Misogynistic reactions to gang rape acquittal 'a cause for concern'

Additional reporting by Bianca Caruana

The Malta Confederation of Women's Organisations has expressed concern at the generally hostile public reactions to a recent acquittal in a case of alleged gang-rape.

In a 50-page ruling delivered on 10 April, Magistrate Consuelo Scerri Herrera acquitted three men - Rhys Fiteni, Ronald Barbara and Keith Bartolo, all in their 20s from the Cottonera area - of raping an 18-year-old girl, who was a cousin of one of the three defendants, and who also transpired to have mental problems.

In delivering her verdict, the magistrate observed that there was no evidence of external violence on the alleged victim; and also that the girl in question was not as 'innocent' as she claimed to be where sex was concerned, as she had had a sexual encounter with another man that same morning.

From the ruling itself it also transpires that one of the three men - Roland Barbara - had admitted that the girl had initially not given her consent for the sexual activity that ensued - but "at no point did she ask us to stop".

Furthermore, the ruling also took note of the fact that Rhys Fiteni had earlier admitted to the police to having threatened the girl, warning her not to tell anyone about the incident.

Yet none of these points was taken into account, in a verdict which seemed to imply that 'rape' has to involve physical violence; and that a woman cannot be 'raped' if she already has experience of sex.

Within hours, the news article announcing the three men's acquittal was inundated with comments singing their praises, and pouring scorn and derision on the 18-year-old victim. One of the three men, Rhys Fiteni, was afterwards interviewed by The Times, which also dedicated last Sunday's editorial to his 'ordeal'.

Few however commented on the fact that non-consensual sex is, by definition, rape... whether or not violence is involved. Besides, whether illegal or otherwise, the act of three men sexually dominating a younger girl with mental problems is not exactly something to be proud of.

Contacted by MaltaToday, Renee Laiviera, Chair of the Malta Confederation of Women's Organisations, expressed concern at the generally misogynistic attitudes expressed about the case.

"If you are referring to the comments which are posted on online articles by readers, as the Chair of the Malta Confederation of Women's Organisations, I find that some of them can be giving very disturbing messages indeed; messages that may highlight the need for our society to take action and revisit gender education in schools."

Laiviera made it clear that her comments were not about the verdict itself, but only about the public response to date.

"While it may be true that the rape allegation was false, given the facts as set out in the Times article - and nobody, women or men, should be wrongfully accused - other issues come to mind," she said.

"The girl is described in the article as being mentally ill. Was this fact given its due weight when issuing the sentence? One of the three men involved in the case is her cousin. Given his close relation to the girl, would he not have known of her mental state? In which case, would he have not been responsible for protecting her from such situations, rather than consider her words as a 'sexual' challenge?"

Furthermore, implicit in some of the reactions was the view that men were not responsible for their actions when sexually aroused - a dangerous idea, which could be taken as a justification for sexual violence.

"Some of those commenting on the article seem to find the idea of men falling victim to their sexual urges and losing all control acceptable," Laiviera said. "Are such men therefore incapable to think logically or rationally, and move away from such circumstances? Or would they like to think that they are conveniently not responsible for their actions?"

Lastly, the chair of the MCWO questioned some aspects of the verdict itself, which seemed to equate rape with physical violence; and also treated the fact that the girl in question was sexually active as if it were a mitigating circumstance.

"The line of reasoning reported in the article, whereby the magistrate appears to assume that since the girl in question had consensual sex (with a man of any age), any sexual encounter that occurred thereafter must be consensual, is certainly cause for concern," she said.

"Moreover, being experienced in sex, and not innocent, does not preclude a woman from being raped."