...as she appears to believe every woman who alleges rape automatically to be a victim instead of merely a complainant whose accusation has yet to be proved.By Ann Widdecombe: Recently a succession of men has been acquitted by the courts and a judge with 40 years’ experience of legal practice wrote to the CPS to say that a pattern has emerged whereby the parties involved know each other, one or both has been drinking or using drugs and each gives a plausible account as to what happened.
There is absolutely no independent evidence so no jury can convict given the requirement of “beyond all reasonable doubt”.
The irate judge ends his missive by suggesting that the CPS must have a different interpretation of cases which stands “a realistic prospect of conviction” from everybody else.
Instead of explaining why such cases are deemed likely to be successful, Ms Saunders calls such views “victim-blaming” and says they have allowed predators to offend with impunity in the past.
If that is an example of her reasoning and analytical skills then it is a wonder she ever passed a law exam.
The judge hasn’t blamed anyone and hasn’t said the complainants were all lying.
He is wondering how anybody in the CPS can decide that conviction in such circumstances is a realistic prospect.
He was acquitted by a jury in under 40 minutes – during which time, as he points out, the jurors had also to go the loo, settle in their jury room and elect a foreman.
By the end of the book I was shaking with outrage because all the evidence which acquitted him was there from the very start of the police investigation.
False accusers are rarely charged with their perjury and enjoy anonymity while their victims are vilified and jobless for months or even years.
She is wrong and the judge is right. So why doesn’t Liz Truss sack her?
Look no further than the Justice Minister’s recent proposals to allow women alleging rape to give pre-recorded evidence.
Any minute now they will be insisting every woman’s evidence is credible and true.