General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Does anyone dispute the fact that the 'false allegations of rape are common' myth is dangerous? [View all]Ms. Toad
(38,190 posts)It means that the prosecutor did not provide admissible evidence which established, beyond a reasonable doubt (a pretty high standard), in the minds of a jury selected from a culture in which rape is still the subject of jokes and disbelief (absent visible physical wounds) sufficient facts to convict.
In the UK (a country which keeps detailed enough statistics - and comparison to other crimes), the conviction rate in cases which were deemed sufficient to warrant prosecution was 47% - 59% the rate of conviction for burglary, theft, and other violent offenses. In other words - similar cases which are strong enough to convince the people who deal with crimes every day that there is a strong enough case to go forward, are still rejected by juries; juries which are less intimately familiar with crime than those who choose to prosecute crimes, and which are subject to the same rape culture in which rape and rape survivors who are not physically brutalized are treated with skepticism and often ridicule.
I don't have statistics for the US - but they are likely to be similar.
http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/visualizations/rape-a-lack-of-conviction/