In the News
A piece by Julie Bindel, writing about rape in the Guardian, contains several misconceptions and inaccuracies regarding the CPS' approach to rape prosecutions, and in particular, its decision to charge.
• The article states that: 'The CPS will only take a case to court if it has a "reasonable chance of conviction". This is a misreading of the Code for Crown Prosecutors, which states that a case must only proceed where there is "a realistic prospect of a conviction". This prevents cases going to court where there is not sufficient evidence to do so.
• CPS lawyers are required to explore every avenue when assessing if there is sufficient evidence to charge, and to support victims so that they are able to give their best evidence, but the verdict is a matter for a jury.
• We accept there is work to be done to improve the way we handle rape cases, and improving our performance in prosecuting rape cases is a priority for the CPS.
• Of those cases which are charged by the CPS, 58% result in conviction. This is a rise of around three percentage points since 2006-7.
• A new Rape Manual for the use of all prosecutors was published in 2008 and emphasises the need to recognise and challenge societal myths about rape and sexual violence. Chief Crown Prosecutors are also trained on prosecuting rape cases which includes a session on myths and stereotypes and the psychological effects of sexual trauma on victims.
• Only specially trained rape prosecutors handle rape cases and all self-employed barristers who prosecute cases in court must have attended a course that has been accredited by CPS.
• It is untrue that cases involving complicated factors such as previous history between complainant and suspect “rarely get an airing” as is alleged in the article. In fact, only a small proportion of rapists are strangers to their victims and it is not unusual for us to prosecute rape cases where the two parties have previously had a sexual relationship.
