The first time I heard of this woman was when the trial of three police officers for an historic rape resulted in three not guilty verdicts. The trial was huge in New Zealand, Louise Nicholas, the alleged victim was ripped to shreds on the stand, and her character was severely judged and stated upon by the defence, while at the time there were suppression orders on the rape convictions of two of the three police officers involved. Most of Wellington seemed to know about this, I heard separately from my father and my mother, the entire law school was aware of it as well. Jan Jordan was interviewed on Close Up at 7, a current affairs show. She managed to get across the unfairness of the case, comment on the fact that prior convictions weren't brought up, while not breaking the suppression orders. At the time I remember thinking, wow that woman is awesome I want to be taught by her one day!
Then my awesome ex-crim tutor made me aware of this book (you have excellent taste in books Laura).
The book begins with an introduction 'The Credibility Conundrum' detailing the historical belief which to an extent still exists today that all women lie and the attempt to disarm this belief. It also includes excerpts from current books speaking of how women cry rape whenever they are unhappy with sex, a notion I'm sure our criminal justice system does not need. Jordan also introduces readers to the gaining of rapport with the people she interviewed in the course of this book. The introduction both gives reasons for why this book needed to be written, current beliefs about the word of a woman and the dynamic of the interviewing and privilege of voices over others in this set of studies.
She then attempts to define rape in a modern context both legally and morally while featuring what several members of the criminal justice system define as rape as well as historic definitions and punishments for woman who had been raped. This highlights the need for a better legal definition within the justice system.
The next chapter assesses how the criminal justice system in New Zealand views rape: how lawyers defend it, how juries view it, how it is administered through the courts and how for a lot of victims, the system becomes something that treats them as more victimised than they were before.
The first study she undertakes is an in-depth analysis on a year worth of rape files, Jordan separates these into 'Genuine Cases', "Possibly True/Possibly False Cases", "Cases which the Police said were false" and "Cases which the complainant said were false" and gives examples of cases within each set with details about why they were believed or not believed. This study is done very well, she remains objective through the whole thing presenting each section with cases that both match the title or show police inconsistency. It showed how the combination of certain factors which lead to certain beliefs such as drunkenness, time elapsed before it is reported and previous consensual sex with the alleged perpetrator. It also showed that evidence of violence often makes certain cases more believable.
The study following this is about police investigations of rape cases. It features interviews with police officers who are specialised in rape and abuse investigations and their opinions on false complaints, what constitutes real rape etc. I probably found this chapter the most shocking, seeing an interview where an officer says that in fact, only stranger rape constitutes real rape and that other is just 'non consensual sex'. Jordan obviously has a particular skill with interviewing, because she has managed to be completely impartial to some pretty shocking comments and to continue the interviews without insulting anyone involved. The way she has structured these interviews and carried them out and the way they have been presented in the book shows she must have an extreme talent to stay impartial to get them to tell her the truth. I feel there is always a danger with these sorts of interviews that they will tell you what you want to hear, in this case she has done extremely well and a wide range of opinions is showed.
The last chapter is devoted to interviewing of the victims of Malcom Rewa a serial rapist. Jordan comments that these rapes are (almost) all 'stranger rapes' and show large amounts of violence and are therefore the most believable to police. She interviews them about their experiences over the course of the eventual identification of Rewa and consequently the prosecution and court case. It's fascinating again the amount of women she is able to interview about something so traumatic. She says and rightly so that at times she was emotionally exhausted after interviews, and if she hadn't been it would have been a worry.
I feel the studies in this book are in New Zealand anyway largely unprecedented and are an available aid to the police on attitudes which can sometimes prevent people form coming forward, and what attitudes are helpful. I found it covered both good and bad aspects of this area of policing so was not just a large manifesto. It showed what works, why it works and how certain attitudes can be incorporated. This book is amazing. I think anyone with even a passing interest in criminology would find it interesting and informative.
No comments:
Post a Comment