With regard to the ‘rape and sexual offence myth directions’, how do jurors receive, understand and use these directions? Is there any way in which they could be made to be more effective? Are there alternative mechanisms which would more effectively combat “rape myths”?

Background

The Scottish Government’s Vision for Justice aims to establish an effective, modern person-centred and trauma-informed approach to justice in which everyone can have trust, including as victims, those accused of crimes and as individuals in civil disputes. As such, Justice Analytical Services have identified the theme of ‘Justice Processes & Experiences’ as a research priority. Robust research on justice processes, the experiences of complainers and the accused as well as the functioning of juries will inform work towards this aim.

Next steps

Get in touch with Justice_Analysts@gov.scot

Source

This question was published as part of the set of ARIs in this document:

Justice analytical services areas research interest

Research fields

No research fields assigned yet

Related UKRI funded projects


  • Trial by gender? Examining jury decision making in cases of rape and sexual abuse involving male victims

    In year ending March 2020, 155,000 men aged 16-74 experienced some form of sexual assault (including attempts) (ONS, 2021a, Section 3). Police reported crime data highlights that men represented 15.5% of sexual offence v...

    Funded by: ESRC

    Why might this be relevant?

    This project specifically focuses on examining jury decision making in cases of rape and sexual abuse involving male victims, which directly relates to the question about how jurors receive, understand, and use directions related to rape and sexual offences.

  • The Extension of Pre-recorded Cross-examination and Related Special Measures to Adult 'Intimidated' Complainants in Sex Offence Cases

    Pre-recorded cross-examination enables vulnerable and intimidated witnesses to record their evidence so that they do not have to testify at a criminal trial. It is the most far-reaching and significant 'special measure' ...

    Funded by: ESRC

    Why might this be relevant?

    While this project focuses on pre-recorded cross-examination in sex offence cases, it does not directly address the specific question about jurors' reception, understanding, and use of myth directions related to rape and sexual offences. However, it provides insights into related special measures that could be considered as alternatives to combat rape myths.

  • Understanding sex offence victims, risk and police investigations using novel datasets

    The Government's End-to-End Rape Review found police investigations were poor and low numbers of rape cases ended in a conviction. Operation Soteria Bluestone (OSB) was launched in response. OSB aimed to transform the wa...

    Funded by: ESRC

    Why might this be relevant?

    The project focuses on understanding sex offence victims, risk, and police investigations, which partially relates to the question about jurors' understanding and use of rape and sexual offence myth directions.