Yes, but the (alleged) victim’s statement is evidence. I’m not a lawyer but as I understand it the decision to prosecute is made by the Department of Public Prosecution, usually after advice from the police. There will be cases when there is no evidence other than the (alleged) victim’s testimony, but the testimony itself is extraordinarily convincing. In such cases I see no reason why a jury shouldn’t decide who is telling the truth. In other cases the DPP will decide that there isn’t enough evidence to proceed with the case, and there will be prosecution.

In the case of the one night stand, a typical claim might be that the (alleged) victim was too drunk to be capable of consenting. If they were drinking publicly then there would be evidence as to how much she drank, and how she looked when she left. They would have also interviewed the (alleged) rapist, who may admit that the victim was unconscious. In that case there’s quite a bit of evidence, and even a confession.

“I could just accuse you of raping me even though we’ve never met and you would be arrested, charged and made to await trial. That’s not fair is it?”

It wouldn’t be fair, but it wouldn’t be fair to accuse her of any other crime either. It would quickly be seen that you two had no real connection and that you couldn’t make a convincing story as to when and how you were raped. The system usually works reasonably well.

If not, I could just accuse you of raping me even though we’ve never met and you would be arrested, charged and made to await trial. That’s not fair is it?

OK, Yusuf, I’m going to get you alone in a private place and hit you with a blunt object, so as to be painful and not leave bruises. It should not really go to court at all, since there is no real proof that I hit you.

This incident, strangely enough, supports my earlier assessment (previous post) about the nature of evolutionary pressures and the necessary social constraints on them. It also ties into Islam and rape. It ties into the (unspoken but implied in the Oz media) issue of Arabs and rape.

An interesting comment on bigpharaoh was that the sexual fear that a Chinese man’s wife felt in Cairo did not exist in Isfahan. Is it specifically Arab culture that fosters misogyny? I personally have a prolem with that contention because of elements in Pakistan/Afghanistan – ie. Hudood ordinance. But just because there are problems there doesn’t mean that there is not something quite ill in the Arab world when it comes to women.

A fascinating take on all of this comes from Tanveer Ahmad, who happens to represent most of what I believe. He was on this week’s religion report on the ABC. Have a listen. He contends that central to Islam is the yearning for a mother figure, a female, loving authority. When he gets into stuff about the matriarchy of Jahaliyya and lierated women then, and the goddesses and what not, he starts to lose me because I believe that is an abrogation of histrocity and more a rose tinted attempt to parlay goddess worship into a generally woman friendly social structure which never existed.

Anyway, go to Religion Report and listen. It’s always geat to hear him speak.

There was a very well-known case in Scotland where a 16-year-old girl was raped, having been attacked in the street and forced into a park, by a local thug. When giving testimony, the defence barrister insisted that she hold up the underwear she had been wearing – twice – and read out the “little devil” slogan. Although the rapist was convicted, the victim later committed suicide.

Faris does not say whether there were witnesses to the girl being dragged out of the party and into the car. If there were, and it was obvious that the girl was in distress, and that she had presented to the police with injuries consistent with rape, there really was no excuse for questioning her virtue. Girls go to parties every day, usually not to get a quick screw in a man’s car. It doesn’t mean she’s “asking” for anything.

On the other hand, there are situations where a rape accusation might be made and the alleged victim’s past record might well be relevant. When the supposed rape happened during an actual one-night stand and there is no evidence other than an accusation and some nasty details about the man’s character, it really should not go to court at all given that there is no real proof (something a lot of feminists don’t like hearing). But as the awful case in Scotland shows, it is not only in heavily contentious “date rape” cases where a woman’s history is dragged up: victims of archetypal rape suffer it as well.

That does not have much to do with what the shaikh said in that lecture, however; the words quoted plainly say that according to this great imam he mentioned, the overwhelming share of blame lies with the woman for “tempting” him, rather than with him for failing to control his impulses as he is commanded to do. It also failed to take into account the huge difference between the sort of attention a woman might get by dressing provocatively, which may well be what she intends, and rape. There is simply no comparison.