TAR 2005 CAMPAIGN

DURING 2005 WE ESTIMATE THAT 17,000 WOMEN WILL REPORT RAPE - ONE EVERY MINUTE - OUR WISH IS TO STOP THE INJUSTICE

Our Christmas 2004 campaign took on the 'justice' system.

During 2005, with your help,  we will continue this campaign. Click the links below to read more...

Feedback from Christmas campaign

Previous cases of judges soft of sex offenders

Can judges be sacked?

A Name and Shame list

What can you do?

Feedback from Christmas campaign

The Christmas campaign was hugely successful and attracted hundreds of responses. Thanks to everyone who responded.

A short poll during the Christmas period asked - How can we best improve justice in rape cases? The results were:

Insist that judges receive training from rape crisis centres          7%

Sack judges who make comments such as 'she was

 willing' (Judge Michael Roach of a 12 year old)                         5%

Create a judges’ Inspectorate/Ombudsman                               3%

All of the above                                                                               86%

The Judge the Judge survey attracted hundreds of responses and only one which found the judge innocent! That single response was from a man whose feedback read – “people are just too emotional about the issue”! The comments left by the 99.2% who found the judge guilty were fantastic. A selection of the comments can be seen on the website at:

http://www.truthaboutrape.co.uk/campaign%20comments.htm

Previous cases of judges soft of sex offenders

A TAR member sent us this article from 1993 - yes, judges have a long and dishonourable history of outrageous comments, discriminatory decision-making and unjust sentencing.

Guardian Article by Clare Dyer 10^th June 1993 

Judge's comments echo "silly" remarks

Judge Ian Starforth Hill's comments that an eight year old victim of a sexual attack was "not entirely an angel" raises echoes of the notorious remark by Judge Bertie Richards in 1982 that a teenaged hitch-hiker who was raped after thumbing a lift late at night was "guilty of a great deal of contributory negligence".

The judge, who was banned from trying sex cases as a result, caused an uproar when he let the rapist, a businessman, off with a £2000 fine.

Judge Starforth Hill's word also recall the comment of Mr Justice Owen, a High Court Judge, that a 12 year old rape victim had been "asking for trouble" by going to a 19 year old man's room.

Such pronouncements regularly provoke accusations that the judiciary is soft on sex offenders and prone to belittle victim's ordeals.

In February Judge John Prosser let a 15 year old rapist go free, ordering him to pay his teenage victim £500 "for a good holiday".

The Court of Appeal later increased the penalty to a 2 year prison sentence.

In 1984 Lord Hailsham, then Lord Chancellor, complained that judges say "particularly silly things which are then widely publicised in the media".

In 1988 Judge Sir Harold Cassel QC, refused to jail an ex policeman for indecently assaulting his 12 year old mentally retarded daughter. He said the man was driven to assault the girl because his wife's pregnancy had dimmed her sexual appetite causing "considerable problems for a healthy young husband". Judge Cassel was strongly rebuked by Lord Mackay, the Lord Chancellor, and retired early on medical grounds.

Most of the injudicious remarks have come from circuit judges like Starforth Hill, Cassel, Richards and Prosser.

But High Court Judges are not immune: Mr Justice Leonard, the judge in the Ealing Vicarage rape trial, provoked a furore when he commented that the victim's trauma was "not so great", and gave the burglar who organised the raid a much harsher sentence than the two rapists.

Other sufferers from Judicial foot-in-mouth disease include Judge Brian Gibbens who told a 35 year old builder who had sex with a neighbour's seven-year-old daughter while drunk: "It strikes me, without belittling the offence, as one of the accidents which happen in life to almost everyone, although of a wholly different kind."

Judge Gibbens has since retired, as has Judge Gabriel Hutton.

He pronounced, when jailing a lorry driver briefly for attempted rape: "I hope you'll be able to keep your well-paid job and that the couple of weeks you spend in prison will be treated by your employers as part of your holidays." 

Previous Campaign

Our Christmas 2004 campaign concerned the case of Judge Hucker in the trial of a 15 year old who complained of gang rape. The judge doubted the credibility of the young victim. But imagine how confused and distressed she must have felt after being questioned in turn by each man's defence barrister. Such interrogation within the courtroom by a 'gang' of barristers must have felt like another series of attacks.

Previously in 2004 we referred another Judge Michael - Judge Michael Roach - to the Attorney General’s Office for exercising poor judgement in the way in which he discussed the case in court. Before that, in 2003, we chastised Lord Reed who sentenced the rapist of a 13 MONTH old girl to just 5 years. That sentence was subsequently increased because it was deemed to be unduly lenient.

Can Judges be Sacked?

Alex Wade from The Guardian makes the point that sanction against errant judges is virtually non-existent, usually consisting of no more than a reprimand from the lord chancellor. Removal of a high court judge requires a motion from both Houses of Parliament, and though circuit judges can be dismissed for misbehaviour or incompetence, only one has ever been sacked, after he was convicted of smuggling whisky and cigarettes. Often, it seems that a judge can survive the kind of scandals that would wreck a lesser mortal's career: Judge Victor Hall kept his job despite being convicted of drink-driving in 1999, and Judge William Crawford suffered a "severe rebuke", but not dismissal, from the then lord chancellor, Lord Mackay, when he said in court that he knew "many people with duodenal ulcers who work like niggers".

A name and shame list

So we open our name and shame list.

We will list here every judge whose comments and sentencing decisions offend the members of the Truth About Rape campaign. The first few on the list are cited in the article above and also on the Scotsman website. Where possible we will provide a link to evidence of their crimes against women.

Please send us your entries for inclusion on the list - we can't do this without you.

Judge Bertrand Richards - 1982 – banned from trying sex cases

Judge Leonard - 1987

Judge Sir Harold Cassel – 1988 - rebuked by the Lord Chancellor and retired early

Judge Raymond Dean - 1990

Justice Alliott - 1991

Judge John Lee - 1991

Judge Ian Starforth Hill – 1993

Judge David Owen – 1993 - has since seen 86 appeals against his verdicts and/or sentences

Judge John Prosser – 1993

Judge Brian Gibbens – 1993

Justice Arthur Myerson - 1997

Judge Gabriel Hutton - 2001

Judge Richard Benson - 2003

Lord Reed - 2003 (and see our 'Whats New' page for 2003)

Judge Michael Roach - 2004 (and see our 'Whats New' page 2004)

Judge Michael Hucker - 2004 (and see our Christmas 2004 campaign)

Click here for another case of leniency in a sex offences case from Judge Hucker

Judge Roger Dutton - 2004 (and see our Christmas 2004 campaign)

Judge Medawar - 2005

Judge William Morris - 2005

Australian Judges - Judge Tony Duckett and Judge John Barnet - also see What's New August 2005

Judge Jeffrey Lewis - see What's New August 2006

What can you do?

If you feel that judges such as these should be brought to account,  demand your own justice. You can take action in lots of different ways. Our 'Ideas For Action' page has a lot of suggestions.

You could use our model letter (below).

We estimate that around 17,000 women will report rape in 2005 – that is one woman raped every minute of every day. Stop the injustice by writing to you local newspaper, your MP, the Prime Minister, the Lord Chancellor, the Attorney General or the Solicitor General, the United Nations - and anyone else you can think of.

Find your MP - You can write to your MP care of 'House of Commons, London, SW1A 0AA'. To find their constituency address either phone the House of Commons Information office 020 7219 4272 (with your postcode), or ask your local library. Alternatively, use this link to go to the UK Parliament's MP locator service (go to our Ideas for Action for more information).

The Prime Minister, Tony Blair at 10 Downing Street, London SW1A 2AA. Or you can email him - but he is not obliged to respond to you!

Lord Falconer of Thoroton who is Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs and Lord Chancellor. He is responsible for the appointment of judges. Department for Constitutional Affairs, Selborne House, 54 Victoria Street, London SW1E 6QW.

The Attorney General - Any member of the public can email the Attorney General at: lslo@gtnet.gov.uk  Or write to Lord Peter Goldsmith, The Attorney General's Office, The Legal Secretariat to the Law Officers, Attorney, General's Chambers, 9 Buckingham Gate, London SW1E 6JP.

United Nations - Division for the Advancement of Women, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, 2 UN Plaza, DC2-12th Floor, New York, NY 10017, USA.

Model letter

Dear

All I want  is justice for rape survivors. 

The Truth About Rape Campaign has alerted me to the injustice faced by rape complainants in the UK courts.  The discriminatory attitudes held by certain members of the judiciary results in injustice and I am therefore calling upon you to take action.

I am appalled that some judges seem to base their sentencing on rape myths and untested beliefs about human behaviour. The Truth About Rape have documented evidence of poor sentencing by a number of judges including:

• sentencing a man convicted of possessing and distributing child pornography to only 2 years imprisonment;
• sentencing two men convicted of multiple child sexual abuse to only 5 years and 8 years respectively, which would result in one man serving less than 2 years and the other less than 5 years and;
• sentencing the rapist of a 13 MONTH old girl to just 5 years.

There is a list of judges, named and shamed and all of it supported by evidence.

The State has a duty to protect its citizens from harm and abuse. Are women and children not included? Women are just as human as men and are entitled to their human rights. HOW MUCH EVIDENCE DO WE NEED before we take action?

I believe it is vital that individuals such as judges, who are in positions of authority within the legal system, demonstrate due diligence in upholding women’s right to sexual autonomy and bodily integrity by awarding sentences that are proportionate to the harm committed in sexual offences. The evidence shows that some judges fail to do this and so continue to perpetuate injustice.

I call for the following:

• Justice system staff, including judges, to receive training on sexual violence issues from rape crisis centres;
• Legal representation for complainants in rape trials;
• The dismissal of judges who make misogynistic/sexist comments in court and;
• The creation of a judges Inspectorate/Ombudsman to conduct independent reports and who the public can appeal to.

It is estimated that around 17,000 women will report rape in 2005 – that is one woman raped every minute of every day. The UK current conviction rate in rape is around 6% - that means just 6 in each 100 rape cases will result in a rapist going to prison. Please can we change that?