Three men jailed for raping drunk woman

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/feb/13/three-men-jailed-for-raping-drunk-woman

Version 0 of 1.

Three men have been jailed for raping a woman who admitted to being so drunk she did not know whether she had consented to sex.

The prosecution, which was halted mid-trial and referred to the court of appeal, will set a criminal precedent for victims’ capacity to give sexual consent.

The charges were originally thrown out by a crown court judge in Lincoln then reinstated after an appeal by the Crown Prosecution Service, which relied on mobile phone video footage.

The case comes as the director of public prosecutions, Alison Saunders, has been raising concerns about the way the criminal justice system treats victims who are incapacitated through drink or drugs.

“It is not a crime to drink,” she has said, “but it is a crime for a rapist to target someone who is no longer capable of consenting to sex though drink.”

All three defendants in the Lincoln case – Michael Armitage, 43, Rafal Segiet, 40, and Pawal Chudzicki, 48 – claimed that the 23-year-old woman had been a willing participant. The men were sentenced to six years each in prison.

Their victim had consumed up to 12 shots of vodka before she left a nightclub in the town in October 2012. She met the men, who were strangers, and took a taxi with them to a flat. She drank more vodka there and was repeatedly assaulted.

The woman was reported missing by her family and finally located the following evening by police at the flat. She was in a confused and distressed state and told officers she had been raped.

During cross-examination about whether she could remember anything, the woman told the court: “Yes, it could all have happened consensually and I don’t remember it.”

The crown court judge in Lincoln, John Pini QC, terminated the trial last month on the grounds that there was insufficient evidence to prove that she could not have agreed voluntarily to have sex with the defendants.

“I am absolutely not saying that a woman in drink cannot say no. I am not saying that lack of memory equals consent ,” he said. “I am simply saying that the prosecution must make the jury sure that at the material time … she lacked the capacity to consent as opposed to being able to form a drunken intent, and now having forgotten what may have happened. And in my judgment on that vital issue there is a deficit of evidence.”

Prosecutors challenged Pini’s decision. Three court of appeal judges – Lord Justice Treacy, Mr Justice Walker and Mrs Justice Thirlwall – agreed with the CPS, overturned the crown court ruling and ordered that the jury continue hearing the case.

Video footage on mobile phones seized by police at the flat showed one of the defendants having sex with the victim while she appeared to be barely, if at all, conscious.

“It appears to us that [the victim] is depicted throughout as being sufficiently inert and unresponsive as to leave it open to a properly directed jury to be sure that she was not consenting and that she did not have the freedom and capacity to do so,” the appeal court said. “Issues of consent and capacity to consent should normally be left to a jury to determine.”

Lawrence English, CPS East Midlands’ senior district crown prosecutor, said: “This was rape as it was clear the woman was in no state to consent to sex. While it is, of course, true that lack of memory, on its own, does not prove lack of consent, the context in this case showed that this victim was taken advantage of because she was incapacitated, and that she could not have consented to sexual activity.

“It is against the law to engage in sexual activity with someone who is clearly unable, through drink, to give their consent. We are pleased that the court of appeal ruled in the way it did and the case proceeded to the jury for a verdict. The victim in this case has shown tremendous courage. She suffered a horrific ordeal because of the actions of these three men and we are satisfied to see justice has been served.”