So what was he trying to say?

(leviticus no longer likes the cut of your gib on, Thu 19 May 2011, 16:25, 1 reply)

see above

( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Thu 19 May 2011, 16:26, closed)

A Vagabond, you are totally right and I salute you
"Clarke: Date rape can be as serious as the worst rapes. But date rapes, as you are quite right to say very old experience, of being in trials, they do vary extraordinarily one from another and in the end the judge has to decide on the circumstances. But I've never met a judge who, confronted with a rapist, as you and I would use the term in conversation, would give him 12 months. That would be a crazy sentence."

This is not the opinion I thought he'd given. Shame on the Labour party for being such opportunistic little bastards, calling for his resignation and all that.
(leviticus no longer likes the cut of your gib on, Thu 19 May 2011, 16:33, closed)

He's drawing an explicit difference between rape by strangers and rape by people known to the victim
with the implicit assumption that rape by strangers is typically worse.

He's a fucking idiot.
( Dr. Shambolic je suis charlie, Thu 19 May 2011, 16:43, closed)

Every case is different
That's why judges have leeway in their sentencing options at their own discretion. If all rapes were the same, we wouldn't need judges.

Having read the transcript I don't think Clarke was advocating one point of view or the other, he was just describing the system as it currently stands.

Still, feel free to jump on the absolutely outraged bandwagon.
( emvee cruor deo cruoris, Thu 19 May 2011, 17:36, closed)

Where did I suggest that every case wasn't different?
I simply said that he makes an explicit distinction between date rape and rape by a stranger.

Still, feel free to argue against a strawman or accuse me of being irrational with outrage rather than addressing what I've said.
( Dr. Shambolic je suis charlie, Thu 19 May 2011, 17:43, closed)

He made no assertion that date rape was easier, he said this, as you've already read above:
"Date rape can be as serious as the worst rapes. But date rapes, as you are quite right to say very old experience, of being in trials, they do vary extraordinarily one from another and in the end the judge has to decide on the circumstances."

And it's true, they do vary wildly and that's why judges have discretion in sentencing.
( Bazongaloid, Thu 19 May 2011, 18:09, closed)

"Date rape can be as serious as the worst rapes"
I can't really see any way to parse that phrase that does not make a distinction between date rapes and "other" rapes.

Anyway, he's clarified and apologised so, whether he intended that or not, he at least concedes that it is how it could be interpreted.
( Dr. Shambolic je suis charlie, Thu 19 May 2011, 19:25, closed)

There is a distinction, otherwise there wouldn't be different terms for them
One is a subset of the other.
Look, they even have separate pages on wikipedia:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Date_rape
( emvee cruor deo cruoris, Thu 19 May 2011, 22:06, closed)

Another straw man.
I never suggested the specific term "date rape" doesn't exist.
( Dr. Shambolic je suis charlie, Fri 20 May 2011, 9:16, closed)

The whole thing's a massive straw man
It's pathetic political point-scoring over very little substance at all
( emvee cruor deo cruoris, Fri 20 May 2011, 11:09, closed)

I think it would be reasonable to give Ken the benefit of the doubt on this
The quote is spoken rather than pre-written for a start.

Also, I think he's making a fair point that date rapes can differ in how serious they are and how harshly they should be sentenced, and he explicitly states that at the extreme end of the spectrum, a "date rape can be as serious as the worst rape".

I don't think he is saying that date rape is worse than rape by a stranger. I don't even think that's what he means by "the worst rapes" - I think he's talking about about a premeditated, prolonged attack involving assault and battery, whether the victim knew the attacker or not.

Eugh. Christ, what a subject.
(leviticus no longer likes the cut of your gib on, Thu 19 May 2011, 18:20, closed)

Oh dear
and then I saw this, and changed my mind again.

www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/may/19/kenneth-clarke-rape-sentencing-law

This is quite a remarkable fuck up for a guy who has ostensibly spent a year looking into the intricacies of sentencing policy,
(leviticus no longer likes the cut of your gib on, Thu 19 May 2011, 21:04, closed)

If this chap has been advising the government on its strategy for 10 years
What was he doing in 2004 when they originally cut sentences by a third in the event of a guilty plea?
( emvee cruor deo cruoris, Thu 19 May 2011, 22:01, closed)