According to the previous law, juries rarely convicted men of rape if their accuser was drunk. The study found jurors believe that when a woman is intoxicated, it is reasonable for a man to take her silence as consent to sex and so hardly 5% of the allegations used to end up to conviction.
However, the ministers are planning to re- consider the law, which would entitle the accuser of a sentence.
But it would open the way to prosecutions of husbands or regular boyfriends who have sex with drunken wives or partners as well as fierce arguments over medical evidence and real levels of intoxication of alleged victims.
On further investigations, the researchers discovered 120 cases of sexual assaults and in 119 cases, the women had been drinking.
But because of the time gap between the ‘collection of samples and the incident’, in only half of the cases, alcohol presence could be detected.
The Association of Chief Police Officers, ACPO, research found that in 31 cases alcohol levels at the time of the incident could be estimated by ‘back-calculating’.
Solicitor General Mike O’Brien is considering the drink and sex limit among proposals for new rules that could also include fresh guidance for juries on matters of consent and the right for defendants to call experts on rape who would explain to juries how damaging to a victim the offense is.
