LETTER : A new definition of rape needed
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Sir: Glenda Cooper's article on the argument for a new crime of date rape (19 June) quotes the erroneous opinion that a "lesser" offence would somehow reduce the standard of proof. All crimes must be proved beyond reasonable doubt, not "beyond probable doubt".
The real problem with rape is that the crime itself requires proof that the man knew or was reckless about his victim's lack of consent to intercourse. Presumably this mens rea requirement would still exist in any new "date rape" law.
If this were abolished, making a man guilty simply if it is proved beyond reasonable doubt he had intercourse with a woman who did not consent, the law would be clearer and fairer to victims. It would send out a clear message that men must be sure there is consent before they have intercourse.
WYN DAVIES
Burry Port, Dyfed
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments