[Pseudoscience-is-malarkey (OP)]

Any theories on why it is, and how it can be fixed? Can it be fixed? Social stigma, facing the abuser, guilt about something you did wrong, endless paperwork and hours into getting a conviction?

[alancalverd]

If they aren't reported, how do you determine "majority"? And "every country"?

Many crimes are unreported. The victim may fear reprisal, or consider that the effort of reporting outweighs any likely benefit, but in the case of rape there is particular problem of proof which demands evidence of penetration (not always provable) without consent (always disputable), and of taint: a significant number that do get investigated turn out to be malicious accusations so the authorities are at least cautious if not skeptical.

"Facing the abuser" is prejudicial and unnecessary. However awful the alleged crime, in a civilised country you aren't guilty until proved, so you are really talking about facing the accused. Now that isn't always required - evidence can be given by video or even audio link. But where is the right of the accused to face his accuser, as guaranteed by Magna Carta?

"Hours into getting a conviction" should be read as "a few days in police stations and  court, in order to destroy someone's life and put him in prison for several years." Seems like a fair balance of effort and reward.

Beware of poorly formed questions and facile answers that may undermine the foundations of justice.

[Bored chemist]

But where is the right of the accused to face his accuser,

It's currently under threat from a post-brexit government.

a significant number that do get investigated turn out to be malicious accusations

How do you know?
There are certainly some.
But for exactly the same reasons that it's often impossible to prove  the allegation, it's impossible to prove that it didn't happen.

There are exceptions; for example the police are known to have falsely accused Stefan Kiszko of rape and murder.

[alancalverd]

It's currently under threat from a post-brexit government.

Magna Carta predated the EU, my friend.  I'd be intrigued to know what Tory policy is seeking to abrogate the right of the accused to face his accuser, but I doubt that Brexit had much to do with it.

How do you know?

Talking to magistrates and observing in Crown courts.

[Bored chemist]

Talking to magistrates and observing in Crown courts.

But, as you point out, it's usually impossible for the court or magistrate to actually know.

but in the case of rape there is particular problem of proof which demands evidence of penetration (not always provable) without consent (always disputable)

You have pointed out the biggest problem with rape trials; and then ignored it.
It's essentially different from any other crime because the difference between legal and illegal acts exists solely in the mind of the victim.

That fact makes it very hard to prosecute. The perpetrator can always say "I thought , at the time, that she was content with what I was doing" and it's then a case of deciding what was inside one person's head regarding what was in another person's head.
And that problem is probably fairly fundamental to why it is underreported.

[Bored chemist]

Magna Carta predated the EU, my friend.

And Roman law predates that .
But the Tory party are happy to detain without trial.
Terrorism Act 2000, s. 41(3). suspicion of involvement in terrorism can be detained in custody for up to 28 days without being charged with any particular offence.
And, if there's no trial you are not facing your accusers.

[alancalverd]

The Terrorism Act 2020 is an update of the Prevention of Terrorism Act brought in by the Blair government.  It is a legal anomaly in that it doesn't (or certainly didn't) define terrorism and was even invoked by the then Home Secretary to silence a heckler at the Labour Party conference who pointed out that since he (Jack Straw) had just contradicted the Prime Minister, one of them might not be telling the truth.

For all its faults (and I see no actual virtues) I don't think the Tory Party has abused its own laws to quite that extent.

Detention on reasonable suspicion is the basis of effective policing at all levels, the alternative being "you go and have a cup of tea while I look at the body, and I'll call you if I can prove that you killed him." The normal requirement is to charge, release, or obtain a judicial warrant to further detain within 24 hours, but it has been extended in some circumstances. The TA2000 actually sets a limit on those extensions.

[alancalverd]

You have pointed out the biggest problem with rape trials; and then ignored it.

I haven't ignored it - I stated it clearly and succinctly, and there is no requirement for further discussion.

[Bored chemist]

You have pointed out the biggest problem with rape trials; and then ignored it.

I haven't ignored it - I stated it clearly and succinctly, and there is no requirement for further discussion.

And then you ignored it saying

Talking to magistrates and observing in Crown courts.

Those magistrates and courts still face the problem that a false allegation of rape can be as difficult to prove as a true one.

The same problem works both ways.

[Bored chemist]

I don't think the Tory Party has abused its own laws to quite that extent.

Have you seen the news today?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-65033262
Or, in the recent past?

Nobody even knew what "prorogation" meant until the Tories did it illegally.

[alancalverd]

Those magistrates and courts still face the problem that a false allegation of rape can be as difficult to prove as a true one.

Which is why the authorities are very cautious about bringing prosecutions, particularly in the absence of corroborating evidence.

It is indeed worth considering this in parallel with the terrorism statute. In the latter case, detention may prevent a crime and if no evidence is found, the suspect merely suffers inconvenience.

It's been a long day and I'm getting a bit tangled up with nested negatives here, but I smell a whiff of inconsistency in your arguments. Happy to be disabused.

[alancalverd]

The mechanism of prorogation is not a Tory law. I think it was probably introduced around the Restoration.

The more recent law requiring anyone with dodgy eyesight to drive to Barnard Castle, or the one that exonerates prime ministers from remembering their own birthday parties, are certainly Tory inventions, but they only apply to members of the Party.

[Bored chemist]

You said this

a significant number that do get investigated turn out to be malicious accusations

apparently oblivious to the fact that those investigations are just as difficult as those you referred to thusly

in the case of rape there is particular problem of proof

[alancalverd]

How did you diagnose oblivion? Difficult does not mean impossible.

[Bored chemist]

How did you diagnose oblivion?

It where this thread's gone.

[Zer0]

Any Solutions?

[alancalverd]

CCTV, presumption of guilt, or the elimination of surplus males. None of which is likely to find favor with the electorate.

[Zer0]

Death Penalties?

How bout Medications to suppress Hormones?

Or perhaps each & every Parent on the planet could have an open conversation with their Children on the Topic?

After all, every paedophile & rapist has biological creators, isn't it?

(having surplus females won't necessarily end it, anywhichways males can get raped too)

[Bored chemist]

How bout Medications to suppress Hormones?

Who for?
Are you volunteering?

[Zer0]

How bout Medications to suppress Hormones?

Who for?
Are you volunteering?

Isn't it an Excessive Hormonal Imbalance issue?

Children/Teenagers/Adults could be screened to Identify those having Abnormal Levels.

Medications could be provided by W.H.O.

If it Works inside Jails & Mental Asylums, it should Ideally work outside too.