The Metropolitan police failed to investigate scores of rape allegations because officers did not record them as criminal offences, the Guardian has learned.

An internal review by Scotland Yard found that women who complained to police that they feared they may have been raped or suffered a serious sexual assault had their concerns dismissed in up to six London boroughs. In a breach of police policy, officers instead classed the incidents as crime related incidents [CRI], meaning the cases were not investigated properly, informed sources say…

The practice of dismissing women’s fears of rape and failing to class them as crimes is believed to have continued for several years and was ended last year. The review that identified the practice was triggered by the Worboys case.

When the procedure was corrected it led to a spike in recorded rape cases, up by 25% over the past year, at a time when overall crime in London fell.

Reflect upon how much of policing can be politics – and shouldn’t be.




  1. Mr. Fusion says:

    #17, GregA,

    say a basket ball player is banging a whore,

    As soon as a woman ( or guy ) says “stop”, “enough”, “I don’t want any more”, or anything to signify to what a reasonable person would understand that she does not want to continue, you either stop or it becomes rape.

    It doesn’t matter if you paid your $0.25 up front. If the woman (or guy) says to stop, you better. Getting your quarter back is your problem.

    The law is quite explicit and clear on when it is consensual and when it isn’t. Those who rape are generally not favored in prison either.

  2. Paddy-O says:

    #30 Because liberalism is the root of all evil?

  3. bobbo says:

    On an almost related issue, I was saddened when rape law was applied to married partners.

    Seems to me that “rape” should be impossible/inapplicable to married people. Assault and battery yes, rape no.

    But then, I’m not a Muslim.

  4. #34 – bobbo,

    On an almost related issue, I was saddened when rape law was applied to married partners.

    Seems to me that “rape” should be impossible/inapplicable to married people. Assault and battery yes, rape no.

    Et tu bobbo??!!?

    I am saddened to read such words from you.

    At what point does the wife lose the ability to say no? Must her vocal chords be removed prior to marriage?

    If a wife says no, it means no. Just like anyone else.

  5. Mr. Fusion says:

    #34, Bobbo,

    Although Scott did a good job of answering I’ll put my own two cents in.

    A person owns their own body. You will always have the right and privilege to do with that body what you wish, provided you are an adult and not in jail.

    If you do not wish to accompany your spouse to a Tupper Ware party, you do not have to attend. If you don’t want a tattoo, you don’t have to get one. And if you don’t want your spouse to have sex, beat you, cut you, keep you chained up, or locked in a room, you don’t have to consent.

    You beat you wife, you go to jail. You purposely injure your wife, you go to jail. You rape your wife, you go to jail.

  6. bobbo says:

    My most valued interlocutors, Scot and Fusion.

    Both Wrong. Thats more sad than the concept of marital rape.

    Rape is a subset of Assault and Battery. Rape is A&B against “that certain part” of a females anatomy. Why is there no special crime for A&B of the big toe, or the left knee?

    There is a special crime for rape as it involves the violation of “that certain part” but that certain part is granted access by the marriage contract. A&B is not likewise granted.

    Lets see–as a wife, would you rather have the A&B of unpermitted sex or the A&B of a baseball bat upside the head? I think most wives would take the rape as the “outrage” amongst spouses is long past.

    You may disagree but doing so without even recognizing what has really been placed at issue is kinda going off premature – and the same feminists that think spousal rape should be prosecuted separate and above from A&B would prosecute you for that as well.

  7. Mr. Fusion says:

    #37, Bobbo,

    Rape, also referred to as sexual assault, is an assault by a person involving sexual intercourse with or sexual penetration of another person without that person’s consent. Rape is generally considered a serious sex crime, as well as a civil assault.

    Though definitions vary, rape is defined in most jurisdictions as sexual intercourse, or other forms of sexual penetration, by one person (“the accused” or “the perpetrator”) with or against another person (“the victim”) without the consent of the victim.

    See? Nothing about any marriage “right”. But the word “consent” is used. Of course, in your jurisdiction, it may be different.

  8. Nimby says:

    #37 – Bobbo – “Rape is A&B against “that certain part” of a females anatomy.” You’re gonna have to be more specific than that. I believe rape (under the law) can include unconsensual intercourse with the vagina, anus, breasts, mouth and perhaps other areas of the body.

    I believe it is also possible for men to be raped. I had a friend who was the physician at a prison in New Mexico. He treated many anal tears caused by claimed rapes and once a man who’d had all of his teeth traumatically removed so he couldn’t bite the numerous chunks of manhood that were subsequently rammed down his throat. He was pretty sure this was a rape.

    As for intercourse being granted to the husband by marriage, I am pretty certain that has been ruled ridiculous by many courts in the US of A. Maybe not in Alabama.

    Yes, under much of Islamic law, the lady spouse has to give it up on demand. Perhaps you live under shar’ia law? Or in Alabama?

  9. GregA says:

    Who said marriage had anything to do with sex??? I certainly didn’t.

    I just pointed out a case where a guy spent 10 years in jail for a horse shit false rape allegation.

    A tiny little study on your part will reveal the true horror of the rate of false rape claims.

    Oh and I didn’t know it, but women in the US get about $30k for claiming they were raped. Once again, tax payer dollars.

  10. bobbo says:

    #38–Fusion==yea, the law used to be as you stated with the addition of “who is not their spouse.” Thats why I am sad the LAW WAS CHANGED. Marriage should mean something other than tax benefits and financial arrangements.

    If all the husband does is have non-consented to sex with his wife and is sent to jail for 5 years because of it, why is that not sufficient. Why a rape charge on top of it?

  11. bobbo says:

    #39–Nimby==I’m not a doctor, so I can’t talk like that. I was actually just tripping on a late night 30 minute advert for “Male Enhancement of that Certain Part.” My own private amusement.

    While everything you say is true, it really doesn’t add or subtract from the point I was making. Your very own Cliff Clavin moment?

    Why not add that women can rape women even by sitting outside in the get away car?

    Isn’t the law funny?

  12. eaze says:

    Ok guys, first off its been publicly acknowledged that the number one date rape drug in the UK is alcohol. Second, if a girl is unsure whether she was raped or not, then she should get herself checked out at the hospital, before bothering the police about something that may not have happened.

    I live in the UK and a huge proportion of the women actually dress and act like they would enjoy being raped. If they wernt stumbling home out of their faces, rolling on floor with their cunts in the air then maybe our rapists wouldn’t get so tempted.

    I’m not justifying rape, I’m just sayin that girls should take responsibility for their actions.


2

Bad Behavior has blocked 5306 access attempts in the last 7 days.