You can't get raped wearing a faja, say stupid lawyers
In another example of a rape victim getting being blamed for getting raped, a rape survivor in the United Kingdom was informed via letter by a prosecutor that the case against her attacker was being dropped after taking into account all the circumstances and "particularly bearing in mind the type of underwear that you had on at the time."
Say what? She was wearing Spanx at the time. Yup, the lawyer pretty much said the woman couldn't have been raped because she was wearing a faja! How the heck does that even make any sense?
Read more ¿Qué más?: 9-year-old boy killed defending older sister from rapist
The woman, whose name is being withheld, was raped by her partner in December of 2012. She was in a relationship with the man and had planned to have him spend the night, but he became aggressive. They argued in his car outside of her home and when she went inside her home, he followed her, raped her, then left immediately.
The letter that this woman got by a Crowns Prosecutions Service lawyer telling her the case was dropped came in September of 2013. The woman appealed the decision and a CPS prosecutions manager upheld the decision to drop the case, but admitted that the previous lawyer "made an unnecessary reference" to the underwear, which was irrelevant in the investigation. I call B.S. on that. Obviously, given the wording of the letter, the underwear did affect the investigation, otherwise why would it have been mentioned?
Every single time a woman comes forward about being raped and she is questioned about what she was wearing, all women are being disrespected. You do not blame a woman for getting raped because of what she was wearing. You also do not discount a woman's claim of rape because of what she was wearing. For cryin' out loud, Spanx come off; they are not some sort of chastity belt and they don't cause any damage to a person who forcibly takes them off.
Image via lillianamundarain/Flickr
What do you think this faja excuse the lawyer used?