Woman's Hour - Grease stars Olivia Moore and Jocasta Almgill. Author Julie Myerson. Restorative justice.

Episode Date: May 31, 2022

Grease IS the word! We meet actors Olivia Moore and Jocasta Almgill, who are taking on the roles of Sandy and Rizzo in a new production of one of the best-loved musicals of all time.Author Julie Myerson’s new book is Nonfiction, a novel about a couple struggling with a daughter who is addicted to heroin. It's partly inspired by the experience of her own son's drug addiction. Julie joins Andrea Catherwood to talk about addiction, maternal love and the ethics of novel writing.As we await the verdict in the Heard / Depp libel trial, we look at the ramifications. Some say that neither party comes out of it well, but there are also serious concerns that this televised court case is harmful to victims.New sentencing guidelines regarding child sexual offences come into force today. Child abusers will now face tougher sentences for the act of planning or facilitating sex offences even if sexual activity doesn't occur or the child doesn’t exist, for instance, where police pose as children in sting operations. We hear from Gabriel Shaw, Chief Executive of the charity NAY-PAC, National Association for People Abused in Childhood.And for the first time in Scotland, some victims of rape and domestic abuse will be able to formally meet those who harmed them. In a process called restorative justice, victims of crime, such as sexual abuse or assault, can ask for a face-to-face meeting with the perpetrator. Andrea talks to Gemma Fraser, head of Restorative Justice Policy at Community Justice Scotland, and Ashley Scotland, Chief Executive of the charity Thriving Survivors, which will offer a specialist service for cases involving sexual harm.Presenter Andrea Catherwood Producer Beverley Purcell PHOTO CREDIT; Manuel Harlan

This BBC podcast is supported by ads outside the UK. I'm Natalia Melman-Petrozzella, and from the BBC, this is Extreme Peak Danger. The most beautiful mountain in the world. If you die on the mountain, you stay on the mountain. This is the story of what happened when 11 climbers died on one of the world's deadliest mountains, K2, and of the risks we'll take to feel truly alive. If I tell all the details, you won't believe it anymore. Extreme, peak danger. Listen wherever you get your podcasts.

BBC Sounds. Music, radio, podcasts. Hello, I'm Andrea Catherwood and welcome to Woman's Hour on BBC Radio 4. Good morning and welcome to the programme. The Johnny Depp-Amber Heard libel trial is coming to an end in the US. Whether you've followed every twist and turn of the televised courtroom drama or tried your best to avoid it, I wonder if you've considered its broader impact. There's concern that the case,

and particularly the social media storm around it, is putting people off reporting abuse. Does that ring true for you? Or perhaps you think a high-profile case like this has the opposite effect and encourages people to come forward. I'd love to hear your thoughts and indeed your experiences on this. You can text Woman's Hour on 84844. On social media, it's at BBC Woman's Hour.

And of course, you can email us through our website. Also today, author Julie Myerson joins me to discuss her new novel, Nonfiction, and how it relates to her own family experiences of drug addiction. New guidelines introduced today may lead to longer sentences for those convicted of planning sex offences with children that don't take place, or even where the child doesn't exist in the case of police stings. We're going to look at the likely impact of that. And Greece is the word. The musical is back in the West End and the actors who play Sandy and Riso are joining me in the studio.

There will be singing, though not from me, I promise. But before all that, you may have heard in the news headlines this morning that the UK's Information Commissioner has called on police and prosecutors to immediately stop collecting large amounts of personal information about victims of rape and serious sexual assault. Known as the digital strip search, it's a subject that we've covered extensively on Woman's Hour. Now, in another initiative, for the first time in Scotland, some victims of rape and domestic abuse will be able to formally meet those who harmed them. In a process called restorative

justice, victims of crimes such as sexual abuse or assault can ask for a face-to-face meeting with the perpetrator. It's starting as a test project in Edinburgh, Lothian and the borders with plans to make it widely available across Scotland by the end of the year. But some women's support groups are concerned that it could re-traumatise victims. Well joining me is Gemma Fraser who is Head of Restorative Justice Policy at Community Justice Scotland which is overseeing the rollout, and Ashley Scotland, who's chief executive of the charity Thriving Survivors, which offers a specialist service for cases involving sexual harm. Gemma, if I could start with you, I think that many of

us might think we sort of have an idea of what restorative justice means, but it's actually quite a specific procedure, isn't it? Can you just explain it for us? Gemma, can you hear me? I'm just going to try and get Gemma's line back up and I'm going to go over to Ashley now, who's Chief Executive of the charity Thriving Survivors. Ashley, from your point of view,

do you think that this is something that's actually going to be useful for many people who have actually been through sexual abuse? Well, I think we're struggling for Ashley to hear us as well. Gemma, I'm just wondering if you can hear me. No, we'm having some technical problems here. I can see both guests on Zoom, but

neither of them, I think, can hear me at all at the moment. I'll tell you what we're going to do. We are going to leave those gremlins where they are and we're going to try and get both of our guests in Scotland up in just a few minutes time

and first of all I'm going to go to Julie Myerson who wonderfully is actually here today in the studio for us. Julie is the author of ten novels and three works of non-fiction. Her new book is called Non-Fiction.

It is a novel however and it's about a couple who are struggling with a daughter who is addicted to heroin. Now, it's not the first time that Julie has written about teenage drug addiction. In 2009, she published The Lost Child, which started out as a book about a 19th-century watercolourist, but it ended up including descriptions of her eldest son's addiction to skunk and the decision that she and her husband took to kick him out of the family home when he

was just 17. There was a ferrara in the media and Julie was accused of, among other things, betraying motherhood. Julie, thank you very much indeed for coming in. I know you were in the green room just a few seconds ago. Thank you for coming in at such short notice. Welcome. I just wonder, we'll talk in a few minutes about what happened in 2009. But talking about this new novel, with everything that went on then, I wonder what made you return to the subject of parents struggling with a teenager's drug addiction? Yeah, it's a very good question. I knew people would ask it. But in order to answer it, I sort of have to explain how I write. Nothing made me and I certainly didn't sit down and say, Oh, I know what I'll do. I'll write a novel that makes everyone talk about the lost child. But the way I begin when I'm writing any of my novels, actually, I don't know what

they're about. I don't really do any research or make any notes. I concentrate on a space in my own head that sort of is quite, it's different from the space I'm in on an everyday basis. And I sort of listen and images come. And if an image seems to work, I go with it and I write it. And if it's not good, I get rid of it. And basically, it took me about five years to write this novel. I was struggling with various health issues as well. And my energy was quite low a lot of the time. And it took a very long time to discover that what I was actually writing, yes, is a book that was probably going to make people

talk about the lost child. And I think I'm all right with that, actually. Well, I know I am now. The narrator, the mother in this novel, feels terribly guilty about what happened to her daughter. And I think many of us as parents, no matter what struggles our children have or haven't had, just we feel guilty sometimes. Just it's sometimes the default position, isn't it? She beats herself up, though, you know, and and she recounts moments where she feels that she could have done so much better.

Do you think that that's particularly common for parents of addicts? Yes, I do. I mean, obviously, I would say I think it's common for parents of everyone all the time, regardless of what's going on. But I think with addiction, it's difficult. I what I was trying to do, there's plenty been written about addiction and better probably than I could write it. What I think I was trying to write about was the fact that although, I mean, first of all, no one who hasn't been through it understands. And why should they? It's the only situation when, as a parent, you see your child basically ill, afraid, dirty, unloved. It's an awful thing seeing your child addicted to something, almost possessed by something different. And you aren't allowed, whereas if they had a serious illness, you'd be allowed to help them, comfort them.

You have to actually sort of do the opposite. And I think although all the self-help books, and my God, we consulted a lot of them, and the helpful people and the, you know, the fam and non places that you go to, they all tell you it's not your fault. And I think on a certain level, it isn't. Addiction happens to everybody. I mean, it happens to anybody, is what I'm trying to say. I don't think as a parent, from the moment you have a baby until either one or other of you dies, they are your responsibility. And I really do think that actually, regardless of how old the

child or the parent is. And yes, you continue to blame yourself at some very deep level for anything bad that happens to them. And yet you mentioned this feeling of helplessness. At one point, the narrator in the book says the tragedy of this particular illness is the only way to help is to do nothing. And actually, the parents in the book at one point, which is, you know, it's searingly honest and quite startling, I think, to read. They look at their daughter in hospital and she's survived, but she's still unconscious. And they kind of look at each other and they say, well, now we know she's OK.

There is nothing we can do. And they leave her there. Yes. What does that, can you explain a bit more about that idea that you really can't help and at some point you've just got to walk away? Well, people say to you with an addict, they'll do things for two reasons, to get attention and to punish you and also to get more drugs.

Very often, and anybody who has a loved one who's an addict knows this and probably the rest of the world maybe don't, they will cause a crisis, something quite dangerous, it may be taking something that puts them in hospital where they hope someone will then give them the drug that they want and sometimes it is given to them. I think the really hard thing for a parent the more you educate yourself but and I'm not I ought to add I'm not saying specifically that all this happened in our family but I certainly know about it and some of it did. The more you educate yourself the more you know that and I did try to write this in the book

actually you know your child's in hospital try to write this in the book, actually, you know, your child's in hospital, of course, you want to rush straight there. You say to each other, we mustn't rush straight there, because if we do that, she'll know she can do it again and get the same result. But you do rush straight there. Then having established that she's still alive, because to be honest, you know, your standards go right down as the parent of an addict, just being alive is enough, actually. You then know that if you stay there, they'll tell you they need either money or heroin. So you leave. And yeah, I was trying to write about that. And it's an ugly thing to write about. It made me quite uncomfortable even trying to write about it. I'm sure it did to have to go back and revisit all of that. The other thing that

struck me, your narrator said, I look at this young person who is apparently our daughter and I can't see anything there to love or even like. This thought is so unbearable to me that I have to turn away. I mean, that really strikes. I mean, it strikes anybody, I'm sure, reading those words, particularly a parent, I think. Tell me more about this, the idea that your child perhaps is so possessed that you can barely see anything in them that reminds you of who they really are. I think possessed is a good word, actually, because a little bit as if your child was possessed of an evil spirit, you know, the exorcist or whatever. It isn't your child that you're seeing, not your real child, not that child who you love and you know so well and you've hugged and looked after and cared about and spent

every day good times with. It isn't that person. It's a different spirit in there. And that spirit only wants one thing, which is the drug. And I think, yeah, and I'll admit, I wanted to write about this. I feel it needs to be talked about. The terrible pain for a parent is you see that and you want to carry on. You know, it's really your child, the one who you took to the dentist and looked after and did homework with. But, you know, for a few moments, it isn't. And that's only a momentary thing. I'm not saying that all the time you look at your child and say, I don't see nothing to like or love. But, yes, it's a terrible moment.

And I think, you know, I wanted to put that on the page. I have to say, when I was writing this novel, you know, often I would write something that was a bit easier, that I thought would be okay. And then I don't know why, and it's just the way I write novels all the time anyway, I pressed myself harder and said, no, no, write what you really feel. So that's what I really feel. It sounds like you really were incredibly truthful in this, searingly sometimes, unsparingly. It's only my truth.

I should also say I'm only writing the mother's story. I never try and step inside the head of the child and talk about that because I don't think I could. And I actually don't think it would make a good novel either. So I'm only interested in the mother's story. And in this mother's story, there are other dysfunctional relationships and particularly her relationship with her own mum. Her own mother is, well, I don't know how else to put it. She's a bully. She's very cruel. In fact, there's a scene where the mum's so upset about her daughter, she meets her mother, the grandmother, in a cafe and,

you know, she's absolutely distraught and it turns out after her crying and telling her mother this for a long time that her own daughter has actually been staying in the grandmother's house the whole time I just wonder how much of this is based on your relationship with your mother?

It's kind of almost surreal for me hearing someone like you describe that moment because that actually really happened. Much of the stuff in this book obviously didn't happen. Most of it is fiction. My relationship with my mother, I didn't really have to make any of it up. And the only reason I've been able to publish this is she actually died very sadly while I was writing it. She died suddenly and sadly.

And I miss her and I regret that she's gone. But I wouldn't have been allowed to write those incidents. I wouldn't have been allowed to write those incidents. I wouldn't have felt able to. At the same time, I would say this isn't a fair portrait of my mother because if I was writing a book about my mother, there would be much more in there. She was actually a wonderful person. She inspired me as a child. She's why I'm a writer, actually, and I thanked her for that,

and she knew that. But I had a very difficult relationship with her. Yes, I don't like saying she was a bully. She certainly bullied me, and I had to struggle out from under that. And I think I'm still, although I've written about it, I'm still processing that really. I feel very, very sad for her. Very sorry for her, actually. There's more to say about my mother, which is not in this book. And maybe one day, who knows. But I have tried, I hope. I tried to be sympathetic about the mother in the sense that I went into her background and her childhood. She had a very neglectful, difficult childhood, which she never really came to terms with. And that's true of my mother.

There's also a version of this story where the relationship with the mother does really transform. I should say that there are sort of alternative versions in the book. There are sliding doors moments in the book. And that's one of them. Why did you write that? Well, all the alternative versions, especially with the daughter, are there because actually, I was trying to evoke the mindset of someone who's dealing with all of this. And you're constantly, even when things are going well, you're thinking, oh, but this could happen, that could happen. You live with a range of possibilities all the time, good and bad. And I would say that's a fairly exhausting way to live. I found it so. With the mother, funnily enough, yes, there's an episode

where she goes to hospital and she suddenly has a good relationship with her mother. And strangely, that also is true. I mean, I didn't think I made anything up about my mother in this book. I'm pretty sure I didn't. My mother had a small stroke a few years ago, and it did something to her. She got her sense of humour back. She lost her anger. It lasted almost two years. It was blissful.

And during that period, it was like I had a mother again. It was... I've tried to write about it here. It made me understand what normal people with normal mothers and parents who support them, because my father wasn't any good either, what it feels like. And it's an amazing feeling. It gives you a certain confidence, which, you know, I could do with having actually.

There are alternative versions about the marriage and about the daughter. Do you think that while you were going through this and you've tried to reflect this in the book, there were always these various outcomes that you were juggling the whole time? Yeah, I mean, I think there are for anybody living through a traumatic situation. I would, my husband and I would literally lie in bed at night, and this is in the book, rehearsing to ourselves, and it seems bizarre now, but it didn't seem bizarre at the time. What would happen if we heard our son had died? Who would tell us? How would we find out?

I was obsessed with that. There was a time actually when we were about to leave London to go just for a few days away. And I couldn't leave London because I couldn't bear the idea that I didn't know where he was exactly or how he was. And obviously, one of the great things of being a parent of an addict, you have to get on with your life. You can't sit at the station waiting for someone to tell you what's happened. And I wrote about that in the book too, actually.

It's an airport scene. But yes, you are. You're living with all these different possibilities. It's very stressful. And I do think that honesty kind of comes through very clearly in the book, that the kind of mundanities of life carry on and you've got to try to have a life while all of this is happening. The other thread that runs through the book, which is almost a whole other interview, which we don't have time to do too much on.

But it's this conversation about the ethics of fiction because the narrator, the mum, is a writer. She's a successful writer. And she interacts with other writers as these lovely little kind of vignettes where she goes off to a literary festival and she talks to other writers and she's interviewed by journalists. I wonder what made you decide to do that? I mean, you must have been poking fun a little bit at some of the people you've come across along the way. Yeah, I didn't decide, because like I said, I never make a decision about what to write. But I think as I was writing it, I think I've always had this struggle in all my novels. I mean, I've published, I think this is my 15th book. I have always said I will never write about a writer because I think people who do proper jobs are much more interesting.

I don't think people want to particularly hear about what it's like to be a writer. But then, you know, I'm almost 62. And I suddenly thought this is all I know. It's all I've known now for the last 35 years or whatever. And I found I didn't set out to make this woman a writer. But again, it became the only honest way to write it. So she's a writer. So she's, she's doing what I have always done, which is try to make sense of the things that happened to me through my work. And also, to some extent, write about the things that I care passionately about. So I care passionately about my children, I find it very hard not to write about the people and things I love. And so she became a writer. And then obviously, it was, you know, it's actually,

yes, I had fun writing about the things that I really know, like what it's like to go to a literary festival or be interviewed in your hometown, for instance, that was one I really enjoyed writing. And it's not none of these people are specific, but I really wanted to feel like they were. So I wanted people to be reading it saying, oh, but hold on, if that's Edinburgh, then who's this? And yes, I did want that. And that feels playful to me. And I thoroughly enjoyed it. You talk about going back to writing

about what you really know. So thinking about what happened in 2009, you published this novel, The Lost Child, and you did, you know, can you just explain to us, I suppose, what happened next? Sorry, I should say it's an easy mistake to make, but it wasn't a novel. It was non-fiction. Well, sorry, you're non-fiction. Obviously, that's kind of important in a way. I mean, in some ways it makes it worse. But it was very difficult. What happened with that book was it

was supposed, I think, people ask me, do I regret writing it? I don't. I stand by almost every word. There are actually a couple of things that I would take out now. I think we were still in the middle of dealing with the trauma and our son was still in a very difficult place. And what we hadn't expected was that it would be leaked before it was available for other people to read. I think the crucial, I think if it had come out, so what happened was it was leaked.

Everybody wrote about a book that wasn't even available in proof yet, which of course was terrible. It is the most destroying thing for a writer to have people write about a book, not that you've written, but that you haven't written, the book they think you might have written. And I include my family in that. My mother read the Daily Mail rather than reading the book. But I think I was ready for it to be criticised by people who read it. And indeed, when it was reviewed, the reviews were kind of mixed, but fair, I would say. But they didn't, they wrote about the book they hadn't read. You also, it also came out at the time that you were the anonymous author of Living With Teenagers, which was a column in The Guardian that had been running for a few years by that stage. I think it finished in 2008. Do you regret doing that? I mean you were writing about your own family at the time and of course you were pilloried for doing that for using private information and kind of making a living I understand why I got into trouble for it

It was actually ironically much more fictional than people realised I was quite careful The eldest character was actually almost entirely fictional because I couldn't write about what was happening with our son at the time. I wrote about that in The Lost Child. But I think it was difficult. It was only supposed to be about three columns. We didn't tell our children what we thought were good reasons. We thought we wanted them to be teased in the playground at school. These characters have different names. They're not. Obviously, I used family life and the kind of things that were said and a lot of the kind of things that happened. But it was also semi-fictional. And I always think once you introduce some fiction into something, then you can't say anymore that's a truthful portrait of something.

But the timing was terrible. And yes, I do regret. We never thought, I never, say we, because my husband's been very supportive through all this. I never thought it would go on so long. There came a point where we simply had to tell our kids. It felt deeply uncomfortable. And then it all came out. And of course, it was the worst possible time because the lost child.

I think I probably deserve all the trouble I got into there. But the only serious point I would make probably is that I'm still proud of those columns, too. I was in hospital last year and people came up to me and said, oh, you, the author of Living with Teenagers. I love that. Nurses in hospital. And that gave me a lot of pleasure. And I think it's still it, I like to think I always write about love at the end of the day. I write honestly about family. I'm proud of what I've written. How do I be a mother and a writer at the same time and somehow balance it and not be a bad person?

I don't know. I'm still trying, but I've tried to explore it in this book. Just before you go, how is Jake today? He's very good, actually. He's coming to my launch party tonight. No, he's good. I couldn't, I think, again, I couldn't have, I wouldn't have published this novel

if the kids weren't all in a good place. They're all grown-ups. They're all in their 30s. They're not especially interested in what, in fact, two of them are writers. I'm sure I'll be appearing in a novel very quick, very soon. And I couldn't have published this if they weren't all in a good place, I don't think.

I couldn't have written it. Julie Myerson, thank you good place, I don't think. I couldn't have written it. Julie Myerson, thank you very much indeed for coming in and talking to us about it. Well, now we're going to go back to our top story. For the first time in Scotland, some victims of rape and domestic abuse will be able to formally meet those who harmed them. In a process called restorative justice, victims of crime, such as sexual abuse or assault, can ask for a face-to-face meeting with the perpetrator it's starting as a test project in edinburgh lothian and the borders

with plans to make it widely available in scotland by the end of the year but some women's groups are concerned it could re-traumatize victims well joining me on the phone i hope is jemma fraser who's head of restorative justice policy at Community Justice Scotland, and Ashley Scotland, who's chief executive of the charity Thriving Survivors, which offers a specialist service for cases involving sexual harm. Gemma, just tell us about what exactly restorative justice means. No problem. Thank you for having us this morning. Restorative justice is a process of facilitated contact between someone who has caused harm and someone who has experienced that and it's about asking the questions that often remain unanswered following any criminal justice process

or a crime that's taken place. Restorative justice can have a range of outcomes, but fundamentally the victims need a parliament in that. And what they need out of an approach is to the best what we will try to deliver for them. Tell me, does it help victims of rape and domestic abuse in particular? I mean, is there any research around that? Yes. Internationally, restorative justice has been used across many countries and throughout Europe and further afield. It's also used in England in a number of county areas. And we've been working hard with Restorative Gloucestershire and Restorative Solutions to look at those approaches. Actually, Scotland will speak very well about victims and the impact that harm and crime has upon them and what those responses can be. But in the main, restorative justice gives back empowerment,

a voice in how people need to recover and to hear that harm, some control over what happens to them, which can often be stripped by both the incident and also the system in many ways. And I think it's about what they can look forward and think about in terms of their recovery and what's necessary to achieve that. Gemma, just talk me through the steps that happen here before somebody actually meets their perpetrator. Because it seems to me that, you know, you might hope that this is going to give you closure or give you something that it just isn't able to provide.

Of course. course restorative justice is not for everyone and in scotland we're looking at a voluntary approach there's no no ties to the criminal justice system it runs parallel to that and it's in no way incentivized the steps that take place would be that someone will come forward and in the types of harm that we're talking about here this can be initiated only by an individual who's experienced that harm. So they will seek that out in a self-referral approach that doesn't come through the system. And they'll be supported by a trained facilitator

who undergoes both training in restorative justice, but also training in specialist areas, depending on the harm type. The process for restorative justice, in terms of its exploration, can take months, years, depending on what people need. But it's about ensuring that there are as little surprises in that as possible. It's also hugely risk assessed and we work with experts in harm and professional bodies to achieve that as well as what people need. We want to adopt a strengths-based approach also in order to ensure that the

strength that we find in people who have experienced harm is also utilised to their benefit and that we can make connections with support services as necessary. Gemma, how keen are those who've been convicted of sexual abuse to actually take part in this? Because presumably you have to have their consent as well i mean they have to be willing absolutely yes of course although if an individual who has committed harm doesn't want to take part there are still restorative approaches we can take with someone which would include letter writing healing circles we can complete storytelling and all sorts of other restorative approaches in the absence of that

we find with individuals who have caused harm particularly when we've done work in prison settings that they very often want to talk to or at least make contact with a person or a family that have suffered from harm they've committed to express how they feel about that the reasons for that often how they've moved on from that themselves and changing their behaviours and to try to make some amends from that. It is incredibly difficult. Restorative justice is not an easy option. This is a really painful thing for all parties to go through

and it has to be very carefully managed. Ashley, I wonder what you think about how useful this is in terms of helping people. I think that restorative justice will offer people a new way to experience justice. I think far too often victim survivors, they lose their voice in any sort of criminal justice process. This, what we are trying to offer, will allow people that voice back, the opportunity to actually choose whether or not they want to participate in a restorative justice process is indeed empowering within itself.

But I think this will offer a new way for people to heal from the harm. There are some women's groups who've said that it could actually re-traumatise victims and clearly it must be a risk when you ask somebody or when even if somebody has decided they would like to meet their perpetrator it may go wrong. How do you prevent that from happening or try and mitigate against it? So we'll have a team of restorative justice professionals who will be specially trained to identify risk and indeed mitigate against that.

We will ensure that any process that we undertake is safe. If it isn't safe, it simply won't go ahead. We will not put people at further harm. And again, there is something in a survivor having the ability to make that choice for themselves. So I think this really does offer power, choice and control to people and that's important. Now, I know that restorative justice has been rolled out elsewhere

across the world. When you look at those places, do you see good outcomes? Yes. So you look at Ireland and the developments that they've had over there. Somebody that I spoke to recently told me that the restorative justice process

had the most profound effect on her life. It completely transformed her life and gave her back the ability to see the person who harmed her as a man and not as a monster. And that's really powerful. It's something that a lot of survivors do. We often visualise the people that cause us harm as monsters and really they are just people.

And being allowed to address that harm in a way that allows freedom of conversation and for that voice to be heard is vital to a recovery process. It's happened in Belgium, in Canada and Denmark

there's international case studies that are available that show the impact, the positive impact that this can have on people. Gemma, it's being rolled out as a pilot at the moment. Do you think that it's going to be something that is going to be Scotland-wide and indeed across the whole of the UK at some stage? In Scotland, certainly, the commitment as part of the programme for government and now supported by the new justice vision for Scotland is to have restorative justice consistently available by the end of 2023. The pilot that we're running at the moment will identify what exists currently in local areas

because we do have some restorative justice that takes place already in Scotland but what will be needed in addition to that to ensure that we get that consistent approach that allows individuals who experience harm to access restorative justice at a time when they are ready. So I think in terms of how this will look and will be rolled out, we'll take cognisance of the fact that local areas in Scotland are very different. They have very different needs and very different makeup. But we should be able to identify what's necessary, understanding that restorative justice is not a free approach, and we will need to consider what resource is needed to make sure

that people experience this in the best way, in the safest way possible. Gemma Fraser and Ashley Scotland, thank you very much indeed for joining us. Thank you. Now we might just get a verdict later today in the Herd-Depp trial.

The jury will continue to deliberate today, but the world's press has been promised an hour's notice before their decision is announced. The court case is in Fairfax County, Virginia, and Depp is suing Heard, his ex-wife, for $50 million over a 2018 article she wrote for The Washington Post in which she described herself as a public figure representing domestic abuse. She is counter-suing him for $100 million.

Though Depp was not named in the article, he claims it cost him lucrative acting roles. Have you been hooked on the Amber Heard and Johnny Depp saga in court, their claims and counter-claims, their expressions and emotions, Kate Moss taking the stand. Even if you have no interest in inspecting dirty designer linen being washed in the public glare, this trial, which it has been very hard to avoid, may well have serious ramifications that go well beyond an A-list actor getting their pound of flesh. Some say that neither party comes out of it well, but there are serious concerns that this televised court case is harmful to other victims. Well, Professor Jessica Taylor is the founder of Victim Focus, which is a research, training and consultancy organisation.

Jessica, you say that this court case has been damaging. To who and why? Thank you so much for having me. Just to be really, to be clear, it's Dr. Jessica Taylor, not Professor. I don't want to promote myself on the BBC. Okay, no, I think it's been harmful to everybody. I actually can't think of a party that comes out of this well anywhere in society. I was thinking about this, you know, for the last few weeks, and I think that obviously it's going to harm victims, men and women who have been subjected to domestic and sexual abuse. I think that it's going to harm the justice system in totality.

Like, why was this televised? Why has it been turned into a social media circus? Why is it being streamed constantly on YouTube? You know, people can pay to have their comments put to the top. Like, it's a big game. It's turned into it's almost like a reality TV program that's not quite real. It's almost fiction. And people are watching it with these two well-known, you know, actors. There's the issue around people that are throwing around psychiatric terms, you know, that Amber was deliberately diagnosed. There's just so much. I just can't think of a single benefit or anything good that we're ever going to get out of this.

I wonder what effect this will have, do you think, actually on people coming forward? I mean, have you got any evidence that it's going to prevent people from feeling safe to come forward? So we've been looking at the psychological literature around victim blaming, self-blame, self-doubt, disbelief, and the way people respond to and portray victims of domestic and sexual violence for about six decades now in psychology. And what we know is that there is a stereotype of the perfect victim that basically you can't ever attain, you know, nobody is the perfect victim because it's impossible. And scholars started to suggest in the 60s that there was no real way for you to be this perfect victim that did everything right. And you've got absolutely no character flaws that you went to the police

straight away. You have lots of evidence, you know, everything is there. It's, you know, you're, it's a perfect case that doesn't exist and and I think that men and women specifically women though because I think I do want to talk about men in a minute but women are watching this and watching her she's being mocked if she cries it's too much if she doesn't cry why is she not crying then it's that she's lying then it's that she's exaggerating then it's that she doesn't remember enough detail then it's that she's attention seeking then her memory recall isn't good enough then it's that why is her memory so sharp on that event then it's that she's attention seeking, then her memory recall isn't good enough, then it's that why is her memory so sharp on that event, then it's about her sexuality and her background and then her injuries. Why are injuries like this? Well, why didn't she seek

help? Why did she cover up her injuries? Her injuries aren't real. And there are women watching that thinking, that's what's going to happen to me when I come forward, because I am also not the perfect victim, right? Well, we do have figures from the Victims Commissioner published last year that a record number of people, including 43% of rape victims, do pull out of cases. And we've seen that there's a between 1% and 4% increase year on year from 2015 up to 2020, which is the last year that we've got those figures available from. I wonder what you think about the social media platforms like TikTok and Twitter, where there have been a lot of memes and jokes and lip syncs and hashtags, and whether the kind of media storm, the social media storm around this, actually adds to the weight of a potential worry about victims coming forward when they see that. Clearly, ordinary people are not going to get that kind of a social media storm.

So is there anything that's translatable from that to what might happen to other victims? This is a really good question because I think that there's a lot that's happened. One of the things that I've been worried about is actually TikTok, because we know that TikTok's target audience is young people and we know even though there's age restrictions on TikTok we know that there's children on there and you can't even flick through without there being something about this you know a disclosure of sexual assault a disclosure of domestic abuse from the child like these little clips that are then mocked uh memefied uh you know and ridiculed and picked apart by somebody. And I do worry that

we've got a young generation watching that and just finding this entire thing entertaining. But then, you know, the other thing that's come up around social media is the amount of people saying, wow, you know, I have this person on my Facebook, my sister, my mom, my grandma has shared these comments saying that, you know, Amber Heard is a narcissist. She's a liar. She deserves everything she got if this was real X, Y and Z, right? And then they're sort of reflecting themselves thinking, I did not know my family felt like this about domestic abuse. I did not know that those opinions existed in my friends and family. You know, that people are unfriending each other over this. They're thinking, whoa,

I don't want you in my space. You're terrifying. I think that... I just want to come in here because we don't have a lot of time. We've had a large response on social media, as you could imagine. And one message here says that one good thing

that's come out of this is it discusses the possibility of men being victims of domestic abuse. I was a police officer for many years, writes this man who hasn't given us his name.

And in fact, I have seen a similar, I have been a sufferer of such abuse myself. It has brought a shine, shone a light on this. And that's important too, isn't it? Yeah. So I think I've been thinking a lot about the impact that this has on male victims. So men that are out there that are actually being abused, they're being subjected to abuse by their female partners or male partners and i do worry though that this case has almost been put up as like an example of real male suffering in in male male abuse now i just worry that i don't think johnny depp is the poster boy of that i don't you know this is a man that has bragged about using women's bodies, murder, rape,

cutting men's penises off, burning women's bodies, laughing throughout his trial. We haven't had a verdict yet, of course. No, but I'm saying that there are men out there that have never done anything like this. They're genuine victims of abuse. There is no other side. That man is a genuine victim.

He's never, you know, talked about killing his wife. He's never talked about burning her body and things like that. And I worry that men are identifying with a man who is clearly violent and misogynistic, if nothing else. Well, these are allegations. Obviously, the trial is ongoing. We awake the verdict. Dr. Jessica Taylor, thank you very much indeed. Now new sentencing guidelines regarding child sexual offences come into force today. Child abusers will now face tougher sentences for the act of planning or facilitating sex offences, even if sexual activity doesn't occur or if the child doesn't actually exist. That's really where police pose as children in sting operations.

Previously, offenders in these cases have sought reduced jail terms by saying that no real child was hurt. Well, to discuss the new guidelines introduced by the Sentencing Council and the impact they could have, I'm joined by Gabriel Shaw, Chief Executive of the charity NAPAC, the National Association for People Abused in Childhood. Thank you for joining me, Gabriel. If you could just tell me what these new guidelines cover. Yes, thanks for having me. This is a really good news story and an excellent move for justice. The specific guidance covers two sections of the Sexual Offences Act. The first one is arranging or facilitating the commission of a child's sex offence, even when no offence takes place, as you noted. So this is where an offender will try to arrange or actively plan to meet a child to abuse them.

And the second one, Section 10 of the Sexual Offences Act, is causing or inciting a child to engage in sexual activity, again, even when no child exists. And this doesn't have to be contact hands-on abuse. It can be getting the child to abuse themselves, getting them to engage in sexual activity, taking photographs, all those kinds of things. So those are the two key offences that have been changed. Now, previously, there were cases where defendants asked for lower sentences, didn't they, because they were meeting fictional children. Why has it been decided that that just doesn't wash?

Oh, this is such, yeah, this is a really key point of it. And it focuses around, did an actual contact offence take place? Did the offender go and abuse or rape that child? And that's where the previous guidelines, as previously written, were a bit ambiguous. They were a bit dull. And so, as you know, sentencing is an arrange. So you can sentence an offender at the lower end or the higher end. And offenders were trying to argue,

well, I may have planned argue well I may have planned it I may have organized it but nothing happened or it was a police sting so there was no child therefore you know you can convict me but convict me at the lower end of the scale because no harm took place and essentially the focus is now on the intended harm and that is a brilliant point because it's, and actually as the appeal court heard in 2020, this is where the changes came from, they said the offence is complete when the arrangements for the offence are made or the intended offence has been facilitated. Now that's great because it means that children aren't harmed but yet offenders are sentenced at their actual seriousness, as if the offence had taken place. Now, another change is that offenders who try to groom underage children over the internet are now going to face two years in prison, and that comes into effect in July.

What was the case before? I just wonder if we're behind the curve when it comes to online child sex abuse and prosecutions compared to other countries? Yeah, that's another change that comes. And those two changes we were discussing come into effect today. And the change about online abuse will come into effect in July, as you say. And the case there is that it increases the seriousness or the range of the sentencing length. And what that message sends out is a deterrent message

because there's a myth out there, isn't there? At NAPAC, we've heard of this myth for years that somehow it's a victimless crime. If you're, and I quote, just looking at child abuse material, just talking about it with a child, somehow that doesn't matter as much. But there are a world of victims out there where it doesn't matter. I think this is the key point as well.

People ask, why is this important? This is just a change of sentencing. And the really key message is deterrence. And this is saying to offenders, you know what, we as a society want to protect children, and we need to show that we will do everything possible to deter offenders from acting on their offending behaviour. And we must show offenders that they're going to be punished even if no actual abusing takes place.

Is there any concern that if juries think sentences are too draconian that they might be more likely to acquit? Does that ever come into the thinking? I don't think so, no, because juries will be involved in the actual deciding of guilt or innocence, and then the sentencing comes later where juries aren't actually involved in it. I do perhaps see some of the commentary we've heard over the years

that are we moving into thought policing? You know, if something hasn't happened, because are you... But I just want to reassure everybody, sentencing only happens post-conviction. So it's clear that the offender has engaged in this offending behaviour. If there's evidence there, they've been found guilty by a jury.

But they're going to be punished as if the offence actually took place. And that deterrence message... And when we're seeing a rising rate of offending, this is not something that's a slow, small issue. This is huge and it's a really good move in the criminal justice system to address it. Well, Gabriel Shaw of NAPAC, thank you very much indeed

for joining us today. Now, how about a bit of nostalgia? I wonder if that got you dancing. That, of course, is just one track from the iconic Grease. It's got to be one of the best-loved musicals of all time. And now a new production in London's West End sees Olivia Moore as Sandy and Jocasta Armgill as Rizzo. And I am delighted to say that I'm joined by both Olivia and Jocasta Live in the studio.

Welcome. Thank you for having us. Why do you think that Grease, and particularly its music catalogue, has reached this iconic status? I mean, for me it was my childhood and I think for so many of us we grew up with Grease. So it's just so well loved. And it's really exciting to bring it back to the West End.

It's really interesting you say your childhood, because I remember vividly going to see the musical when I was still in primary school. And that was just after Grease the movie came out. And it was the height of Grease madness. You're both a lot younger than me. And so I wonder, was it still a big deal when you were kids? I mean, did you watch it, Olivia?

I mean, did you watch Olivia Newton-John as a child on screen? Yeah, my mum always says, you know, Grease is my era, my era. And so growing up, they definitely, you know, put the DVD in front of me. And yeah, I have them to thank for my love of the film because I used to watch it all the time. I used to sing all the songs. I used to dance around my room. So it is quite crazy that we're here right now, you know, at the Dominion in Greece. It must feel great.

I was going to ask you how you prepared, but you've answered it. You've been preparing for all your life. So tell me, how different is this version from the original musical and indeed the film that many people are familiar with? Well, we've definitely, you know, you've got all of the iconic songs. You've got all the characters that everyone's going to be looking out for. But we felt it was really important to make changes, small changes that reflect the world that we live in right now. That includes a diverse cast, same-sex couples, and empowering women and championing that

because we think it's something that is incredibly important. And it's a production that we are, I am specifically incredibly proud of. Olivia, tell me a little bit about that, because I would suggest that some of the elements of the show haven't aged particularly well. I'm thinking of that song, Summer Nights, when Danny's friend says about your character, Sandy, did she put up a fight?

Is that still there? It is. It is, isn't it? Yeah, I mean, when you're working with the material, you can't sort of deviate away too much from the book. But what Nikolai Foster, our director, tried to do was really in the staging and the casting, really bring strong women into the production to kind of combat that.

It's also, sorry, just to, it's also really important that it's nice when audiences nowadays can acknowledge that there is things that need to change and how we have moved on with time. So it's important that, you know, some of those things are still within the show, but audiences acknowledge that.

Yeah. And I mean, I'm going to fess up here, Rizzo, Jocasta, and say that I auditioned for that role at the Ulster Youth Theatre back in 1984. I'll tell you that I didn't get it. Not that I'm still bitter. If you asked me to sing, you'd find out why I didn't get it. You're Rizzo at heart. But I can tell you that, you know, we were, you know, teenagers then and we didn't bat an eyelid, I don't think, as I recall, over any of those words or the kind of premise that Sandy had to reinvent herself and wear tight black trousers and leather trousers in order to get her man, you know.

And in fact, that transformation was the climax of the show. So it's interesting to hear you talk today about, you know, young women today. You felt, and I just wonder, did the cast feel comfortable with it the whole way through? Or did you think, look, this is about something that happened in the 1950s, so we can acknowledge that and still enjoy it? Yeah, absolutely. We had multiple conversations very early on in the rehearsal process about the misogyny within the text and how our diverse cast was going to rework this story. And it was always a very open conversation. that's why we have managed to achieve it so well because everyone was open and not afraid to speak their mind when they were like actually I don't feel this is quite right or I think we can make a better choice here. Now you took us to play Rizzo that gritty young woman and she puts on

such a tough front in order to protect herself she's's such an appealing character, isn't she? Yeah. I mean, I always wanted to be Rizzo. Yeah, me too. You've got to be Rizzo. Don't rub it in. But it was quite important to me to show her vulnerability as well and to show that to be a well-rounded person, you know, she has got layers to her. She is, she isn't, the tough exterior is just an act.

And it's really nice to sort of let the audience in and see some of her more vulnerable sides throughout the show. And I think that's quite exciting. And of course, one of the major relationships in Greece is in fact your relationship, the relationship between Sandy and Rizzo, isn't it? Because of course, you know, Olivia, Sandy, you're on a voyage of discovery if you like. I mean it's a coming of age, you know, film, screenplay and and theater production really isn't it yeah we um it wasn't something that actually we we clocked onto immediately but throughout rehearsals we actually

realized that i think everyone thinks that sandy's transformation at the end is very much led through her desire to be with danny and actually we realized it's really not about that it's you know these two women who seem to have quite a lot of conflict throughout the storyline they actually use each other and they really listen to each other and I think they are huge influences in the way that they kind of learn a lot about themselves and you know at the endizzo becomes, you see a lot more of her vulnerable side. And I think she... That wouldn't have happened without the guidance and seeing Sandy be so vulnerable and her realising that that's OK. Yeah.

Same with Sandy's transformation, sort of Rizzo's confidence and... She's so direct. Yeah. I think that really helps Sandy come out of her shell and stick up for herself um and I think Sandy especially learns that you can have a you can have softer qualities to your personality but you can also know exactly you know what you want and also how you deserve to be treated um so yeah and how does this play to a new generation of theatre goers? I mean, I often find that it's really interesting that little kids still know a lot of these songs.

I don't know. Where does it come from? I mean, it is wild. And like you were saying how, you know, you grew up with it. I kind of I don't even know when the film came out, really, because to me it was when I was a child. 1978. That was long before you were born. Yeah. And it just it translates so well still. But I always think, you know, it is about coming of age and being a teenager and having all those firsts, you know, those butterfly moments.

And I think we all can not only relate to it, but like enjoy being transported back to their moments. So, I mean, I understand why adults like it. The kids nowadays, I'm not sure. But it must be such a fun performance to be a part of. I mean, is it, what is it like to stand on stage and look into a crowd where I imagine everyone's singing the lyrics back at you yeah wild so it's it's it's amazing isn't it yeah I mean especially at the Dominion the Dominion Theatre is so huge yeah um but everyone's just up for a great time and and the energy in in the theatre is just electric and we do have a lot of fun don't we? Yeah, we really do. And it is amazing because the stalls just go out.

It seems like there's so many people out there and they're just so invested in what you're doing. It is a really humbling experience. Nadja Kastar, I'm going to ask you to move over to our piano here in the studio. We're going to hear a song that is the favourite of many teenage girls and lots of other people besides, including my own, I think. There Are Worse

Things I Could Do. Jocasta, go for it. There are worse things I could do than go with a boy or two even though the neighbourhood thinks I'm trashy

and no good I suppose it could be true but there are worse things I could do I could flirt with all the guys Wow, beautiful. Jocasta Omgill, Azrizzo, thank you so much for performing that live for us here in the studio.

What a treat for Women's Hour. And Grease is showing at the Dominion Theatre in London until the 29th of October. We'll have more music live in the studio tomorrow. But from all of us today, thanks for joining us. I'll be back at the same time tomorrow. That's all for today's Woman's Hour. Join us again next time. Hi, I'm Andy Oliver,

and I'd like to tell you all about my Radio 4 series, One Dish. It's all about why you love that one dish, the one that you could eat over and over again without ever getting tired of it. Each week, a very special guest will bring their favourite food to my table and we'll be unpacking the history of it. And food psychologist, Kimberley Wilson, is on hand to talk us through the science bit. What food reminds you of your child? What's your favourite place to go for dinner? What do you have for Sunday lunch? What's your favourite dessert? Do you say plantain or plantain? What's your favourite place to go for dinner? What do you have for Sunday lunch? What's your favourite dessert? Do you say plantain or plantain? What food would you take with you to a desert island?

What's your favourite type of chilli oil? What do you have for breakfast? What's the best pasta? So if you're the sort of person who's already planning what you're having for lunch while you're eating breakfast, then this podcast is going to be right up your street. That's One Dish with me, Andy Oliver. Listen now on BBC Sounds. I'm Sarah Trelevan, and for over a year, I've been working on one of the most complex stories I've ever covered. There was somebody out there who was faking pregnancies.

I started, like, warning everybody. Every doula that I know. It was fake. No pregnancy. And the deeper I dig. It was fake. No pregnancy. And the deeper I dig, the more questions I unearth. How long has she been doing this? What does she have to gain from this? From CBC and the BBC World Service, The Con, Caitlin's Baby.

It's a long story, settle in. Available now.