Abstract
Court responses to rape and sexual assault have been repeatedly criticized in England and Wales (Brown et al., 2010). In particular, research has identified prevalent stereotypes about rape in both the criminal justice system and wider society, with these rape myths often being used as the predominant explanation for inadequate victim/survivor treatment (see Temkin and Krahé, 2008). The existing literature, though, tends to rely on interviews or is outdated by policy, so the present research uses court observations to explore what is actually happening in adult rape and sexual assault trials. The findings show that rape myths are still routinely used at trial, but that they are sometimes resisted using judicial directions or prosecution comments. In addition, the research highlights how rape myths are kept ‘relevant’ to trial through a focus on inconsistencies, a dichotomy of wholly truthful/untruthful witnesses, and conceptualisations of ‘rational’ behaviour as being the ‘normal’ way to act. These findings provide a new understanding of rape myths and have implications for policy; in particular, that while training legal professionals is helpful, it cannot be expected to fully address the use of rape myths.
Highlights
The Criminal Justice System (CJS) in England and Wales has been accused of poor responses to rape and sexual assault (Brown et al, 2010)
The findings show that rape myths are still routinely used at trial, but that they are sometimes resisted using judicial directions or prosecution comments
The present research seeks to understand the use of rape myths at trial by observing how they are made relevant despite increasing awareness of the realities of rape
Summary
The Criminal Justice System (CJS) in England and Wales has been accused of poor responses to rape and sexual assault (Brown et al, 2010). In relation to the defendant, we felt it was important to highlight that there had not been a conviction at the stage examined, so ‘the accused’ was the most appropriate term to reflect their status While this may initially appear to treat the accuser and accused differently, it is notable that adversarial trials are concerned with establishing the defendant’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt and so are not a comment on the victim/survivor’s status. Lonsway and Fitzgerald (1994: 135) noted ‘the truth value of these statements in a particular situation is not as significant as the fact they tend to be universally applied’ It is arguable, that rape myths are a combination of stereotypical attitudes about rape with the cultural functioning of a myth, leading to the most common definition: ‘prescriptive or descriptive beliefs about rape that serve to deny, downplay or justify sexual violence’ (Bohner et al, 1998: 14)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
