Rape, Roger Helmer, and Ken Clarke

East Midland l MEP Roger Helmer has created a bit of fuss on the internet following this post, which follows on from the comments made by Ken Clarke early on in the week.

I have little sympathy for much that Ken Clarke says on law and order. I believe prison works and that we shouldn’t go down the path of more tariff reductions for people who plead guilty early. They are guilty. They did the crime, so they shoudl do the time. If the prisons are full… build more. But I digress.

The issue raised by Clarke and Helmer is about rape. Frankly I would also be on the side of “chop their goolies off”, so you can see I am no law and order liberal here.

What the comments on Roger Helmers website often seem to miss if the fact that the law DOES distinguish between different types of rape (rightly or wrongly) as there would not be set guidelines for a judge to offer different tariffs for the crime (and no one disputes any are not crimes) which has been committed.

Now if anyone can tell me that I have got that wrong I would be more than happy to be educated, for some of the comments on this blog are shall we say, less than helpful. Finally I am glad to see so many people want a strong stance on law and order. Rapists and serious criminals to get no sentence reduction for an early guilty plea then! Gets my vote.

7 Responses to Rape, Roger Helmer, and Ken Clarke

  1. anon says:

    No there are not lesser sentances for the rape itself. They get different sentances if they commit other crimes against the victim besides the rape. In England we do not practice consectutive sentancing so if a person has committed three crimes such as rape, kidnapp and physical assault the sentance will reflect all three crimes otherwise they escape justice for the two crimes with the lesser sentance. Rape is a very specific crime, and the law does not distinguish between actual rapes. Helmer's comment does not anywhere state that it is OK to punish people for committing other cirmes, he implies the sentance for rape should be cut if rape was the only crime, and then specifically says that rape victims can be at least partly responsible, that not all rapists are equally deserving of blame, and that rape can be instinctive. The only comments on the blog that are unhelpful are Helmer's hiimself, where he repeats that not all rapists are equally deserving of blame or culpable, and Huge Davies when he accuses female bloggers of being hysterical (and ignores the fact at least half of those opposing helmers are men). Just because people oppose Helmers does not mean that they are being unhelpful.

  2. toryradio says:

    Dear anon – I would welcome sight of the legal advice where this is made clear. That would be very helpful. Sorry but comments that just say "twat" and the like are in fact unhelpful – unless you think they are constructive and help the discussion? In which case we disagree.

    Of course I assume you believe like me, that there should be no reduction in tariff for an early guilty plea? In which case you too are a proponent for more people being locked up in prison.

  3. sfortunata says:

    Dear toryradioHi, thanks for removing the comment referring to my full name, as requested: I really appreciate your speedy attention to that. Unfortunately, my original comment seems to have got lost in the process too. Just because this is an issue that seems to cause a lot of confusion, I'm going to repost the gist of it.

    In British law, there are no distinctions within the category of rape, no degrees or 'types' of rape (as there are distinctions within, for example, the category of murder). Rape is simply defined as penetration which takes place without the consent (or reasonable belief in the consent) of the person being penetrated. Particular situations or circumstances make no difference in statute: there is no legal definition of 'date rape', or similar. As Anon above says, other violent acts which are committed alongside the rape are considered as separate counts, rather than somehow accruing to the rape itself: so a perpetrator would be formally charged with rape and violence, rather than violent rape.

    The law dealing with rape is the Sexual Offences Act 2003, which can be read online (as can all laws) here, http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/part/….

  4. anon says:

    very few people have used the phrase twat. But considering Helmer has said that women are sometimes partly guilty of their own rape and that not all rapists are equally deserving of blame for raping their victims (that is what culpabale means, deserving of blame) I think that is far less helpful than calling someone a twat. And as this is tory radio I think you should be capable of looking up the sentancing advice yourself, or are the tories incapable of this?

    • toryradio says:

      1) I didn't realise you had seen the comments unpublished due to them being purely abusive.

      2) I take no lessons or advice on looking something up from someone who can't spell sentencing.

    • toryradio says:

      No sorry – doesn't make sense, and failure to provide a proper email address makes me believe you are just trying to agitate on the blog. Only constructive comments please. Thanks.

  5. toryradio says:

    You recently made two further comments on this site which made no sense whatsoever so were deleted. Maybe ask a FOI about them? Good luck! Moderation of comments on blogs mean many abusive comments get deleted or end up in the spam folder. Of course I am sure an intellectual heavyweight such as yourself would have no need to look that up, or resort to abusive comments such as your previous one on here.

    Always very brave being anonymous.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: