I’ve just written a fairly lengthy entry and then accidentally deleted it. I said “fuck” and “motherfuck” quite a lot of times, like a furry, confused Joe Pesci, and began to write it again. But it wasn’t very interesting, really. There was a thing about a seal that I thought was quite funny, but it’s now gone, lost to the ether. Anyway, and I don’t think I’ve ever said this before, today I’ve got rape on my mind. Not in a bad way though. Ken Clarke, the lardy old wheezing hoover-bag of a Justice Secretary, has been all over the news today for things he said about the prosecution of rape cases. He was on the Victoria Derbyshire show on 5 Live, and the topic of the interview turned to the sentencing of convinced rapists who, when caught, plead guilty immediately. This spares the justice system the expense of putting on a trial, and also the victim of having to give evidence about a horrible ordeal in front of a room full of strangers, they say.
It wasn’t an idea Clarke had come up with himself, but he’s been involved recently because, as The Sun points out here, judges have been calling for the proposal to be dropped. Graeme Wilson writes, “The Justice Secretary told MPs he will press ahead with the proposals to slash sentences for sex beasts and other criminals who plead guilty early”. “Sex beasts?” Are they a thing? If anything it sounds more like a compliment than an insult.
Anyway here’s a transcript of the interview, and the audio here. It all hots up when Clarke starts talking about there being different kinds of rape, and appeared to differentiate in seriousness between date rape, consenting teenagers, and ‘serious rape’. Y’know, good old fashioned British rape.
He’s since been all over the news and radio, clarifying and re-defining as fast as his little legs could carry him. And to be fair to him, I don’t think his intention this morning when he got up and lit his morning fag was to go out and deliberately offend rape victims. I think he just got into a muddle trying to be too specific to questions which required a far simpler answer. It was 5 Live after all. He also seems to have been pretty unprepared, the lazy bastard, and hoped to just be able to talk his way out of it.
“Derbyshire: Rape is rape, with respect.
Clarke: No it's not, and if an 18-year-old has sex with a 15-year-old and she's perfectly willing, that is rape.That's 'cause she's underage, can't consent. Anybody has sex with a 15-year-old, it's rape.”
In this bit though he is definitely wrong – if you have sex with someone who’s under 13 it’s rape, but if they’re 13-16 it’s ‘unlawful sexual conduct’, and the Justice Secretary should really know that.
In this bit though he is definitely wrong – if you have sex with someone who’s under 13 it’s rape, but if they’re 13-16 it’s ‘unlawful sexual conduct’, and the Justice Secretary should really know that.
All this constant repetition of the word ‘rape’ – Clarke says it and its variants 34 times on his own – made me think of a Malcolm Tucker-esque communications director going mental as Ken said ‘rape’ over and over again. Rape rape rape rape rape. Ed Miliband called for Clarke to resign at Prime Minister’s Questions, and he may well do if given no other choice. If they can afford to get rid of him I can see the Tories using him as a sacrificial lamb, throwing him to the opposition to take the attention away from them and their evil ways. I’d like it if Labour picked bigger targets to attack, but it seems the role of the opposition is to act like a desperate child and snatch at anything which comes their way. Anyway I guess we’ll see what happens. I'm off to expunge my internet history of the last couple of hours’ searching.






