Quote:

Campaigners against violence said the decision sent out a "chilling message" to rape victims and ignored the pressures placed on abused women by the perpetrators of such crimes. The 28-year-old from mid-Wales called police in November last year claiming that she had been raped six times by her husband on three occasions. In January she told police she wanted to drop the charges – even though she said they were true. Crown Prosecution Service and police said they would continue with the prosecution and the husband appeared in court, pleading not guilty. During discussions about the case it emerged that the couple – by then estranged – had had consensual sexual relations when the husband visited his wife and children over Christmas. "The Crown started to worry about their case," prosecutors said. In February, the wife went to police to say the allegations of rape had been untrue. She was arrested and charged with perverting the course of justice, but in the summer she gave a new statement to say the rape allegations had been true all along and that her retraction had been false. Her solicitor said she had previously lied because she was being "emotionally blackmailed" by her husband, at the culmination of an abusive marriage, which was now over. The woman had been told by her husband and his family that the charges against him could mean a long jail sentence for him, whereas if she retracted her allegations the penalties were likely to be far lighter for her. On Friday, distraught relations of the woman shouted at the judge as she was led sobbing from Mold Crown Court to begin her jail sentence. Judge John Rogers told her that she had changed her position again after being told she would be prosecuted for a false allegation of rape. Such charges could have resulted in a sentence of two years. He said she had caused “a substantial amount of wastage for the Crown Prosecution Service and police”. The false retraction had perverted the course of justice, which meant “the imposition of a prison sentence is inevitable”. Gordon Hennell, defending, said: “When she embarked on making a false retraction she did not realise the seriousness of what she was doing. She does now. She perverted the course of justice in relation to a series of events in which she was the victim.” Holly Dustin, director of the End Violence Against Women Coalition, said: “Imprisoning a woman for a 'false retraction’ of a rape allegation sends out a chilling message that the criminal justice system is still in the dark ages in relation to sexual violence and does not understand the pressure women come under from perpetrators during the legal process.” She added that the potential threat of prosecution in a case such as this would make rape victims less likely to report cases to police. Women’s groups said resources should be focused on improving “the very low conviction rate of just 6 per cent of reported cases” and ensuring all victims got help from a Rape Crisis Centre.

Woman who accused husband of rape jailed for "falsely retracting" the claims - Telegraph

Well yeah, I suppose 8 months is a tad excessive given what your average burglar gets, but she did fuck everyone about and waste hella public money.

Hubby, on the other hand, sounds like quite the machine.

__________________
Standard disclaimer: the disgusting statements contained in this post are the views of the poster, and unless specified do not represent the views of the moderators or the site's owners.

Holly Dustin, director of the End Violence Against Women Coalition, said: “Imprisoning a woman for a 'false retraction’ of a rape allegation sends out a chilling message that the criminal justice system is still in the dark ages in relation to sexual violence and does not understand the pressure women come under from perpetrators during the legal process.”

Errr...

1- I'd be wary of claiming to know for sure what happened over that Christmas stuff. It looks very confused.

2- Hold on a sec'. Victims of sexual violence have regular contact with the perpetrator during the legal process?! WFT?! You'd think that, having been raped/sexually abused by the guy, they'd stay away from him during the enquiry/trial. Why was that not the case here?

__________________
Unless otherwise specified, I am posting as a regular poster. When I will act as a mod, I'll make sure you're in no doubt.

Yes, I'd also point out that part of the reason it's so difficult to get a conviction in rape cases is that the victims tend to do this sort of thing an awful lot...

__________________
Standard disclaimer: the disgusting statements contained in this post are the views of the poster, and unless specified do not represent the views of the moderators or the site's owners.

Of course. Victims need to be much more assertive and stop trading on their status as women. They'd be well advised to install a CCTV in their bedroom.

Originally Posted by roadkill

Of course. Victims need to be much more assertive and stop trading on their status as women. They'd be well advised to install a CCTV in their bedroom.

Already got it covered.

Yeah, it's bad for the victim but what else are you going to do? It's not like the judge can say "well, you're clearly very upset so we're just going to lock the nasty man up without further ado and forget about any illegal actions of your own." That said, 8 months is way OTT.

__________________
Standard disclaimer: the disgusting statements contained in this post are the views of the poster, and unless specified do not represent the views of the moderators or the site's owners.