Revenge porn victims to be given the same rights as those who are raped

Victims of revenge porn and other image abuse online are set to get the same legal rights to anonymity as those who are raped under plans being drawn up by the Government.

Ministers are expected to change the law to grant anonymity to victims of revenge porn, deep fakes and other offences where sexual images are shared online without their consent.

The move, which was recommended by the Law Commission, will also entitle victims to other special measures as in rape such as the right to give their evidence via video ahead of the case to spare them the ordeal of appearing in court to face their offender.

The Law Commission said the change was necessary to ensure victims were not deterred by the shame of being publicly identified or fear of their family and friends finding out.

It has also been backed by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS). Police data shows as many as 60 per cent of cases of revenge porn fail because of a lack of evidence or the victim withdrawing support for a prosecution.

A survey by police commissioners found 94 per cent of the public would expect anonymity if they reported such an offence, and 67 per cent said they would not support a prosecution if they had to be named.

A report by the revenge porn helpline revealed that the number of cases rose by 40 per cent from 3,146 to 4,406 between 2020 and 2021.

Downblousing to be criminalised

Campaign groups and charities said changing the law would also enable police, prosecutors and government lawyers to secure the removal of sexual images posted online without consent by alleged perpetrators, in the same way as anyone naming a rape victim publicly can face jail for contempt of court.

A Law Commission official said: “Victims are discouraged from reporting intimate image abuse without automatic anonymity for two reasons: to avoid being shamed and blamed by others, and fear that the image will be seen by more people if it gains attention during an investigation or trial.”

The plans come as the Government this week prepares to unveil its revamped Online Safety Bill which will make the sharing of “downblousing” images of women and pornographic “deepfakes” new criminal offences with maximum jail sentences of at least two years.

A Government source said: “We recognise that this is a form of sexual abuse, so it is about making sure that victims have as much support as possible when they go to trial.”

The Bill will also require social media firms to remove and prevent illegal content such as revenge porn, child abuse images, deepfakes and downblousing content or face fines worth up to 10 per cent of their global turnover. They could also have their services blocked in the UK if they fail to take down such content.

The Government announced last week it will criminalise downblousing, where photos are taken down a woman’s top without consent and “deep fakes” – explicit images or videos which have been manipulated to look like someone, with each offence set to carry a maximum sentence of at least two years in jail.

Multi-million-pound fines

The Bill is due to return to the Commons for its final stages on December 5. The clause protecting adults from legal but harmful content is to be scrapped after criticism from free speech campaigners that it could lead to “woke” social media firms removing controversial content that upsets but does not harm.

Instead, there will be a three-stage system of protection where companies will be expected to remove and prevent illegal content.

They will be held to account for “legal but harmful” sexist, racist or abusive content through their terms and conditions of service. If they fail to deliver what they promise in their terms of service in protecting people from abuse or harassment, they could face multi-million-pound fines.

Under the third stage, social media firms will be required to offer their adult users an option to filter out abuse or other “harmful” content that is neither illegal nor in their terms and conditions.

Our stalking legislation is failing to protect victims

By Claire Waxman

On November 25 th , 2012, I recall the pride I felt in watching stalking become a criminal offence for the first time in England and Wales, something which I had passionately campaigned for. Having been a stalking victim for nearly ten years at that point I hoped and believed this law would have helped my case and would now go on to help countless other victims.

The introduction of this law certainly helped raise awareness of stalking, evidenced by the rise in the number of recorded offences. And yet, unacceptably low charging rates mean that the vast majority of stalking victims continue to live their lives in constant fear, let down by the criminal justice system.

So why is the current legislation failing? The 2012 law created two separate offences – ‘stalking involving fear of violence or serious alarm or distress’, and a lesser charge simply identified as ‘stalking’. The original harassment offences continued to exist alongside these new stalking offences, creating a confusing landscape for the police and prosecution to navigate.

Ten years on from the introduction of this legislation, it is abundantly evidence that – despite the positive intentions behind these laws – they simply do not work for victims. The nature of stalking creates alarm and distress in its victims, and yet the majority of stalkers are charged with the lesser offence – resulting in serious offenders facing a maximum of only six months’ in prison, putting victims at further risk of harm.

The time has come to acknowledge the failures of the current legislation, and to establish a new, standalone offence of stalking that adequately recognises the psychological terror it inflicts on its victims. A 2017 study found stalking behaviours present in nine out of ten homicides, which shows the significant risk posed.

Despite a lot of positive work over the past ten years, a lack of training and specialism in policing and the wider justice system has resulted in a widespread failure to recognise patterns of behaviour and join the dots between incidents.

Organisations like the Suzy Lamplugh Trust, who run the National Stalking Helpline, provide a vital service for victims, with well-trained advocates who can support and advise victims and the authorities, but far more advocates are needed to support the number of victims who would benefit from them.

On this tenth anniversary of the stalking laws, the Suzy Lamplugh Trust have submitted a
‘supercomplaint’ against police forces in England and Wales, challenging the system that results in a charge rate of around five per cent and a conviction rate less than one per cent.

For the fortunate few who do reach court and secure a conviction, restraining orders can offer a victim protection and feelings of safety. However, we know that breaches of these orders are common, poorly investigated by police, and rarely result in a charge. Where they do, the sentences given are often too lenient and fail to act as a deterrent.

Breaches of restraining orders are a clear indication of present and ongoing risk to a victim, and so Government must act to introduce mandatory minimum sentences for repeated breaches, reflecting their cumulative impact and harm.

Government also needs to reform the Unduly Lenient Sentence scheme – that allows anyone to refer a sentence to the Attorney General if they believe it to be too lenient – and the Home Detention Curfew framework – that allows offenders to leave prison after only a quarter of their sentence is served – to adequately protect stalking victims. Lenient sentences for restraining order breaches should be open to challenge, and perpetrators who fail to comply with protective orders should not eligible for early release.

The data on stalking and its risks is clear, and its victims need a justice system that protects them. Government must abide by its commitment to putting victims at the heart of the justice system, by acting swiftly to take this offending seriously and protect all stalking victims.