Beyond Belief: Police Files on Rape

Rape as ‘one person’s word against another’s’

“…When it comes to rape in the criminal justice system, ‘one person’s word against another’s’ is a commonplace phrase. Used by criminal justice professionals, scholars and the man (or woman) in the street alike, ‘one person’s word against another’s’ is part of the common vernacular in discussing rape and is found, quite literally, everywhere: from conversations in the pub, tweets, blogs and comments posted online to newspaper articles (see, for example, Bowcott, 2013; Burrowes, 2016; Dodd and Bengtsson, 2016; Philipson, 2014; Street-Porter, 2017), research reports (see, for example, Burrowes, 2013), academic and practitioner texts (see, for example, Jordan, 2004a; Radcliffe et al, 2016; Temkin and Krahé, 2008), criminal justice policy (see, for example, CPS, 2011; Home Office, 2002a) and associated press releases (for example, CPS, 2010), Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) legal guidance (CPS, undated), and law reports. 1 In contrast to, or perhaps by virtue of, its pervasive use, the meaning of the term is seldom explored or defined.…”

“…But it also explains. The ‘attrition problem’ in rape cases (Hohl and Stanko, 2015)—the so-called ‘justice gap’ (Home Office, 2002b; Kelly et al, 2005) and ‘one person’s word against another’s’ have long been causally linked (see, for example, Jordan, 2004a; Temkin and Krahé, 2008). The relationship between the two is concisely summarised by Cunliffe et al (2012: 3–4), who, exceptionally, also provide a rare insight as to what the authors mean by the term:In part the low conviction rate may be attributed to the particular characteristics of a rape case.…”

“…Although the definition of the ‘rape myth’ has altered drastically since the 1980s (see, for example, Gerger et al, 2007), and may be contested (Gurnham, 2016a, 2016b; Reece, 2013; Young, 2017), the prevalence of such myths and their impact on attrition have reportedly not diminished. According to the conventional wisdom, the trouble with rape is that, evidentially, such cases generally amount to ‘one person’s word against another’s’ and, prejudiced by ‘rape myths’, police, prosecutors, judges, juries and society at large routinely fail to take rape victims at their word (Estrich, 1987; Harris and Grace, 1999; Hohl and Stanko, 2015; Jordan, 2004a, 2004b, 2011; Kelly, 2010; Kelly et al, 2005).…”

Violence against women

“…Authors from the 1970s onwards have written about the complex and problematic nature of policing and the way in which it deals with situations of violence against women –in relation to both domestic (Edwards, 1989; Kelly, 1999; Stanko, 1985) and sexual violence (Jordan, 2004; Temkin and Krahe, 2008). In cases of both sexual and domestic violence, the police are essentially the gatekeepers to the criminal justice system and similar issues have been noted in this debate for both areas of violence against women (Lees and Gregory, 1999).…”

“Don’t Ever Give Up!” Resisting Victimhood Through Self-Defense

“…This controversial question has been posed and responded to numerous times, yet in the minds of many remains unanswered. Historically, an expectation existed that women would fight to the utmost to protect themselves from being raped, with the risk of death viewed as preferable to the dishonor and shame of rape (Jordan, 2004). More recently, evidence of active resistance has been regarded as proof of a woman’s lack of consent, a vehicle through which she demonstrates both her morality and her efficacy in regulating men’s sexual aggression (Ullman, 2007).…”