The treatment of all victims in our courts is in dire need of overhaul

THE treatment of sexual assault victims and archaic notions about consent have quite rightly been highlighted once again following a recent rape trial in Cork. At that trial a 27-year-old man was acquitted of raping a 17-year-old girl who had claimed she had been raped in a lane-way. The accused man consistently claimed that any sexual contact between them had been entirely consensual.

The jury believed the man, who was cleared of the charge. One cannot argue with the finding of the jury who reached their decision having heard days of evidence.

What has caused legitimate outcry is an argument advanced by the man’s defence team as they summed up their case.

The defence barrister used an argument, previously heard in hundreds of similar cases, that the alleged victim’s clothing indicated consent and that the fact that the teenager was wearing a lacy thong was enough to prove that she had set out that evening with the intention of having sex with someone.

It was an odious argument that harkens back to the misogynist dark days of the 1970s when any woman in a skirt was “asking for it”.

That the argument was, on this occasion, advanced by a female barrister made it even more difficult to comprehend.

The comments have sparked national outrage over alleged victim shaming in our courts with protests held in locations around the country in the last week and the matter raised in the Dáil by TD Ruth Coppinger.

While the case is worth highlighting, and deserves to be debated, it is far from the only such incident to occur in the courts and it really serves to highlight the need for a wide ranging reform of how all victims are treated in courts.

It is typical in rape and sexual assault trials for the sexual orientation and habits of a victim to be poured over, in often salacious detail, as if their past actions can in any way justify an attack at the hands of a sexual predator.

Usually at such hearings, which are typically deeply unpleasant and often very upsetting, it appears that the victim, not the alleged perpetrator, is on trial.

It is not uncommon to hear victims describe their court appearance as akin to being raped or defiled a second time, this time in public and in the full glare of the media .

It should be noted, though, that while victimisation of the victim tends to be more obvious in rape and sexual assault cases it is certainly not isolated to them.

In recent years it has become much more common for defence teams in murder, manslaughter and serious assault cases to attach blame to the victims – who are often dead and cannot defend their good names – in a bid to get a violent thug or a killer off the hook.

In many cases it is again the victim’s sex life – whether they are male or female – that is used as a weapon against them.

The Justice system is designed to ensure that defendants have a fair chance when faced with the full resources of the State.

That is a vital part of our democracy but it is a crying shame that more cannot be done to be fair to the victims of crime as well.