Thoughtful article on the Guardian Online regarding the ambiguity in the law that makes it very difficult to convict someone of rape - ie. the jury have to be 'sure' a crime has been committed.
Some interesting comments, some fights over language, and a commentator suggesting trying people for GBH rather than rape ie. rape not as a crime in itself, but part of a spectrum of violence covered by grevious boldily harm.
Could classifying rape as GBH add weight to the accusation, lead to a better conviction rate or prompt a change of perception away from thinking of it as the victims fault? Should rape be classified as GBH?
Appaulingly the convication rate for rape has fallen way below the rate I had heard in previous reports (1:5) to an even more worrying 1:20 (in 1999).