MP's bid to stop rape victims being quizzed on sexual history

A Private Member's Bill is to be introduced in the House of Commons aimed at preventing the cross-examination of alleged rape victims about their sexual history, behaviour or appearance.

The MP behind the Bill, Plaid Cymru's Liz Saville Roberts, hopes the proposed changes will give more victims the confidence to come forward to report rape.

She said: "We have had one instance of a woman who was asked 'why did you wear a red dress' on the evening when she was sexually assaulted.

"They will be asked about previous health issues, say substance abuse, alcohol abuse, mental health - all matters which are aimed at really knocking their credibility."

Sky News interviewed a woman called "Ivy" who was repeatedly raped by a gang of men for years.

She says she found her cross-examination in court degrading and humiliating.

"I was asked how many men I'd had sexual encounters with, how many times I'd had sex with these men," she said.

"I was accused of being promiscuous and somebody who enjoyed having sexual encounters with multiple people at the same time.

"It just completely shatters your faith, you trust in the legal system. From a psychological point of view it's as traumatic as the actual physical action of being raped, psychologically it's the same."

An 18-month study by Dame Vera Baird QC in 2015 concluded that in over a third of all rape cases heard at Newcastle Crown Court there were questions about prior sexual conduct of the complainant.

Despite high profile awareness campaigns, many rape victims still fear they will not be believed but blamed - with everything from their sex life to skirt length potentially used against them.

In 2015 to 2016, there were an estimated 85,000 rapes against women - that averages out at 233 every day.

While police in England and Wales logged 35,798 alleged rape offences, only 2,689 resulted in a conviction.

But the Chair of the Criminal Bar Association feels the proposed changes are unnecessary and that probing questions are a vital part of a robust legal system.

Francis FitzGibbon QC told Sky News "You have to balance the needs of complainant against the right of the defendant to have a fair trial and to put before the court what is relevant evidence.

"The question of what is relevant evidence in this context is decided by the judge applying the restrictions that exists and the law as it stands."