Apparently you're not "victim-y enough" if you ever get on with your life?
Hasn't been 8 years or so now? Would it be better if she had just curled up into a dark corner for the rest of her life? WTF?

The good news is that I can't see it feasible that anyone would buy this horseshit. Even the person presenting it can't possibly believe it.

What the hell?? This reminds me of a conversation we had going in my global issues class a couple years ago. We were talking about sexual abuse in the Catholic church in general, and one woman who had been abused in particular. She had come out about her abuse many years later, after carrying on her life (you know, like rape and sexual abuse victims do every day), and one boy had the audacity to say something to the effect of, "Well, it couldn't have messed her up that badly. I mean, she had a job and a family and everything." ......

It's sad that I'm surprised the court didn't buy this bullshit, isn't it?

What an ass. I hope he has trouble finding work after this.

Hey, look on the bright side. This douchebag has given us a new comeback for guys who do the "Smile, sweetie!" thing on the street. "Sorry, I'm not allowed to smile. It might hurt my case if I'm ever raped."

Seriously though, wtf? I guess a woman is only allowed to be considered a rape victim in the eyes of society if she spends the rest of her life in penance for the shame of it, or something like that.

My father said the same thing to me about my childhood - that I smiled in the pictures in their photo albums so I must've been a happy kid. I think my eyes fell out of my head when he said that. And the saddest part is that he really, really wanted to believe it.

I was abused by both my parents, sexually by my father. People will say whatever they want to and see what they want to. It doesn't make it true.

The thing is, if someone did just spend their entire life after an assault just curled up in bed, not getting a job or going out to socialize or starting a new relationship, they'd probably be accused of "crying for attention", "needing to get over it", etc.

There's also the "fancy dress party" thing. Apparently women who are victims of rape aren't allowed to go out and get dressed up? They have to stay home, in sweatpants, suffering, for the rest of their lives.

And I bet this will help said lawyer get more clients. He didn't win, but some people will like how far he was willing to go. Ugh. It's sickening.

So true, ShifterCat. Damned if you do, damned if you don't. If you get on with your life, it couldn't have been that bad so you probably weren't really assaulted. If you are traumatized so badly you can't get on with your life, you're weak and just doing it for the attention. Ugh.

WTF, filed.

And that's so-called-evidence "in the years since the rape", meaning we cannot look happy for the rest of our lives if we have been assaulted, not even for moments of snapshots. But wait, never look too unhappy or angry at someone around, in case snapshots would be used as evidence for murder.

The good news is that the judge didn't buy the lawyer's ridiculous case. The rapist went behind bars. More good news is that the attempt to say that the victim was able to live her life, and therefore her attacker didn't deserve punishment, was met with outrage by many parts of the British law system.

Do you guys remember the Bill Napoli quote which declared that only Christian virgins saving themselves for marriage were psychologically harmed by rape as if everyone else was secretly enjoying it? This is more of the same. Rape victims cannot win no matter what they do...I'm glad this disgusting defense did NOT work...but many are waiting out there to use it.

This is so damn stupid. There really is no winning for rape victims. If you're still down and depressed after it happens, you're dwelling on it and need to 'get over it.' And now apparently you can't smile years after it happens because then, you're a liar!

Here we go again with the "right kind of victim" and "wrong" kind. If survivors are scarred they should just "get over it" and if they still have joy in their life then obviously it wasn't that bad. Ugh. Anything to minimize the rapist's actions.

WTF? Even putting aside the ridiculousness of it, rape is a crime whether or not the victim recovered.

(Nicole: I could be wrong, but as I understand it, "fancy-dress" in UK parlance refers to a costume party. Not that rape victims shouldn't go to costume parties, of course.)

"Do you guys remember the Bill Napoli quote which declared that only Christian virgins saving themselves for marriage were psychologically harmed by rape as if everyone else was secretly enjoying it? This is more of the same. Rape victims cannot win no matter what they do...I'm glad this disgusting defense did NOT work...but many are waiting out there to use it."

I remember that! Only I think he also added that it was only bad if it was really degrading, violent anal rape. Because otherwise even the purest Christian girl would probably enjoy it.

Oh I remember the graphic detail he used for that quote. Disgusting and tasteless in every way...

It's sad that the court would even entertain the fact that a victim can not get on with her life 8 years after the incident. So basically, after one of these incidents happen then it is not ok to move on. The whole argument the defendents lawyer is trying to make is wild and that is why they lost the trial because there was no relevance to what he was saying.

This statement is to me the same as saying that as a rape victim you no longer have the right to be happy. That just gives the rapist one more thing they take away from you. I too am a rape victim and I can not count the number of times I put on an act. I would want to protect those around me by showing that I can be happy, though the whole time I was a mess. You never truly know what is going on inside someone. Everyone has the right to happiness even rape victims so shame on anyone who makes them feel guilty for happiness.

I'm glad that this news source seems to be recognizing the victim-blaming bullshit of the lawyer's defense and not giving it validity.

Did anyone else notice the "FEMAIL TODAY" side bar on the news story page? Pretty gross.

Rion - Femail is the women's pages of the newspaper The Daily Mail. It is a real misogynist paper so this story is quite unlike them; they are usually fully victim blaming.

In feminist circles it is often called the Daily Male or the Daily Hate.

Outrageous, sad, frustrating, enraging...but sadly not all that surprising. People are endlessly inventive when it comes to portraying women in a negative light.

There's a case currently underway here in South Africa where a police officer is on trial for the murder of his three children (one by his first wife and the other two by his current wife). His wife, also a police officer, testified of his insane jealousy and his attempts to get her to quit her job. One of the questions his lawyer asked her during the trial (in reference to the problems in their marriage) was if it was true she'd recently bought sexy lingerie. And when she asked the judge if she had to answer that question he said she had to. Am I the only one who thinks that question is absolutely insane and doesn't have a damn thing to do with him murdering his children?

For the record, from a lawyer's point of view, the barrister here did nothing wrong. The (any) lawyer's ethical obligation was to represent the client to the best of one's abilities, so long as any statements were not clearly false. I (a female attorney) might have made this argument had I represented him, if I thought that it might be successful. Or I wouldn't have made it, if I was concerned that the argument could backfire.

But, yes, the court was right to reject the argument. That is the difference in roles between an advocate and an objective fact-finder.

one boy had the audacity to say something to the effect of, "Well, it couldn't have messed her up that badly. I mean, she had a job and a family and everything."

Yeah...like how Jewish concentration camp survivors must not have been through that much, since they went on to have lives, families, jobs, etc....