MPs vote to end rough sex defences
It's late, so this is brief! We've live tweeted the key moments from tonight.
Last week the Government published their response to the rough sex amendments, tonight MPs spoke movingly of the need for change and voted the new clause to end rough sex defences into the Domestic Abuse bill.
Mark Garnier spoke again of Natalie Connolly, his constituent, killed by a partner. He read from a letter from Alan Andrews, Natalie's father:
There is no way that a man should be able to bat away brutal sexual violence as just an accident and pave the way to get away with it. To cope with her private life being explored in intricate detail, on top of the grief of losing her, has been unimaginably hard for the whole family. Natalie is no longer here to tell us what he did to her or why he left her where he did. One thing is for certain: Natalie didn't fantasise about being killed or leaving her daughter without a mum that night."
Tonight Laura Farris MP responded to those who say "if the common law says you can't consent to serious injury or death, then does parliament need to act'? "Emphatically yes, and here's why".
Harriet Harman, Mark and Laura have pushed so hard for this.
This isn't law yet and we need to see clear statement from Government, the CPS on how they'll collect and evaluate data on the use of rough sex claims. This law must be made to work. The Government say they'll keep the criminal law on this under review - a single failure will be enough for change. And earlier today, with Harriet Harman and the Centre for Women's Justice, We Can't Consent To This called on the CPS and police to review cases where rough sex claims had been used to drop rape and other assault charges.
Read our submission to the Domestic Abuse bill Committee, on our support for the Harriet, Mark and Laura amendments and the need for the Government's own proposals.
Read our detailed research on the criminal justice system response to "consent" defences.
