#IBelieveHer – ROSA statement on Ulster Rugby trial

The sexist attitudes that have dominated this trial show there is a need for special measures in order to ensure that victims of sexual violence receive justice. The example of specialised courts should be considered, as in South Africa and other countries, which provide judge and juries with training and have achieved a higher level of conviction and a less traumatic experience in court for victims of sexual violence.

 

ROSA, a socialist-feminist organisation, initiated by women in the Socialist Party issued a statement at the time of the verdict of the Ulster Rugby trial. The Socialist Party fully supports the demands being put forward by ROSA. Here we publish the statement:

Today there is outrage at the outcome of the Ulster Rugby rape trial, which like over 94% of all rape trials, has resulted in no conviction for the accused. The conviction rates for sexual violence are far lower than for any other crime. The high-profile nature of this trial has laid bare the reason: the criminal justice system is not equipped to deliver justice for women on the basis that our clothes, where we go, who we look at, can be taken as evidence for consent, in face of the express statement that consent was not granted.

Comments made by the defence barrister throughout the course of the trial have revealed the attitude of the criminal justice system to victims of sexual violence. From the naked victim-blaming of statements like “If you didn’t like him, why were you kissing him in his bedroom?”, to the young woman’s clothes being passed around the jury and inspected for tan stains as evidence of consent, the trial took the form of a prolonged character assassination of the complainant based on misogynistic ideas.

The comments on the rugby players’ “upbringing” and what good families they come from, and the implication that the party’s attendees would have prevented the rape had the victim screamed because they were “middle class” also exposes the disgusting anti-working class prejudice inherent in the legal system.

The media has served the defence’s aim of giving voice to the most conservative ideas in society and backward ideas about sexual consent. Reportage has been biased and salacious: some papers published descriptions of the woman’s clothes and underwear.

When asked in court whether or not the complainant had said “yes”, Paddy Jackson replied “she didn’t say no”. The fact that this was interpreted as an affirmation of consent, rather than an admission that consent was not obtained, is extremely telling. The inadequacy of the legal system, as well as the woeful lack of factual sex education in schools that teaches consent, must be addressed.

The sexist attitudes that have dominated this trial show there is a need for special measures in order to ensure that victims of sexual violence receive justice. The example of specialised courts should be considered, as in South Africa and other countries, which provide judge and juries with training and have achieved a higher level of conviction and a less traumatic experience in court for victims of sexual violence.

This system offers no justice for women and victims of sexual violence. We cannot tolerate these systemic failings any longer.

Total
0
Shares
Previous Article

The poor people's campaign at 50 – The Radical Legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

Next Article

Misogyny, sexism & capitalism in the dock

Related Posts
Read More

Misogyny, sexism & capitalism in the dock

The trial has brought to the fore the prevalence of sexist and misogynistic attitudes that exist in the legal system and society in general. In Northern Ireland, over 94% of all rape trials have resulted in no conviction for the accused. The conviction rates for sexual violence are far lower than for any other crime. In the South only 19% result in convictions and 7% when the case is contested. As Suzanne Breen, one of the few journalists who have covered this trial in a fair manner, put it: “This was a case where it wasn’t always clear who exactly was on trial. Each defendant is rightly allowed their own legal representation. But a 21-year-old woman being cross-examined by four defence barristers over eight days pulls at your heart-strings…The young woman failed to secure the verdict she desired. She did not win, yet she has certainly not lost.”
Read More

Ryanair forced to recognise unions

The victory at Ryanair has the potential to inspire other workers in the struggle against exploitative employers. The fact that such a notoriously anti-union company can be brought to heel by the threat of collective action is a good indication of the power of workplace organisation. Ryanair's approach to workers' rights is hardly unique among employers, and the lesson of this struggle is sure to resonate with other workers who face opposition to their basic rights by similarly exploitative companies.