Ed Miliband called on David Cameron to sack Ken Clarke today after the justice secretary's remarks about rape in a BBC radio interview this morning.
Ed Miliband called on David Cameron to sack Ken Clarke today after the justice secretary’s remarks about rape in a BBC radio interview this morning. At Prime Minister’s Questions, Miliband asked Cameron “to take this opportunity to distance himself”, said “the justice secretary should not be in his post by the end of today”, and urged Cameron to “get rid of his justice secretary”.
Clarke made his controversial comments in an interview with Victoria Derbyshire on BBC Radio Five Live.
To the shock of his interviewer, he spoke about “serious rape… rape in the ordinary conversational sense”, claiming it was different from “date rape”.
Then, when Derbyshire said “rape is rape, with respect”, he replied:
“No it’s not.”
Listen to the key excerpts:
And speaking on Boulton & Co. on Sky News this lunchtime, shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper said:
“You cannot suggest that there is somehow a category of rape in which somehow the woman is willing. Unless he changes his view very rapidly of course he’s got to go.”
63 Responses to “Interviewer: “Rape is rape, with respect”; Ken Clarke: “No it’s not””
Anon E Mouse
Mr.Sensible – So you think that Labour’s 33% reduction for an early plea is OK but the Tory’s 50% isn’t?
What’s the big difference (apart from the obvious percentages) in the concept?
Labour banged up more and more people and should have just built more prisons to house more criminals and to reduce crime. Clarke is simply wrong on all this…
Dave Citizen
This probably won’t happen again, but I am in a certain amount of agreement with Anon – a classic example of political and media opportunism regardless of the sensitivities of the subject matter.
Hey Anon – how does it feel to have a left-wing socialist zombie supporting you?
Ed's Talking Balls
Mr Sensible,
You say ‘you don’t get to stay in your seat for 40 years for nothing’.
Untrue. I can’t see Middlesbrough voting Tory any time soon, neither can I see Henley-on-Thames switching to Labour. Length of time in a job is not always a sign of competence; in fact it can often breed complacency.
Also, I have to agree with Anon E Mouse on prisons. They work and we should build more of them. That would be a better use of taxpayers’ money than, for example, fixing overseas aid at 0.7% or funding exorbitant housing benefit.
Ash
@ Robin –
“In our legal system, date rape is a less serious offense than forcible or violent rape”
What on earth are you talking about? Our legal system recognises no such offence as ‘date rape’. A ‘date rape’ is just a rape perpetrated by someone the victim is dating (or, more loosely, is socially acquainted with). There’s no reason to think ‘date rapes’ are less forcible or violent than rapes perpetrated by spouses, or family members, or teachers, or strangers or anyone else.
13eastie
Miliband and co.’s hypocrisy and ignorance on this today was breathtaking.
There is a clear difference between a thirteen-year-old girl being statutorily, consensually “raped” by her boyfriend of the same age, and conspiratorial gang-rape, violent rape of a child by an adult etc.
This is recognised by the Police, CPS, Judges. And it is the reason why the maximum penalty is life imprisonment.
For Miliband and then Cooper after him to fail to acknowledge this is simply obtuse.
They simply lapped up the Daily Mail headline.
It would befit LFF not to join in the hysteria.
The proposal in question was intended to do nothing other than increase the conviction rate with the hope of at once sparing victims from court testimony and cross-examination, before (and sometimes BY), the accused. What on Earth was there for Red Ed to get so upset about?
An early guilty plea can mitigate the sentence in many convictions, at the discretion of the judge. Why should rape differ in this regard?
Rape may be rape. But if there is to be no mitigation, then there cannot, by definition, be aggravation.
If there are to be one-size-fits all sentences, as Mr Miliband presumably wants (since he apparently opposes plea mitigation), there is no incentive for the guilty to confess. The result of this will be more witness-box trauma for victims, and more cases collapsing because of it. Furthermore, there is the risk that juries will fail to convict in anticipation of what they feel to be harsh sentencing.
It is hard to concieve of a more convincing appeal for the rapist vote from the Labour front bench!
Perhaps they should not have got so distressed about the positive unemployment figures?
What a pity for potential victims that Labour leader thought to ignore any of the rationale and waste all six of his questions today trying (and failing) to take the scalp of the Govt’s most liberal Tory.