Paris: seven policemen charged with rape of prostitutes
From 'Liberation' newspaper, Wednesday 13th September 2006, and NouvelObs.com.
Seven members of the parisian riot police (CRS) are facing sentences of up to twenty years imprisonment for the rape of three eastern european prostitutes in April 2003. Three of the men admitted to the rapes during an internal police inquiry and are charged with aggravated rape, while four others are charged with complicity. Only one of the women will be present at the court proceedings as the others have - understandably - fled from fear of reprisal from the men.
Late one night in April the police picked up the first women on the pretence of checking her ID documents, took her to an isolated area next to a motorway and raped her, then returned her to the street where they found her. Later the same night they picked up the other two women on the same pretext, took them to the same isolated area and forced them to have sex in exchange for the return of their ID documents. One woman attempted to run away and was recaptured and raped. On the journey back both women managed to escape from the car and were picked up by a passing lorry driver.
It is excellent to see that the police and courts are taking this case seriously, particularly considering the women were prostitutes and therefore had even less chance of being believed than non-prostitutes. The men involved obviously believed this to be the case.
The case is also a good example of why so few women go to the police when they have been raped or sexually assualted - according to Truth About Rape less than 7% of women report their rape to the police - we know that there is no reason why policemen will be any different from the men who assualted or raped us.
These rapists are normal men with supposedly respectable jobs who feel entitled to use women in any way they please. Let's hope they get what they deserve - I'll keep you posted.
A Crackdown On Encrypted Child Pornography
Events in Sussex last year in which Jane Longhurst tragically and horrifically threw the spotlight on another form of extreme material on the internet — violent pornography in which children and women are depicted as the victims of rape, torture and asphyxiation.
There has been remarkable progress in a comparatively short period, as politicians and the public have responded positively to the call for a crackdown on both violent pornography and encrypted child pornography.
Read more...
It would seem in the past few months or so, the police, spurned on by press and public, have been forced to take note of the Internet and its potential to harm vulnerable individuals and groups. Nobody likes being told what to do, especially when you are used to saying what you want, to whom you want. Until recently, the Web has been an open forum for freedom of expression. However, as its audience grows, so does the possibility of offending someone's sensibilities. Therefore, whether some people like it or not, welcoming restrictions are being developed and implemented.
[Related article from The Observer, 27 Aug 2006]
Suspected paedophiles who refuse to show police encrypted images on their computers could receive much longer prison sentences under laws being considered by the government.
The proposal has won support from a coalition of children's charities, which are worried that an increasing number of paedophiles are using sophisticated software to hide child pornography from investigators. Currently, anyone refusing to reveal an encrypted image to police faces a maximum of two years in prison. But making and disseminating child pornography carries a maximum 10-year sentence, so some suspects refuse to decrypt images in the knowledge they will receive a lighter sentence.
In May, Home Office minister Liam Byrne signalled the government's concern over the issue, acknowledging that 'the use of encryption is proliferating'.
A government consultation about giving judges powers to increase sentences for suspected paedophiles who refuse to unlock encrypted files closes this week. It highlights a number of cases in which suspects refused to co-operate. One, the consultation document notes, had '27 encrypted disks, none of which could be opened'. In another case, images of child rape were recovered along with encrypted files 'giving rise to concern they may contain worse material'.
The Conservatives have called for the maximum sentence to be increased to seven years. The charities, which includes NCH, Barnardo's and the NSPCC, have written to the Home Office saying there is an urgent need for the law to be changed.
The consultation discusses the higher sentences as part of amendments to the controversial Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act. The legislation was introduced in 2000 but, after a public backlash, the government dropped the part of the act that made it an offence to refuse to hand over encryption keys.
'Lenient' sex offence sentences appealed
A young woman exhausted with fighting the system that is there to protect us. I am pleased this survivor has the courage and strength to write a book about her ordeal so that other rape victims “have something to relate to”.
One brave and gutsy young woman.
Read more...An 18-year-old rape victim attended an appeal court hearing Monday as prosecutors claimed the jail sentences handed to her attackers were too lenient.
Tegan Wagner said that while she was "exhausted" by the length of time the case had taken, she wanted to see justice.
"I'm still waiting for everything to be over, so it's still taking a bit of strain on my own personal life," Ms Wagner, who has waived her right to anonymity to encourage other rape victims to speak out, said outside court.
Prosecutors have appealed against the jail terms given to three Sydney brothers for sexual offences, arguing that they do not reflect the seriousness of their crimes.
The men were already serving lengthy jail terms for gang rape when they were sentenced in April for assaulting Ms Wagner and another teenage girl at their Ashfield home, in Sydney's inner-west.
The crown on Monday challenged the latest sentences given to the Pakistani trio, who can only be identified as MSK, MAK and MMK.
MSK, 27, and MAK, 26, were convicted of sexually assaulting Ms Wagner on June 14, 2002, when she was aged 14.
MSK was also convicted of raping a 13-year-old girl known as CH on July 14, 2002.
Earlier that night, the girl had had consensual sex with MMK, who was convicted of having sexual intercourse with a minor.
When the brothers were sentenced for the offences, their jail terms were made partly cumulative with sentences they were already serving for the 2002 rape of two other girls, aged 16 and 17.
In 2004, NSW Supreme Court Justice Brian Sully had sentenced MSK and MMK to 22 years each behind bars for those rapes, while MAK was jailed for up to 16 years.
Last April, Justice Peter Hidden effectively ordered MSK to serve at least another five-and-a-half years for raping Ms Wagner and CH, while MAK was sentenced to a minimum two years on top of his earlier sentence.
MMK, now 19, will spend no extra time in jail, serving his 12-month term at the same time as his other sentence.
In the Court of Criminal Appeal, Crown Advocate Richard Cogswell, SC, argued that MMK's sentence was inadequate and "failed to recognise the harm done to the victim".
He was convicted under a law designed to protect young women from sexual violation, he said, and the sentence "fails to deliver any punitive response at all".
Mr Cogswell said MAK's sentence did not reflect the gravity of his criminal behaviour and the offender was simply not adequately punished, he said.
The sentence handed to the ringleader and oldest brother, MSK, was "manifestly inadequate", he said.
MSK had encouraged MAK to assault Ms Wagner and threatened CH with violence as he raped her, telling her he had strangled a girlfriend and hung her from a balcony.
Chief Justice Jim Spigelman, and Justices Anthony Whealy and Roderick Howie reserved judgment on the appeal.
But Chief Justice Spigelman indicated they would increase MSK's maximum term by at least two years, to take into account a miscalculation in his sentence.
Outside court, Ms Wagner said she was "exhausted" by the legal proceedings, which have dragged on for four years.
"I'm not happy that justice hasn't been served yet," she told reporters.
Ms Wagner is writing a book about her ordeal so other rape victims "have something to relate to".
http://au.news.yahoo.com/060828/2/10b6b.html
'Police Disbelieve Women On Rape'
A poll has found one third of people think a woman is at least partly to blame for being raped if she is flirtatious, and a quarter if she is drunk or wears revealing clothing.This is not a new article as it was published on the BBC website in November of last year. Lets face it, nothing much is going to have changed in eight months - is it? So I thought it was well worthy of another airing, just to remind ourselves just what we are up against.
One woman, raped at the age of 20, told the BBC News website she never reported it for fear it would not be taken seriously. She agrees that it was a shocking stastic but that she was not surprised; as public perception of rape is affected, by the way rape is treated by the justice system.
"I didn't hold much hope that it would be taken seriously"
Read more...
She felt it would have been too much of an ordeal to go through, as she did not have any faith that the Police would take her seriously, coupled with the low conviction rate she did not hold up much hope that her rape would be given the gravity of seriousness that it deserved.
She knew her attacker, she had had a drink with him, he was a friend, she had been drinking and she had kissed him. That was as far as she had wanted it to go. She was raped by him, but did not report it to the Police.
"It wasn't what I would have thought rape was. I know now that most people are raped by someone they know. It's not the 'stranger danger' that people think happens, bushes and knives. I didn't know that - it's not something that was ever covered at any stage of my life, there's no education at school. I didn't know the statistics."
The sexism, and yes the misogyny in the justice system needs to be challenged and turned on its patriarchal head. Women seem to be of little value, their safety and integrity appears to be an after thought. As long as the police and the judiciary are getting away with not taking rape seriously, things are not going to improve. Women continue to be questioned regarding their previous sexual history, although this was addressed and disallowed a couple of years ago. Many Judges don’t even realise that questioning of the victims sexual past is not permissible. They need to be held accountable, for the way they treat women when they report rape, and do their job properly, gather evidence and make sure the resources are going into that area.
Rape is not taken seriously, approximately 6% of rape cases that get to court are convicted of their crime. When you combine this with the huge percentage of women who don’t even report the crime, it points to a rape culture. We live in a culture, a so-called civilised society that minimises the horrific act of rape, disbelieves the woman if she reports it, and if it does get to court, brings her past previous sexual history as something to be held in 'evidence' - evidence for what? That she may have 'deserved' it?
Virgin - Whore - or Saint... anyone?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4458122.stm
