A recent report by Victim Support found that 75% of sexual offence victims have been asked in court at least one question based on rape myths and stereotypes. These can include questions about what they did to stop the assault, whether they were drinking or taking drugs, or what they were wearing. Such myths and stereotypes reinforce mistaken beliefs about rape held by jurors and society more generally.
Defence barristers sometimes use such myths and stereotypes to prevent a guilty verdict or to secure a lighter sentence for their client. According to Kama Melly KC, head of rape and serious sexual offences for the Criminal Bar Association, questioning a victim about something the defendant will say in their evidence at least gives them a chance to defend themselves against it. However, the course of justice needs to be more balanced and fair.
The report also highlights the fact that after reporting their assault to the police, victims can be left for months or even years waiting for their attacker to be charged. It then takes an average of two years for the case to get to trial, according to the Criminal Bar Association. Such delays can mean that gaps appear in the victim’s memory, allowing rape myths to creep in.
Working with the Inns of Court College of Advocacy, Kama Melly is helping to introduce a training course for all barristers working on cases involving trauma from December. This training course explores the varying effects of trauma on witnesses and the lasting impact of rape and sexual assault on the victims’ mental health. It suggests simple steps such as arranging a pre-trial court visit so victims can visualise the process and giving advance warning that they might be questioned on personal topics such as their mental health, to help them go into the process psychologically prepared. The report recommended that the Crown Court Compendium, which provides guidance on directing the jury, be updated with the latest research into understanding sexual violence.
Victim Support has called for the CPS to get the court to intervene when cross-examination is inappropriate and subjects witnesses to unwarranted or irrelevant attacks on their character. The findings of this report should be used to inform judges who preside over these cases to better control the environment in court to protect rape victims from the harmful assumptions. More needs to be done to reduce the length of time cases take to reach court, and the number of outstanding cases. By addressing these issues, more victims would complete the process, and justice would be served
Read the full article from The BBC here: Read More
