litmus test试金石

'Your Honour, I am here in a unique position. 'Usually, I stand at the bar, 'but now I am in this courtroom as a witness, a complainant, a victim. 'As a barrister, I have questioned women in sexual assault cases 'on the assumption that evidence can be delivered in a clean, logical package, 'and now I have seen from my own attempts here that it cannot be. 'In all of my professional life, 'I have participated in a system that has done this to women, 'and now I know it is not right. 'It is not reasonable, because now I know, 'from my own life, both as a woman and a lawyer, 'that the lived experience of sexual assault, 'it is not remembered in a neat, consistent, scientific parcel. 'And it's because of that, the law often finds evidence "unbelievable". 'So, I understand a witness can be mistaken in their evidence. 'I have suggested it time and time again. 'But this is not a car accident, or a home invasion. 'This is rape. 'It's a crime against the person and now I know. 'You know, when a woman says "no", when her actions say "no", 'it is not a subtle, unreadable thing at all. 'Yet before this, I too, I would suggest that she was mistaken. 'But when a woman has been violated, it is a corrosive wound. 'It is one that starts with terror and pain deep into the body. 'It then overtakes the mind, the soul. 'Yet before this, I too, I would suggest that "she was confused". 'I mean, the message is, if we do not deliver our evidence neatly 'in a clear linear story, with consistency in recall, then we are lying. 'Yet before this, I would point out inconsistencies as proof of doubt. 'I would tell the jury they couldn't possibly be sure. 'As a lawyer I know, I know, 'the law, it cannot jettison consistency entirely, but in sexual assault cases, 'can we keep using it as the litmus test of credibility? 'Because, as a victim, let me tell you 'the rape and the perpetrator, they are vividly recalled. 'The peripheral details, not so clearly. 'If a woman is rattled by having to relive the nightmare in court, 'if a woman's experience of rape is not as the court likes it to be, 'then we conclude that she is prone to exaggeration 'and it's because of this she is so often disbelieved. 'So here in court, I want to call it out.'

「法官大人，我在这儿的位置是独一无二的。 「通常我站在律师席，可现在我在这个法庭里是证人，是控告人，是受害人。 「作为大律师，我盘问过性侵案子里的女人， 「默认证据可以交成一份干净、合乎逻辑的材料， 「而现在我从自己在这儿的尝试看见，做不到。 「我当律师这些年，一直参与着一套这样对待女人的制度， 「现在我知道这不对。 「这不合理，因为现在我知道，从我自己的生活，既作为女人也作为律师， 「性侵的亲身经历，不会被记成一份整整齐齐、前后一致、像科学记录那样的材料。 「正因为这样，法律常常觉得证据『不可信』。 「所以，我理解证人在证词里会记错。 「我一次又一次这么主张过。 「可这不是车祸，也不是入室行凶。 「这是强奸。 「这是针对人身的罪，现在我知道了。 「你知道，当一个女人说『不』，当她的行动说『不』， 「那一点也不含糊，也不是读不懂的。 「可在这之前，我也会主张她记错了。 「可当一个女人被侵犯，那是一道腐蚀性的伤。 「它从深入身体的恐惧和疼痛开始。 「然后盖过心智，盖过灵魂。 「可在这之前，我也会主张『她当时是糊涂的』。」 「我是说，这意思就是，如果我们不能把证据交得整齐， 「也讲不成一条清楚、顺着往下的故事，回忆也对不上，那我们就是在说谎。 「可在这之前，我会把对不上的地方指出来，当作怀疑的证明。 「我会告诉陪审团，他们不可能确定。 「作为律师我知道，我知道， 「法律不能把一致性整个扔掉，可在性侵案子里， 「我们还能继续拿它当可信度的试金石吗？ 「因为，作为一个受害人，让我告诉你们， 「强奸本身，和那个加害的人，记得清清楚楚。 「边上的细节，就没那么清楚。 「如果一个女人因为得在法庭上把那场噩梦再过一遍而慌了， 「如果一个女人被强奸的经历，不像法庭想要的那样， 「我们就断定她容易夸张，也正因为这样，她才那么经常不被相信。 「所以在这个法庭上，我要把它点破。」

'There was a time, not so long ago, 'when courts like this did not see non-consensual sex in marriage as rape, 'did not see that battered women, 'they fight back in a manner distinct from the way that men fight. 'Yet once we see, I mean, we cannot unsee, can we? 'Now I see from my own experience 'that we have got it all wrong when it comes to sexual assault. 'We don't interrogate the law's own assumptions, 'instead we persist on interrogating the victims. 'The law is an organic thing. It is defined by us. 'It is constructed by us, in light of our experiences. 'All of ours, so there are no excuses any more. 'It must change because the truth is that one in three women are sexually assaulted 'and their voices, they need to be heard, they need to be believed 'in order for justice to be done.'

「不久以前还有过这样的时候， 「像这样的法庭不把婚姻里未经同意的性行为看成强奸， 「也没看出这一点：受虐的女人， 「她们还手的方式和男人打架的方式不一样。 「可一旦看见了，我是说，我们就没法再装成没看见，对吧？ 「现在我从自己的经历看见，在性侵这件事上，我们全搞错了。 「我们不审问法律自己的假设，反而坚持审问受害人。 「法律是活的。它由我们定义。 「它由我们建造，照着我们的经历。 「我们所有人的经历，所以再也没有借口。 「它必须改，因为事实是三分之一的女性遭受过性侵， 「而她们的声音需要被听见，需要被相信，公正才能实现。」