I know this isn’t related to what’s discussed in the thread but wanted to at least explain that it’s not as chickenshit or black and white in some other contexts. When they say that and decline to prosecute in SA cases:

It’s obviously a huge hit to you, nobody who finds themselves across the table from them in that situation wants to hear that. They did do me the courtesy of explaining why — they said unfortunately there will be at least one man in the jury who’s going to side towards the defendant. In most SA cases sadly there isn’t much evidence. They are usually he said-she said.This was true in mine too. You might think that when there isn’t enough physical evidence they should use people but testimony from anyone other than an eye-witness is hearsay and not really up to the evidentiary standards in a criminal trial.

It’s still a huge blow to hear that. However, it’s been some years for me since all of that and I do believe it would have been re-traumatizing to go through that trial, especially more so if we lost. Idk how anyone would get over that. It sucks but I do believe they protected me in some way. But to each their own and i only speak for myself and not other survivors.

And in reference to the original problem, yes the lack of paper trial or record is definitely a huge risk but again you have to balance someone’s due process rights.