Michael le Vell - how can the "system" be improved for alleged perpetrators and victims?

Sorry should say things have not changed alot for girls and women.

Glassortwo, sorry I don't understand your reply, I haven't said things haven't changed, I may be misreading your post, do you mean things have changed or things have not changed ?

Oooops, just read your second comment Glassortwo, I think things are changing but it has taken a very long time . When my husband joined the force if a girl did report rape the most she could expect was the offer of a cup of tea in the station , now she is cared for at rape centres with understanding.
I know it!s different for a child but if they do speak out the law does now act quickly - in most cases,

annie sorry I should proof read my posts, I feel yes there may have been small improvements in the treatment of girls and women, but taking Bradford as one case that proves the measures put in place are still being overlooked.

Glassortwo , yes Bradford was a scar on society, those poor girls, let down by all concerned.

Are you familiar with the Bryn Estyn childrens home case? the events and cover ups there are horrendous

I agree with what's said here about the complexity involved,and with J08 about how tough it must have been to sit on the jury in this case.
When's 2nd and 3rd paragraphs 10.17 am today sums up things up well for me.

I wondered whether anonymity for Mr le V and his accuser, and other people involved in similar cases would be better. But, we can't hold trials in private, it'd feel like a totalitarian state. As I support the moves to open up the family courts, I couldn't support 'secret' trials in cases of sexual abuse. The reporting of the details of the allegations, and his personal life was unpleasant to many people, and must have been dreadful for him, the alleged victim and members of their families. Perhaps that's an issue for consideration by the media. It will be an issue when the media report on family cases (aka 'secret courts') where the risk of further emotional/psychological distress to vulnerable people and children by their private lives being made public must be high.

Annie yes I can remember Bryn Estyn but the details are a little vague now.

I remember Bryn Estyn - and have more recent contact with adults who experienced abuse there. The cover up is astounding.

Just for the record, I don't think English courts find people innocent; they find them not guilty. There is a subtle qualitative difference. (I am assuming that this person of whom I have never heard was tried in an English court.)

Yes, absent he was acquitted as there was insufficient evidence to convict, not 'found innocent' as some tabloids would describe it.

So, there will always be some doubt then (in all cases, not just this one)?Seems a bit unfair that 'not guilty' doesn't actually mean 'innocent' of the charges brought.

I have been on a jury in a similar case and we were left with no choice but to acquit on one charge and fail to reach a verdict on the others. In the end there was no actual evidence offered - just one person's word against another's. Without any forensic evidence or any suggestion of there being problems at the relevant time we couldn't get anywhere near Beyond Reasonable Doubt.

I sometimes wonder if it would be better if neither party were granted anonymity.

It seems to send out all sorts of conflicting messages. The fact that the alleged victim is treated differently from the alleged perpetrator implies that the alleged victim is an actual victim and deserves more protection that the alleged perpetrator. From another angle, it also suggests that being raped is something to be ashamed of. You wouldn't be ashamed if you were subject to a non-sexual attack, so why should you be ashamed if you are raped?

I suppose the rationale for anonymity for the alleged victim is that personal details may be placed in the public domain, and this would further deter victims from coming forward, but I think there are stricter rules now about disclosing an alleged victim's sexual history.

That said, the figures for successful prosecutions for rape are pretty dire and perhaps allowing anonymity to the alleged victim is one way of redressing the balance.

Eloethan I have never been able to disclose the precise details of rape to anyone. I would find it extremely hard to relate what happened to me in court. However, if I were required to do so, I would, providing I could not be identified. I don't want anyone to know the disgusting things that were done to me by the perpetrators.

absent In the light of what you say, I'm sorry if my remark was insensitive to the fact that you, and most probably other people on GN, have personal experience of being sexually assaulted. I hope I haven't offended you.

That's what is so hard to take in, Absent. The victim in this case will have disclosed what she thought was just enough to get across to the jury what she alleges happened to her, and sadly it wasn't enough, so she is now one of the majority who didn't get the conviction she hoped for. I imagine she has a lot more she could have disclosed, but to have it splashed all over the papers in a salacious way? Even though she remains largely anonymous, many have worked out who she is, and have great sympathy for her.

For you, Absent

I find myself wondering if, this case/similar cases, had been tried in a Scottish Court would the verdict have been 'Not Proven' rather than 'Not Guilty'? I agree that 'Not Guilty' does not always equate to 'Proven Innocent'. It can mean that there was insufficient evidence to prove Guilt conclusively. Many cases in which I had an involvement as a WA worker, boiled down to her word against his word and although you could see that the jury did not believe his version of events ('another man did it and ran away' 'her injuries were the result of self harming' 'she liked a bit of rough sex') they had no 'proof' either way and were forced, under direction from the Sheriff, to put aside personal feelings and only consider facts which could be proved - resulting in either Not Proven or Not Guilty verdicts, with devastating consequences for the 'victim', left at risk of retaliatory harm.

Our Justice System, perhaps adequate to deal with fraud, robberies, carjacking and suchlike is hopeless when it comes to interpersonal crimes, which by their very 'behind closed doors' nature are unlikely to have independent witnesses. No amount of tinkering round the edges of the current system will be able to solve this dilemma. The only solution I can think of is to refer such cases to specialised courts where the case is decided on a balance of probability basis as in civil courts.

Eloethan Of course I'm not offended. It's always difficult to put oneself in someone else's shoes, however much we claim to have empathy. It is especially difficult in a case of appalling personal violence – which, of course, is what rape always is.