Not surprisingly this page is usually used to air problems, grievances, histories etc of matters normally associated with magistrates courts and/or their users. Generally matters of law are beyond the competence of the blogger and best left to those who are more qualified to comment. However there are from time to time matters where the principle underlying that law or decision can be open to comment to any thinking member of the public. Such a situation arose last week with the lurid headlines in most of the press of the victims` lobby denouncing new police procedures when there is an accusation of rape. During my time on the bench I have seen the rise and rise of this lobby to such an extent that the impartiality of our legal system can rightly be called into question. On the issue of rape this has had a profound effect on the manner in which complainants (pre a guilty verdict the "victim" is a complainant), have been and are treated. Whilst there is little doubt that in the past such people have been less than justly considered by police and prosecution there is a real danger that the legal pendulum has swung too far. It seems that the words of that great thinker Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790) "That it is better 100 guilty persons should escape than that one innocent person should suffer", is a maxim that has been long and generally approved in law books but in current times has been placed in the waste paper basket of our legislators. Shrieks from vocally enhanced left thinking activists have left the facts of the situation far behind. There are strict conditions to be applied when application is made to examine complainants` phone records. If there had been no infamous cases of late of false allegations of rape it is unlikely that the changes would have been considered. By denouncing the procedures outlined there is no doubt that a green light would be given to more such false allegations. The mere fact is that the spectrum from lawful consensual sexual intercourse to rape is a difficult legal road to travel when in most cases it is a case of he says she says. There are in our midst those who have in their minds the "she was asking for it" scenario when a woman`s clothing, sobriety and behaviour have had a bearing on their attitudes to sexual intimacy whether in the privacy of a home or in the steam pressure cauldron of the jury room. Franklin`s adage was correct in the male orientated society in which he lived and is equally correct in our supposed times of enlightenment.
Regrettably there are far too many false accusations these days, particularly against teachers and the like. The problem is that, even when/if the case is dismissed, the accusation still hangs over the head of the teacher (or whoever) and the "no smoke without fire" brigade then make big capital of it, the result too often being that the person can never work again. Alleged victims get anonymity, surely the alleged perpetrator of the offence should be similarly treated?
ReplyDelete