RSS

Tag Archives: consent

The X Case: 21 years ago, 2 referendums, 1 supreme court ruling still no Law.

Last year the Journal.ie did a timeline of the events surrounding the X Case you can find it here: http://www.thejournal.ie/twenty-years-on-a-timeline-of-the-x-case-347359-Feb2012/

Today is the 4th of February 2013, here is what happened 21 years ago:

4 February 1992: The victim and her parents decide to travel to the UK to undergo an abortion. The family informed the Gardaí of their decision and asked whether the foetus could be tested after it was aborted to provide proof of the paternity of the accused in the rape case.

The Gardaí then asked the Director of Public Prosecutions whether such evidence would be admissible in court. The DPP liaised with the Attorney General Harry Whelehan.

The parents of the 14 year old child, were talking her to the UK for the good of her health and life and were trying to make sure the man who had raped her would not go unpunished.

That was 21 years ago and we have had 2 referendums and 1 Supreme court ruling and X Case has not been legislated for and there is still no law.

The current government have legislating for X in their program for government but again we are seeing more delay tactics.

Cabinet update on abortion law delayed | Irish Examiner.

Dr Reilly has said he hopes the measures will become law by July.

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on February 4, 2013 in Uncategorized

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Less then 5% of cases sent to the DPP result in a conviction.

I have known for the years the stats are bad and I have blogged about it before and that even if you do report it to the garda ( and according to the rape cirises network only 10% do go to the gards) that then there is a good chance that after your attacker being brought to the garda station for statements and the file being sent to the Department of Public prosecution they may choose not to take the case but I didn’t know it was as high as 70%.

http://examiner.ie/ireland/crime/dpp-rejects-70-of-sex-crime-referrals-172463.html

DPP rejects 70% of sex crime referrals

By Jennifer Hough

Tuesday, November 01, 2011

AT least 70% of suspects in sex offence cases are not being prosecuted by the Director of Public Prosecutions, figures obtained by the Irish Examiner have revealed.

Statistics provided by the DPP also reveal that, since 2008, there have been just 24 convictions in cases relating to people aged under 18. They were secured from 531 files submitted to the office by gardaí.

So far this year, a high of 179 cases concerning under 18-year-olds, in which there were 201 suspects, were sent to the DPP.

An analysis of the figures from 2008 to October 2011 shows:

* In 2010, 1,254 files with 1,407 suspects were sent to the DPP. No prosecution was directed in 1,002 (70%) of those;

* In 2009, 1,043 files with 1,204 suspects were sent. No prosecution was taken against 883 (73%) suspects;

* In 2008, 962 files with 1,055 suspects were sent. No prosecution was directed in 784 (74%) cases.

To October 2011, gardaí sent 1,083 files concerning 1,213 suspects to the DPP. There was no prosecution taken in relation to 736 suspects. A further 270 are pending.

The figures reveal that conviction rates for serious sex offences in the higher courts are not going up — despite a steady rise in the number of files submitted to the DPP in recent years.

Since 2008, there have been 233 convictions in the Central Criminal Court and Circuit Court. In 443 cases over the same timeframe, “no final outcome” was recorded. There can be several reasons for this, for example, if the gardaí cannot locate the accused, if a case is still pending or if a case is awaiting a re-trial where the jury could not reach a verdict during an earlier trial.

The Rape Crisis Network of Ireland called on the DPP to give victims reasons for not prosecuting a case.

“Very many survivors of sexual violence who take the decision to report the crime to the guards will not have their case prosecuted,” said a network spokesperson.

“For survivors, this can be very difficult to understand and accept.

“We would like to see the DPP extend a pilot project to start giving people reasons for non-prosecution in relation to unlawful killing to include sexual offences.”

The figures show that, in 2010, just 10 convictions were secured in the Central Criminal Court, where 67 people were initially prosecuted. Of the 145 offences tried in the Circuit Court concerning 154 suspects, there were 32 convictions.

Also last year, of 203 suspects in 173 alleged crimes against under 18-year-olds, the DPP did not prosecute 163 (80%) of the suspects.

There was one conviction in the Central Criminal Court, and five in the Circuit Court. One case is still pending direction.

According to the DPP’s office, it receives a file in all detected cases of a sexual nature. Gardaí do not filter “unprosecutable” cases.

For this reason, the office receives a large number of files, some of which are seriously lacking in evidence.

This means they will only bother with cases which they can get a jury to prosecute and given the horrible attitudes to wards sex and women in this country, as over 1/3 of people think the victim is at fault. It means that you have to be a ‘good girl’ and have very little of a sexual history for to have them think it’s not your ‘fault’.

Given that even if the DPP takes your case it can take up to 118 weeks, that’s over two years before it sees the inside of a court room and you have to live with that hanging over you and that’s even harder if the attacker is someone you know which statically is likely.

The system is beyond deeply flawed and needs to change.

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on November 2, 2011 in Uncategorized

 

Tags: , , , ,

Rape Culture in advertising?

I really really don’t like this ad.
Actually I am pretty horrified by what it’s portraying.
It shows a woman who is almost save home, to the point she has is at her hall door, with her keys, being waylaid, held against her will by a figure bigger then she is and having an someting forced into her mouth.

p

It’s part of the Knorr beat the slump advertising campaign.
But the ad with the woman is it just does not compare or contrast equally with the other’s in the series.

slump

The blurb that does with the images are.

http://www.facebook.com/knorrquicksoup?sk=info

Knorr QuickSoup Ireland

Slump-busting? Meet Mr. Slump. You’re probably familiar with him already. So you know that he has a away of sneaking up on you when you’re at your most vulnerable, like mid-afternoon or mid morning.

He takes advantage of your hunger-induced daze and he makes you do stupid stuff that you’d really rather not.

He’ll tell you to chomp that whole bar of chocolate right now, that it’s just what you need.

Or he’ll order you to take a nap at your desk and not to worry if the boss is hovering at the desk beside you.

You get the picture. You know the story. So don’t let your Slump get the better of you. Get Knorr QuickSoup instead.

So the guys are studying and at work and being made sleep or slack off but the women is in the ‘traditional’ role, of out getting the shopping to be at home to make dinner, that’s annoying enough with out the enactment of oral rape with an object and implying it’s her fault.

Yup for double bonus this ad has victim blaming,
that there was something she could have done and as she didn’t it’s her fault she is vulnerable and that Mr Slump has taken advantage and is force feeding her chocolate.

Something you may like on occasion, being forced on you with out your consent, is scary and should not happen to anyone never mind it be used as an ad for something as common place and trivial as a cupa soup.

Knorr is a Unilever brand food and yes I have already lodged a complaint with them and with the advertising standards authority.

 
1 Comment

Posted by on May 13, 2011 in Uncategorized

 

Tags: , , , , , ,

Sister of Mercy excommunicated for being well merciful.

This is insane.
Those that ruined lives are still being protected by the roman catholic church, while those who are seeking to save them are being excommunicated. Is the church really that much of an old boys network?

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=126985072

Last November, a 27-year-old woman was admitted to St. Joseph’s Hospital and Medical Center in Phoenix. She was 11 weeks pregnant with her fifth child, and she was gravely ill. According to a hospital document, she had “right heart failure,” and her doctors told her that if she continued with the pregnancy, her risk of mortality was “close to 100 percent.”

The patient, who was too ill to be moved to the operating room much less another hospital, agreed to an abortion. But there was a complication: She was at a Catholic hospital.

“They were in quite a dilemma,” says Lisa Sowle Cahill, who teaches Catholic theology at Boston College. “There was no good way out of it. The official church position would mandate that the correct solution would be to let both the mother and the child die. I think in the practical situation that would be a very hard choice to make.”

But the hospital felt it could proceed because of an exception — called Directive 47 in the U.S. Catholic Church’s ethical guidelines for health care providers — that allows, in some circumstance, procedures that could kill the fetus to save the mother. Sister Margaret McBride, who was an administrator at the hospital as well as its liaison to the diocese, gave her approval.
Documents
Church Q&A On Abortion, Sister Margaret McBride And Excommunication
Catholic Hospitals Fact Sheet About Abortion

The woman survived. When Bishop Thomas J. Olmsted heard about the abortion, he declared that McBride was automatically excommunicated — the most serious penalty the church can levy.

“She consented in the murder of an unborn child,” says the Rev. John Ehrich, the medical ethics director for the Diocese of Phoenix. “There are some situations where the mother may in fact die along with her child. But — and this is the Catholic perspective — you can’t do evil to bring about good. The end does not justify the means.”

Ehrich adds that under canon or church law, the nun should be expelled from her order, the Sisters of Mercy, unless the order can find an alternative penalty. Ehrich concedes that the circumstances of this case were “hard.”

“But there are certain things that we don’t really have a choice” about, he says. “You know, if it’s been done and there’s public scandal, the bishop has to take care of that, because he has to say, ‘Look, this can’t happen.’ “

A Double Standard?

But according to the Rev. Thomas Doyle, a canon lawyer, the bishop “clearly had other alternatives than to declare her excommunicated.” Doyle says Olmsted could have looked at the situation, realized that the nun faced an agonizing choice and shown her some mercy. He adds that this case highlights a “gross inequity” in how the church chooses to handle scandal.
Bishop Thomas J. Olmsted in 2003
Enlarge Roy Dabner/AP

Bishop Thomas J. Olmsted, shown here in 2003, declared that McBride was automatically excommunicated because she allowed a patient at a Catholic hospital to get an abortion. But some say her quick punishment stands in stark contrast to the protection many pedophile priests have received from their bishops.
Bishop Thomas J. Olmsted in 2003
Roy Dabner/AP

Bishop Thomas J. Olmsted, shown here in 2003, declared that McBride was automatically excommunicated because she allowed a patient at a Catholic hospital to get an abortion. But some say her quick punishment stands in stark contrast to the protection many pedophile priests have received from their bishops.

“In the case of priests who are credibly accused and known to be guilty of sexually abusing children, they are in a sense let off the hook,” Doyle says.

Doyle says no pedophile priests have been excommunicated. When priests have been caught, he says, their bishops have protected them, and it has taken years or decades to defrock them, if ever.

“Yet in this instance we have a sister who was trying to save the life of a woman, and what happens to her? The bishop swoops down [and] declares her excommunicated before he even looks at all the facts of the case,” Doyle says.

Ehrich agrees that sexual abuse can’t be tolerated. But he says neither can McBride’s actions.

“She said, ‘Yes, you can kill that unborn child.’ That’s a heinous act. And I’m not going to make a distinction between what’s worse. They’re both abhorrent,” Ehrich says.

Ehrich says the nun can be admitted back into the Catholic community by going to confession and repenting. McBride still works at the hospital in another position. Whether she is allowed to remain in her religious order, Erich says that is up to the Sisters of Mercy

 
2 Comments

Posted by on May 20, 2010 in Blogroll, rants, taboo, Uncategorized

 

Tags: , , ,

What’s the difference between rape and sexual assault?

Given what is going on with the reporting on the reports of the sexual assault case in Listowel,
I have found myself having to explain to people again and again the difference between rape and sexual assault. Which just hammers home how little irish people in general seem to know about
rape, sexual assault and consent.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1990/en/act/pub/0032/sec0002.html#zza32y1990s2

Criminal Law (Rape) (Amendment) Act, 1990

Sexual assault.

2.—(1) The offence of indecent assault upon any male person and the offence of indecent assault upon any female person shall be known as sexual assault.
[GA]

(2) A person guilty of sexual assault shall be liable on conviction on indictment to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 5 years.
[GA]

(3) Sexual assault shall be a felony.

Criminal Law (Rape) (Amendment) Act, 1990

Rape under section 4.

4.—(1) In this Act “rape under section 4″ means a sexual assault that includes—
[GA]

( a ) penetration (however slight) of the anus or mouth by the penis, or
[GA]

( b ) penetration (however slight) of the vagina by any object held or manipulated by another person.
[GA]

(2) A person guilty of rape under section 4 shall be liable on conviction on indictment to imprisonment for life.
[GA]

(3) Rape under section 4 shall be a felony.

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on December 17, 2009 in Blogroll, irishblogs

 

Tags: , ,

 
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 195 other followers