subscribe: Posts | Comments

Judge says rape victim ‘let herself down badly’

9 comments

As Laura Bates recently wrote in The Independent, 2012 seemed to be the ‘year of victim blaming’

Sadly it wasn’t just media commentators such as Caitlin Moran and Alyssa Royse implying women are at least partially culpable if they are raped – shockingly, it was also members of the police and judiciary.

In California, Judge Derek Johnson said that a rape victim “didn’t put up a fight” during her ordeal.

A British police officer recently tweeted “Its always sad to see young women become victims of sexual offences , Don’t Drink too much … and regret your actions!”.

And perhaps most concerning of all is the following:

On 14 December, while sentencing 49 year-old Anthony Parry to six years’ jail for raping a 19 year-old woman, Judge Niclas Parry said to Caenarfon Crown Court that the victim had “let herself down badly” and was “easy prey” for Parry.

The court heard that the victim woke up naked on a sofa in Anthony Parry’s house, to find her attacker on top of her.

The jury rejected the defendant’s claims that the victim had consented to sex, yet even in the face of a guilty verdict, Judge Niclas Parry felt the need to mention the victim’s behaviour.

In his summing up, Judge Parry stated that the victim had “consumed too much alcohol and took drugs” prior the attack. He added “but she also had the misfortune of meeting [Anthony Parry].”

Note Parry’s use of ‘also’.

As if drinking and taking drugs are somehow ‘contributing behaviours’ to a person raping you, rather than irrelevant incidentals to the crime.

As if anything, except a person deciding they are going to have sex with you without your consent, is a ‘contributing behaviour’ to rape.

As the recent Stern Review reminds us, the 2003 Sexual Offences Bill clearly sets out that ‘sex without consent is rape and all other factors about a person making a complaint of rape are irrelevant to that fact.” (my bold).

By ignoring these clear legal guidelines and deciding to pass comment on a rape victim’s behaviour, Judge Parry has undermined the much-deserved sentence he passed on Anthony Parry.

It is deeply irresponsible for a judge to reinforce one of the most dangerous rape myths of all – that rapists are not fully responsible for their actions, and that women are at least partially culpable for being raped – and it could contribute to more rape victims refusing to come forward, because they fear being blamed for their attack.

In 2008, 14 rape victims had their compensation restored by the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority (CICA), after it was initially cut by 25 per cent because the victims had been drinking before they were attacked.

Despite CICA righting this terrible wrong, the very fact rape victims were ever accused of ‘contributory negligence’ at all speaks volumes about how our judiciary still views rape.

So let’s keep saying it until our voices are heard: the only thing that makes a woman truly ‘vulnerable to rape’ is being in proximity to a rapist.

Women are raped whether they are drunk, sober or tipsy, awake or asleep, using or not using drugs.

And they are raped by husbands, boyfriends, acquaintances, friends and family members. Only 9 per cent of rapes are by strangers.

If we really want to talk about what makes a woman ‘easy prey’ for a rapist, the only answer is being in possession of a vagina and knowing a man.

The only people who ‘let themselves down’ in this case were the man who chose to rape and the judge who ignored a rape victim’s right not have her behaviour scrutinised even though this is enshrined by law.

In doing that, Judge Niclas Parry has sent out a powerful message of support to a culture that tolerates and espouses rape myths rather than confronts the uncomfortable truth that women don’t just ‘get raped’, but that certain men choose to rape them.

He must retract his words and apologise for them, or further damage women’s faith in an already flawed system that has let down so many rape victims already.

You can sign the petition asking Judge Niclas Parry to retract and apologise for his comments here.

  1. Great article, other than:

    “If we really want to talk about what makes a woman ‘easy prey’ for a rapist, the only answer is being in possession of a vagina and knowing a man.”

    Please remember that not all women have vaginas. Trans women are also affected by sexual violence, indeed to a greater extent than cis women.

    • I see you what you’re saying. What would be a more effective way of expressing it? – Being female/presenting as/indentifying as female? I’m trying to make the point that, far from it being possible to ‘behave’ in certain ways to ‘avoid rape’, it is our very existence as women that means we will always be vulnerable to sexual violence, as long as certain men choose to rape.

  2. Clearly there’s still a lot to be learned about rape in this country. Very sad.

  3. And yet, most people make judgements about the behaviour of other victims of crime all the time. The person who left their front door unlocked for the burglar to enter? The person who leaves their laptop unattended only to have it nicked? We can be quick to chastise them for making themselves ‘easy prey’. We know it doesn’t make the thief less culpable, but we still shake our heads at the victim for the role they played in their own misfortune.

    I’m not saying that this should be or is the attitude we take to rape – I just think that it is an interesting comparison. What makes rape so special?

    • For a start, the fact that it is a crime so heinously under-reported and under-prosecuted that the majority of victims never come forward. If you think that even a judge is going to tell you you asked for it – after he has found your rapist GUILTY – would you feel confident about reporting rape?

      Rape is unique insofar as there is no other crime where the victim’s behaviour has been historically so aggressively questioned, scrutinised and critcised while its perpetrators are excused, apologised for or not even mentioned at all. This contributes directly to the appallingly low reporting and conviction rate for rape, and for a judge to reinforce it is simply appalling.

      Also, quite apart from anything, the judge is legally obliged to focus on nothing but the rapist’s behaviour, so to flout this so obviously sends out a message that judges don’t give a toss about the guidelines for ruling on sexual offences cases, and can get away with ignoring them.

      I suggest a read of this to see why the whole laptops/burglaries analogy is unhelpful when thinking about rape, but my two cents would be that I can’t remember the last time I heard someone say about a burglary victim “Well, I heard the victim gave a DVD player away last year, so it can’t really have been a ‘proper’ burglary’. They must have wanted it to happen”.

      http://sianandcrookedrib.blogspot.co.uk/2012/12/on-how-women-are-not-wallets-and-why.html

  4. Nadia Sica says:

    It’s easy to focus our anger and support towards India and to forget that British society is still a long way from providing equal footing in all spheres of life for all women, however they identify.

  5. Sweet Jesus. Another California judge Derek Johnson was reprimanded recently for saying
    “I’m not a gynecologist but I can tell you something: if someone doesn’t want to have sexual intercourse the body shuts down. The body will not permit that to happen unless a lot of damage is inflicted, and we heard nothing about that in this case.”

    Johnson gave the offender – who threatened the victim with a heated screwdriver and beat her with a metal baton – a six year sentence saying it was what the crime was “worth”

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/dec/14/us-judge-victims-body-prevent-rape

  6. In response to Liz C’s claim that ‘and yet, most people make judgements about the behaviour of other victims of crime all the time. The person who left their front door unlocked for the burglar to enter? The person who leaves their laptop unattended only to have it nicked? We can be quick to chastise them for making themselves ‘easy prey.’

    Really? On Christmas Eve Alan Greaves was walking down in a public street late at night and he was subjected to a vicious physical assault resulting in his death. To date I have not read or heard any one claim ‘Mr. Greaves was partially responsible for causing his own murder because he did not take sufficient precautions to ensure his safety when he ventured out into the public sphere.’ Remember Alan Greaves was out late at night and yet Alan Greaves right to venture out late at night has never been questioned because Alan Greaves was a male not a female. http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/jan/08/man-held-church-organist-murder

    However, malestream media and our male supremacist system routinely blames women and girls and holds them accountable for not supposedly preventing male sexual predators from subjecting them to male sexual violence. Why? Because this is a neat Patriarchal reversal wherein the male sexual predator’s(s) choice to commit male sexual violence against women and girls is neatly invisibilised because males must never be held accountable for the sexual violence they choose to commit against women and girls. Instead, despite the fact women and girls live in a male supremacist system, the myth persists that women and girls are supposedly accorded the power to prevent males from subjecting them to male sexual violence.

    I have never read in malestream media tell males that if they are subjected to male violence as they drunkenly attempt to make their way home down a public street, it is the male drunken victim(s) who is responsible not the male perpetrator(s). After all whenever a male deliberately drunks to intoxication he is in effect putting himself at risk of being subjected to male violence. The reason is because males have always accorded the sacrosanct right of freedom of movement any time any where and this sacrosant right has never been accorded to women and girls.

    Finally the criminal legal system is not about determining whether or not a female/male victim of a crime is partially/wholly accountable, but whether or not the male/female charged with a crime is guilty. But male judges such as Judge Niclas Parry believe they have the right to criticise female victims of male violence rather than directing said criticism at the male/males who have been convicted. Judge Parry exceeded his remit and Judge Parry is not alone in his misogynistic views because there are many male judges who hold similar views.

    This is why we live in a rape culture because powerful misogynistic men such as Judge Parry continue to blame women and girls whilst excusing/minimalising male accountability.

  7. Heather Kennedy says:

    Brilliant article. I was absolutely shocked to read that as late as 2008, rape victims were getting their compensation docked because they’d been drinking!

    An in response to Liz C:
    What we do with our front doors and our laptops never be comparable to what we do with our bodies.

Leave a Reply

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