|
WAR's submission to Metropolitan Police Authority's consultation about police priorities in London, May 2004 Which
poli When Ian Huntley was convicted for murdering Holly and Jessica in Soham, the public learned he’d been reported for rape and sexual assaults nine times, but never prosecuted. All the cases were dropped sooner or later, some not even investigated by the police. We have found this practice to be also common in London, where most reports of rape are dropped before prosecution. What happened with Huntley was echoed in the case of Anthony Hardy, the so-called “Camden Ripper”, convicted of murdering two women last year. He is believed to have beaten, raped and killed many others – he had previously attempted to murder his wife; a dead woman with a head injury was found in his flat; and he was known by doctors to hate women, especially sex workers. While the police are not the only ones responsible (the CPS and, in the case of Hardy the medical establishment, are also to blame), much depends on the thoroughness of the initial investigation. When criticised the police reduce their actions to bureaucratic “mistakes”, lack of funding, or lack of communication between officers, forces, with the Crown Prosecution Service or social workers. Thus they avoid confronting the sexism and other prejudice, including racism when the victim is a person of colour, which are at the heart of negligent or half-hearted investigation and prosecution. Women’s and children’s words and actions are torn to pieces, while what men say is more likely to be believed, and their actions excused. 2.
Police response to women reporting sexual violence. Women continue to come to us for help claiming the police have refused to protect them from violent partners, ignored evidence of the rape, refused to investigate it thoroughly or discouraged them from pursuing a prosecution. When women complain they say they face hostility and even scorn. Other key concerns include the dismissal or careless recording of crucial evidence. Instead of taking down the victim’s words and then checking with her for accuracy, officers may take notes by hand, sometimes over days, “later compiled into a written statement”, an agonisingly slow process which results in misrepresentation and inaccuracy. Videoing and audio-taping should be offered but optional, and the implications explained; these do not guarantee an accurate statement. Often included are irrelevancies such as the victim’s sexual history or lifestyle, other relationships and medical history. These practices fatally undermine prosecutions. Police mishandling of a rape case has never to our knowledge led to the dismissal of any officer. Home Office research shows that although no-criming of rape has fallen, this is offset by police discontinuing more cases, and some officers discourage women by telling them there is no chance of a conviction or graphically describing how courts will put them on trial, or their injuries are “not good enough”. They have even pressed some women to say that they lied. 3.
Prioritising property crimes over violence against people We
are very concerned that crimes against property, especially minor
offences like graffiti, and political agendas which have nothing to do
with protecting the public, regularly attract huge resources.
For example, forensic labs are taken up in examining rubbish from
sites where graffiti was found, looking for fingerprints, etc.
And
£7m was spent on investigating Black officer Ali Dezaei for
professional misconduct, and expenses claims from 17 years ago.
This reflects the
obstacles women face in getting rape and other sexual crimes prioritised.
The following should all be high priorities: rape, including in
marriage; domestic violence; child abuse, including rape and sexual
assault; sexual assault, including racist sexual assault; other racist
attacks; homophobic attacks; other violence against women and children.
Too often, very little is spent on investigating a man accused of
rape – the investigation may end after just one interview, if the
accused says it was not rape, but was consenting sex.
We would like to know what proportion of the Met budget is spent
on rape, sexual assault and domestic violence, and what percentage of
officer time is spent on those crimes.
4.
Misrepresentation
and exploitation of the issue of rape 1)
We recently were told that Project Sapphire was investigating
“group rape”, i.e. gang rape. The
police focus on gang rape has
put forward a racist agenda promoted by the media. Scotland Yard gave an “exclusive” to the Telegraph,
“Muggers blamed for a gang rape every day” (14 January 2004),
claiming that gang rape is mostly perpetrated by “lawless” young
Black men against white women. According
to the Observer, Project Sapphire insisted their initiative had
nothing to do with race. As
the police are repeatedly found to be institutionally racist, they are
not in a position to judge. When
the victim is a woman or child of colour, sexism and racism combine
against her. For example, a
young Black woman who reported rape and assault by two men, whom she
accompanied because one was a trusted family friend, complained to us
that the police grilled her about her sexual history, pursuing one
man’s story that she was paid for sex.
Yet it should have been obvious from her physical injuries that
she had been violently attacked.
2) Research is not the priority. The priority is unbiased, careful and determined investigation of rape, including that committed by partners and boyfriends. 5.
Stop
prosecuting consenting sex between adults Consenting
sex between adults, including prostitution, should not be the business
of the law. We know that
many police officers agree that an awful lot of money is wasted
arresting vulnerable women rather than protecting them from violence.
We would like to know how much of the police budget goes into the
policing of prostitution, both on the street and indoors. |