Lindsay Armstrong...took an overdose of anti-depressants
after she was raped by the then 14-year-old, who cannot be
named for legal reasons.

Her family say she never recovered from the attack and the
humiliation of the trial when she was asked to show the
court the underwear she had been wearing at the time of the
assault.

Ms Armstrong's mother, Linda, said her daughter had been
mentally and physically scarred by her ordeal and the trial that
followed. Her family found the teenager's body in her bed on July
16, just weeks after her attacker was convicted, after taking an
overdose of anti-depressants, given to her to help her get
through the trial.

"She was determined to give evidence against him and for him to
be found guilty as she didn't want it to happen to anyone else,"
said Mrs Armstrong, 39. "I think that taking her own life was the
only way she could find peace."

Her daughter had had a bright future and just weeks before the
attack had achieved eight standard grades, five with credit, from
Cumnock Academy.

Ms Armstrong's father, Frank, said the family was angry at the
way Lindsay was treated during the trial. On two occasions, the
teenager was asked to show the court the underwear she had
been wearing on the day of the assault. Her family say she had
been made to feel as if she was to blame for the rape and felt
"totally destroyed" after being cross-examined.

"This should not be allowed to happen," said Mr Armstrong.
"Girls should be treated with respect and dignity."

Sandy Brindley, of the Glasgow Rape Crisis Centre, said that
despite legislation due to come into force in Scotland to
minimise the court ordeal of rape victims, women were still being
humiliated as a matter of course.

What happened was a tragedy but not surprising "given the
trauma women can go through from being raped and the
secondary trauma of going through the justice system".

Court was not the best environment in which to give evidence,
Ms Brindley added, "being forced to give details you might not
even share with your closest friends and family in front of
strangers".

Ms Brindley said it was unlikely, however, that the new law
would have prevented the teenager being asked to hold up her
underwear before the court.

Kirsty Scott
Thursday August 1, 2002
The Guardian 

"The Guardian" an English broadsheet
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,3604,766998,00.html

--------------------------------------------------

"Barrister TWICE insisted that young victim hold up her 
knickers - in front of rapist and open court"
        
BBC News extract  
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/2163606.stm

"She was asked twice to hold up the underwear she had been
wearing at the time of the attack" 
        
--------------------------------------------------

 "Perceptions" note

The rapist's identity is protected - although convicted.
 
And even rapist's barrister's name (you might think _him_ 
guilty of further cold-blooded abuse of the young victim), 
sudenly seems to be "too sensitive' to be made public

It seems the establishmment is keeping the barrister's name
secret.

From the facts it looks like only person in this case who was
repeatedly humiliated and abused, first by the rapist, then by
the rapist's (secret) barrister - and with permission from male
Judge (the "Lord McEwan") - was the young female victim.

The pervert abuse she received from the court drove her to
suicide afterwards.

Rapist's lawyer - John Carruthers (Scottish `solicitor') 


--------------------------------------------------

              FURTHER REFERENCES

  GO - "search perceptions" - in SEARCH-ENGINE


file-ID www.perceptions.couk.com/pervlaw.txt