Clarke pledge after rape cases row

Amid further criticism of his differentiation between types of rape, he insisted yesterday he was simply explaining a “long-standing factual situation”.

He also claimed his remarks had no bearing on his plans to offer 50 per cent discounts on jail terms for guilty pleas in cases including rape.

Downing Street yesterday stressed in the wake of the row, which erupted after Mr Clarke rejected the notion that “rape is rape” during a radio phone-in on Wednesday, that the Government was “still considering the policy” and the Justice Secretary still had the confidence of the Prime Minister.

But a coalition of campaign groups urged the Government to “publicly confirm that there is no such crime as ‘date rape’ and that all non-consensual sex is serious”.

In an open letter to David Cameron, the charities said until the Government confirmed the situation it risks “confusing the public and undermining the effectiveness of the law in this area”.

The letter, from the End Violence Against Women Coalition, Rape Crisis England and Wales, and Rights of Women, called for sexual offences to be looked at separately from others in the review in the “absence of evidence” that a further reduced sentence would lead to an increase in early guilty pleas or a higher rate of conviction for sexual offences.

Mr Clarke, who was last night due to appear on a Question Time debate on sentencing at Wormwood Scrubs, had earlier offered a strong defence of the proposals.

“What I described was a long-standing factual situation which doesn’t affect my reforms,” he said. “I’ve made no proposals to change the sentencing for rape, I’ve made proposals on the discount made for a guilty plea.

“People are punished more if they make the witness go through the ordeal again, but that’s a very long-standing arrangement which has always applied to all crimes.”

He added: “Different rapes get different lengths of sentences from judges and always have, and they now follow sentencing guidelines which explain the different degrees of sentences.

“If I caused genuine offence to anybody by explaining that long-standing factual situation, then I must have made a very poor choice of words, so I will try to choose my words more carefully in the future.”

The Justice Secretary had already written to Gabrielle Brown, a victim of attempted rape who had denounced his sentencing proposals on BBC Radio 5 Live, insisting he had always believed rape is “extremely serious, and must be treated as such”, adding: “I am sorry if my comments gave you any other impression or upset you”.

She is due to meet Mr Clarke next week but said yesterday: “I feel that I’m not the person he should be apologising to.”

Further calls for the Justice Secretary to go came from the husband of a woman who was raped by a convicted killer released early from prison.

Mother-of-five Helen Stockford, 41, was held captive at her home for three-and-a-half hours by Mark Shirley in 2008 after he was released on licence from a life sentence for the ritualistic murder of a 67-year-old woman.

Mr Stockford said Mr Clarke’s comments and proposals were “ludicrous” and he questioned how the Minister, who has admitted he has not met a rape victim since he was working as a lawyer, had failed to respond to his wife’s calls for a meeting over her case.

Steve Gillan, the POA’s general secretary, said members passed a vote of no confidence in the Justice Secretary last week, “stating he was out of touch with reality”.

Prime Minister David Cameron’s spokesman stressed that Ministers were still “listening to people’s views” before reaching final conclusions on exactly which offences should be eligible for 50 per cent sentence discounts.”