STUART Waiton's article asserting that Scots men are “at risk” of being branded rapists for political reasons was extraordinary ("Man at risk of being branded 'rapist' for political reasons", The Herald, October 15). It completely missed the point of why rape complainers in Scotland may consider taking civil action following an unsuccessful criminal prosecution.
In 2016-2017, there were 1,878 rapes and attempted rapes reported to the police but only 98 convictions. Most rapes reported to the police never make it to court. Of those that do, fewer than 40 per cent lead to a conviction. In our view there is a grave danger that significant numbers of rapists are walking free. To be concerned about this isn’t “political” – access to justice is a basic human right. Taking civil action for rape would not necessarily be anyone’s first choice – in the recent case, Miss M had to fight for five years for any form of justice, and go through the ordeal of giving evidence and being cross-examined twice. That she did so was testament to both her courage and to the desperate need for justice that many, many rape survivors tell us they feel. In her case, after hearing all the evidence, the Sheriff decided that Stephen Coxen raped her.
What this landmark civil case did was demonstrate to rape survivors that there may be another route to finding some sense of justice. Mr Waiton called this a “destruction of justice”. It’s not – it’s a wake-up call, both to the criminal justice system which is failing so many rape survivors, and to men who think they have got away with rape.
Sandy Brindley,
Rape Crisis Scotland, 46 Bath Street, Glasgow.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel