RIP Jill Saward

That modulates it a little gillybob but he still should in no way have belittled a rape by comparing it favourably with physical violence. The fact that it was, I believe, carried out in front of her father, must have added horribly to her feeling of humiliation.
His comments disgust me.

I think it was because she was very calm in court mair. She did not break down and "perform" so the court/the judge assumed she was fine. I suspect both she and her father were just those quietly dignified people who tend not to make a fuss not matter how serious the situation. Although I did not know her or her father to be fair. They were (understandably) deeply religious and their faith meant that they were able to forgive the perpetrators. I believe also that she later held the hand of the main culprit telling him that he had no need to ask her forgiveness as she had already forgiven him. A truly remarkable woman.

A remarkable and strong woman who must be sadly missed by her family. Gone far too young.

Youre making very positive assumptions about the father and the judge gillybob.

I find the father particularly despicable, and, again making assumptions, I suspect the poor woman was put under enormous pressure by him to 'do the Christian thing'.
She had the right to feel rage, but I am afraid was probably not permitted to do so. He had no right to 'forgive' IMO.

I would add that her work since is what she deserves admiration for, rather than any 'ability to forgive'.

It was Jill herself that met the rapist and told him that she had already forgiven him mair . Yes you are right I am making positive assumptions about the father (I have listened again to his interviews today) but not the judge. I still think he was horrible and even his later (so called) apology was somewhat begrudged and the wording chosen very carefully.

I realise that but I still think she'd been persuaded by her self righteous father that she should try to forgive him.

"And in 2015, she blasted proposals to grant anonymity to those accused of rape until they are charged, calling it "really insulting to victims".

Doesnt sound so ready to 'forgive' here does she? Good for her!

What did she change?

In 1988, laws were changed that enabled victims to appeal against lenient sentences for the perpetrators.

TBH I don't think that any parties in such crimes should be named before they're charged.

Not every accusation of rape is true.

I was so sorry to hear that this lady had died at such a young age. She was an extremely courageous and humane woman. Despite such a terrible experience she never expressed feelings of hatred towards her attackers or the judge who made such a crass comments about her ordeal.

She was so important in showing that rape victims need not hide themselves behind a veil of anonymity - because they have nothing whatsoever to be ashamed about - and in continuing her work on behalf of rape victims.

Yes Mair you are right, she did but (and I have to be totally honest here) I have mixed feelings about this. There have been a great many cases where men's lives have been ruined by being falsely accused of rape and who have been named giving clout to the "there's no smoke without fire" brigade.

I remember an interview (although I am happy to be corrected) where she said something on the lines of "she could never be expected to be forgiven for her own wrong doing, if she were not able to forgive others also"

Exactly Ana

Mair Unless you know this family personally, your remarks regarding this lady's father are mere presumption and based on your own prejudices. It seems to me that she was a most mature and capable young woman who knew what she wanted, and who had the courage to see it through.

It does not mean that, because she agreed with rape suspects being identified that demonstrates a lack of forgiveness on her part. Her reasoning was that, particularly in the case of serial rapists, if a person is named then other victims may have the courage to come forward.

The issue is nothing whatsoever to do with a belief in forgiveness or rehabilitation. It is to do with trying to weigh up whether the imbalance of rights relating to anonymity/identification of the alleged victim/alleged perpetrator can be justified. I can see both points of view and find myself undecided.

I agree Gilly. I am conflicted about this too as there have been cases of malicious accusation.

My point was more that Seward didnt sound as though she had 'forgiven' in that she was taking a very strong anti accused stance. As a victim herself I fully sympathise with her, but of course if it was my son wrongly accused, then I would not want his name exposed.

Would the solution be that women should have the choice of both their own and accuseds identity being kept private or made public?

I do agree with you, though, that nobody should be made to feel bad about not being able to forgive.

I'm not sure that would work either mair as the very women who maliciously (and wrongly) accuse a man of rape would request that their name were made public, would they not? I am really not sure what the solution would be. Very complex.

To forgive or not is very personal to each of us Eloethan. As I said in a previous post I would find it extremely difficult to forgive anyone who hurt my child/grandchild. In fact if I am honest I don't think I could forgive at all. maybe the ability to eventually "move on" would be all I could be capable of. Who knows? I hope I am never tested.

nobody should be made to feel bad about not beingable wanting to forgive.

As I said in a previous post I would find it extremely difficult to forgive anyone who hurt my child/grandchild.

No reason why you should want to or even try!

Of course they shouldn't Mair we all have our own way of dealing with things.

I too feel that it would be better if both parties could be named. But the problem with that is, for a variety of reasons, most rape cases are not proven. That being so, many more women (and men) would surely be reluctant to report a rape because of the fear of being forever branded a malicious liar.

gillybob and I were expressing the view that neither party should be named until a charge had been brought. Not that both parties should be named.

It's a minefield Eloethan.

Mair I'm not sure there has to be a connection between forgiveness and taking a strong "name the accused" stance.