Nope, not something that should be done

Rape cases should be investigated through a grand jury-style system to encourage more victims to take their attackers to court, a senior judge has proposed.

Peter Murphy, a circuit judge, said the process – similar to investigating magistrates in Europe – would provide victims with greater privacy by enabling a judge to decide what information about their sexual past could be disclosed to police and prosecutors.

The judge or magistrate would work with police and prosecutors to ensure only relevant information was divulged in order to assuage victims’ fears that their sexual past will be trawled over and exposed to the defence.

Because that puts the decisions into the hands of the trained class that directs the grand jury. That trained class that has a rather different definition of rape from the rest of us out here.

It’s we the peeps that get to decide what is a crime…..

21 thoughts on “Nope, not something that should be done”

  1. Senior beaks kisses the arse of Marxist feminist liars and scum.

    Nothing new–but high time such pronunciamentio became a career-ending event.

    This beak needs to hit the dole queue urgently. Defrocked, disbarred or whatever the Hell they call the after -professional-death state of lawyers. A leghost so to speak.

    That EU-owned turd Roly Joly Mourn also needs to join the above gobboon Buck in that sad state of shadedom ( shadoom?) asap.

  2. Early Sunday morning. Should read “beak” not “beaks” in line one and the evil Judge is called Murphy not “Buck”. ? as to the source of the incorrect name . Perhaps I have written the word “fuck” so many times that mental glitches now arrive in variations of the word. What a piece of work is Man.

    Even Tim’s POS system warned me I was typing too fast.

  3. Haven’t we had a lot of disclosure fuck ups lately? Does anyone think that this system would be better because the people deciding what’s admissible are the same people deciding on disclosure?

    Utter insanity.

  4. Hasn’t the history of socialism taught us that such “specialists” rapidly become rich and influential people?

    Oh, silly me, now I get it…

  5. in order to assuage victims’ fears that their sexual past will be trawled over and exposed to the defence.

    Maybe the lesson here is don’t have a sexual history longer than the Bayeux Tapestry though? Perchance thee are an hore from Gropecuntelane.

  6. Either the journalist has got it wrong or the judge, Peter Murphy, is incorrect about the role of the examining magistrate or juge d’instruction. The notion that he could decide what information about the [complainant’s] sexual past could be disclosed to police and prosecutors is fanciful since he can direct the enquiry but not what it uncovers.

    The objective here is presumably to allow for successful prosecutions where the woman is generally promiscuous but has indeed been raped. However, there is a risk that such measures will be used by women seeking to recover a smidgeon of self respect when overcome by coition contrition.

  7. Can a prostitute be raped? Several years ago, I was involved in investigating a series of abductions and rapes of prostitutes. The offenders were tried and, although there was evidence to prove their guilt, they claimed that their culture meant that women who provided sexual services could not be sexually assaulted as having sex was their chosen source of income. A jury found them all guilty, even though their way of life was disclosed. One wonders what this new proposal would lead to?
    In a similar vein, should the victim of a burglary have the fact that he once committed theft 15 years ago, and was punished for it, be the subject of disclosure?
    The gap between law and justice seems to be getting cloudier and cloudier.

  8. A Grand Jury, as used in the USA, decides if there is a case to answer, not guilt or innocence, and does not involve full disclosure.

    When/if the case goes to trial then full disclosure is required.

    There is no ‘victim’ until a jury says so, but why does anyone sensible believe someone who alleges rape is best served by making them go through two Court procedures rather than one?

    European Courts do not have juries, grand or otherwise.

  9. We used to have a thing called ‘committal for trial’. Abolished about 10 years ago.

    The idea was to establish whether sufficient evidence existed to allow a case to proceed to the Crown Court.

    I think it was broadly similar to this grand jury business.

  10. @Mr Lud
    Isn’t this more about police procedure? It seems to be, if a women complains of rape in certain circumstances, the police want access to her phone data. If they’ve got her phone they’ve got all of it. Everything about her day to day contacts with everyone. The entirety is evidence. The analogy would be the whereabouts of your personal presence at some particular time on a particular date. That wouldn’t entitle the police to information on where you were at all times throughout the year.

  11. Bloke in North Dorset

    in order to assuage victims’ fears

    The real victim in this process is going to be the one we currently refer to as the accused and who is presumed innocent.

  12. I thought that if they had nothing to hide they had nothing to fear, isn’t that what we are always told when govt wants more power

  13. There’s something very 1950s about a woman’s promiscuous history counting against her in a rape trail. It’s like defending against a shoplifting charge by pointing to the volume of goods going past the checkout. So what?

    The question before the court is, is she telling the truth? So who’s more likely to lie about a drunken encounter, a woman well known for such or a woman desperately holding on to her reputation?

  14. RLJ- “There’s something very 1950s about a woman’s,,,”

    what this is about is nobbling the jury system. Juries are supposedly getting it wrong. Why? Defence people seem to think this stuff matters to jurors, so we’ll kaibosh the defence’s ability to present it to the jury. OK we may be able to agree this stuff should not matter but its for you ( the prosecution) argue that to the jury when its about locking up a potentially innocent person. Anything else is just underming the purpose of a jury. And yes somethings don’t get presented– all those are about not prejudicing the jury against the accused, the bit necessary to stop innocent peeps getting banged up (at the cost of letting go non innocent ones).

    The beauty of the jury system is the jurors– as tim alludes to— of course their attitudes change from yonks ago because they live in society— they just don’t necessarily share the attitudes of the people who like to make up rules and commit them to legal principles.

  15. “So who’s more likely to lie about a drunken encounter, a woman well known for such or a woman desperately holding on to her reputation?”

    You show a worrying ignorance of women M. Le Jour. A woman well known for drunken encounters won’t be recognised as such by herself. If she was drunk & did encounter it will have been a unique experience, as she’s never done the like before & just isn’t that sort of woman. And it was someone else’s fault anyway. She’ll be lying because she’s had the practise at lying to herself for the past decade & wouldn’t know the truth if she stumbled over it. Of course the woman desperately holding onto her reputation will be lying just as strongly. Possibly why she’s still got a reputation. Women lie by default. It’s in the DNA

  16. Bis,

    Fair point, but if you cast your mind back to the celebrated fake rape claims the women concerned were not good time girls, and were quite possibly jealous of the popularity of those who were. Furthermore in my experience good time time girls who have an unsatisfactory encounter will tell anyone who will listen that they were raped for the sympathy points, but not involve the plod.

    To my mind the most important thing is, not what she’s done in the past but what does she stand to gain? Is this claim against a celebrity? An ex boyfriend she wants to punish? Are politics involved?

  17. JG
    Ha ha. Are you aware that I live in one of the fleshpots of SE Asia? I’m sure I’ve mentioned it once or twice. And no, not for the ladyboys. Roué? Mr Hyde? Hello?

    Although I’ll grant you my experience of western mad women is a fair bit out of date these days.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *