I suspect that as with many people reading Alexandra Heminsley’s article, my jaw dropped on reading the outcome of the trial for two reasons (Yes, bystanders can save women from sexual assault. But I know first-hand that’s not always enough, 17 August). First, that someone can be found not guilty because of the impact that a guilty verdict would have on their lives rather than whether they were guilty of the crime in the first place. Second, because of the way that the magistrate (who should be relieved of their post) framed his decision through such a patriarchal, Victorian view that women who are pregnant are more likely to be emotionally unstable.
This harks back to times when women were judged to be “hysterical” and therefore their views and accounts of events could not be relied on. How on earth does anyone holding those views have the privilege of dispensing justice today? These views are not only abhorrent but have no place in a functioning justice system. No wonder women continue to be failed by the system.
