UK: Police will be banned from 'digital strip searches' of rape victims phones under new law. OP: Many men have been cleard of rape after a trawl of a phone revealed a false allegation. So much for justice!

SultanSaatana · 2020-12-27T15:59:06+00:00

So this means an investigation technique which could prove a man's innocence has been banned?

McFeely_Smackup · 2020-12-27T17:28:22+00:00

banning "digital strip search" is a lot more marketable than "banning collection of relevant evidence"

TAPriceCTR · 2020-12-27T16:45:16+00:00

It's not a strip search if you consent. If you don't consent then clearly your privacy is more important than prosecuting the alleged assailant. You're entitled to your priorities, but you must accept responsibility for choosing privacy over prosecution.

xdzgor · 2020-12-27T16:58:34+00:00

But people who make false allegations are not "victims", so the police are allowed to search their phones?

kudzu25 · 2020-12-27T17:42:17+00:00

This article isn't that informative. I feel that maybe they've rushed it through without having had time to sum up what actually might change.

> A ban on police conducting a 'digital strip search' on rape victims' phones will be introduced under a new law

Ok fine! But you are only a 'rape victim' after the trial. You can't just say you are.

> Clauses in the Bill ... will also only permit the minimum extraction of data required for the police investigation.

Ok, miss. So... do I need to check your text messages to prove you're lying? Or look at your photos as well? Just the text messages, ok I'll tick that box.

> It comes following an investigative report from the UK's Information Commissioner that criticized police for extracting 'excessive' amounts of personal data from victims' phones.

Like what? I mean I can see an issue there. Police aren't perfect. I'm just curious how you could possibly legislate about how much is too much.

Absolutely, you need to see text messages, right? So what would be out of line? Is it that they have illegally downloaded MP3s and are worried about that? This is the kind of situation that I can imagine police officers being investigated AFTER the event. But how you can legislate for this BEFORE the event I really don't know.

> Digital police search consent forms were introduced after a number of rape trials collapsed due to key digital evidence arising at the last minute.

So... the fact that justice was delivered means that changes were needed?? Is that a strangely worded sentence or...?

> However, the digital police search consent forms have caused controversy as victims were told to hand over their phones or prosecutions may not go ahead.

Ok, so a police officer is friends with the accused and basically confiscates the victims phone for months on end until she drops the case. I could see that happening. So... make it so that police are only allowed to take your phone for a couple of days?

If I videoed someone breaking into my house and the police wanted to check my phone to see if I can given them the original, raw video, or something that I can put onto my computer and heavily edited I would think that reasonable. As long as they're not keeping it for weeks on end, what's the problem?

> Speaking to The Telegraph, a government source said:

Ok! So this article was 'matched' to something from the Telegraph. Government sources are staying anonymous because they don't really know what's going on.

> We will put a statutory power into legislation that will clearly define what police officers can look at on phones, and that they can only extract information that is strictly necessary to detect, investigate and prosecute the offence.'

Ahhh. So it 'clearly defines' something that is impossible to know before you look at it.

You have to flip over cards on a shuffled pack to find the Ace of Clubs. BUT! You can only flip over the number of cards that you strictly need to find that card.

> Rape prosecutions have halved in recent years - from 2,991 convictions three years ago to just 1,439 in 2019-20.

Interesting. That does sound kind of low for the UK. I really wouldn't be qualified to comment on whether that is linked to better police investigation of digital devices or other factors.

> This is despite a record high in the number of reported offences, rising to 55,130 rapes, meaning just 1.4 per cent of attacks recorded by police led to a prosecution.

Again, I'm not an expert. But I really, really would not be surprised if spurious rape accusations were on the rise. People are literally being told 'If you regret it, that was rape' 'If you drank alcohol and are a woman, that was rape' 'If he said he was John Bon Jovi's keyboard player and wasn't, that was rape'.

This isn't crazy people on Twitter. This is mainstream opinion being spread to the masses.

Rockbottom503 · 2020-12-27T17:59:36+00:00

This is wrong on so many levels. It effectively means that a woman can literally brag to her friends that she's acting out of malice and the guy has to rely on her friend doing the right thing. Criminal law has always been about an accuser proving the defendants guilt, this is just another step towards reversing that and putting the onus on a defendant to prove their innocence.

SarkyJock · 2020-12-27T17:08:09+00:00

I am hoping that, since Scotland does have control over its own criminal system, I hop that this law doesn't carry over to here. However, because the Scottish Government is very leftist, I think this will happen here too. It wasn't that long ago they tried to get a bill of "Hate Speech" through which was so vaguely worded that anything could be construed as hate speech, they put that through closed public scrutiny and guess what, only invited interest groups that would be in favour of the bill.

Panderjit_SinghVV · 2020-12-27T18:04:11+00:00

Can’t recall which MRA it was but it’s been suggested that men on juries must always acquit when in a jurisdiction that allows withholding of exculpatory evidence.

mmpro55 · 2020-12-27T23:48:08+00:00

Extra frustrating given that under UK law, women can't even commit rape.

"A person (A) commits an offence if— (a) he intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus or mouth of another person (B) with his penis..."

Intelligent_Can_6411 · 2020-12-28T16:10:49+00:00

I was actually thinking about moving over to the U.K. to escape American feminism, but you guys have even less balls than us. Why in the fuck do men in the U.K. not oppose this openly? There should at least be some push back, that being said, American men are pretty silent as well.

Yoshiezibz · 2020-12-28T22:15:11+00:00

They can still look through the phone but only for specific data. I assume that's some photos around the time of thr event, and texts. They aren't banned entirely.

Police were taking 10s of gigabytes of data of victims phones which is clearly unnecessary. They were taking photos from years ago.

I can understand why we should limit the amount of data the police can get from the victims phone.

MisterDamage · 2020-12-27T18:40:34+00:00

This is a UK story, idk any particulars of UK law, but it does seem like an argument could be made in the us against searching the phone on the basis of the 5th amendment. If allowing the police to search the phone will reveal that the accuser is lying, and if the case has progressed to the point that that lie being exposed will tend to lead to a criminal charge of perjury or even misuse of police time.

ObviousObservationz · 2020-12-27T14:54:15+00:00

Wait...you're upset that they won't violate the civil rights to privacy when someone comes forward as a victim?

More importantly, how many people won't come forward because they don't want an officer to see flirtatious texts and tell them it was theur fault? How many rapists wont be caught when women and men don't come forward.

If a man says a woman raped him, should he have to let police officers go through his phone to see all his personal texts?

This practice is very anti victim and its good that its gone.

Juliando · 2020-12-27T22:49:09+00:00

ITT: people who don't know anything about the law and evidence

MuttonDressedAsGoose · 2020-12-27T18:36:29+00:00

The thought that my phone is going to be taken for several months might make me think twice about reporting a rape.

I don't know exactly how the phones were used. I mean, are they only looking for information regarding the specific incident/accused?

And what is shared with the defense? If the victim has sexted a bunch of other guys and talked to girlfriends about enjoying hookups with random people, is that considered relevant? Wouldn't it be used to make her look like a slut who was asking for it?

I don't know how it works in the UK.

Doogle89 · 2020-12-27T16:41:38+00:00

Let's say you were mugged and the police wanted to go through your entire phone history. Yeah I'd be uncomfortable with that. I think this is a good decision.

Men can still freely submit phone conversations as evidence. Women who lie about rape are scum of the earth but some women are victims of rape and they should not also have their privacy invaded.

Comments