Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Rape Trial Practicalities: Delays, Special Measures, and the Survivors’ Experience

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Rape Trials in England and Wales

Abstract

Court responses to rape have predominantly been discussed in relation to pervasive stereotypes that trivialise or ‘justify’ rape and undermine survivors (Ellison & Munro, 2013; Temkin & Krahé, 2008); the use of evidence about survivors’ sexual history (Kelly, Temkin, & Griffiths, 2006); and high levels of attrition (Westmarland, 2015). Relatively little has been discussed about the practicalities of trial and their potential role in survivor justice. However, practical considerations are central to the meaningful participation that survivors say they want, and so it is important to examine the seemingly mundane aspects of court. Indeed, S. Payne (2009) has argued that survivors are very anxious before and during their court attendance, especially when there are delays. This may partly explain why ‘fear of going to court’ is the most common reason for survivors withdrawing support for the prosecution, a key aspect of attrition (Lovett, Uzelac, Horvath, & Kelly, 2007). Rather than being extraneous, the practicalities of trial therefore require attention and will be given such in this chapter.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    While seemingly a practical issue, delays become a human rights consideration because the right to a fair trial involves a sense of timeliness.

  2. 2.

    Cracked trials are those that are withdrawn on the day and not relisted, mostly through guilty pleas. Ineffective trials are those that are not ready on the day listed and are rearranged.

  3. 3.

    Trials will be referred to as T1, T2, and so on, in order to avoid naming any participants.

  4. 4.

    Case Management Judges are those who take on the majority of hearings about court orders and other case management issues being dealt with in that court area.

  5. 5.

    Quotes in square brackets ‘[]’ are paraphrased rather than being exactly verbatim. In many cases, the quotes are still very close to verbatim but I was unsure whether I had noted every utterance and so treated it as paraphrasing.

  6. 6.

    There is also an estimated cost of £93.3 million in legal aid for cases that are not heard in court

  7. 7.

    This is important given Charles’ (2012) finding that many eligible witnesses are not identified or given the opportunity to apply for special measures .

  8. 8.

    For child witnesses or those with a learning disability that causes difficulty in communicating.

References

  • Angilioni Report. (2015). Report of the independent review into the investigation and prosecution of rape in London. London: Metropolitan Police Service.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baverstock, J. (2016). Process evaluation of pre-recorded cross-examination scheme (Section 28). London: Ministry of Justice.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burton, M., Evans, R., & Sanders, A. (2007). Vulnerable and intimidated witnesses and the adversarial process in England and Wales. International Journal of Evidence & Proof, 11(1), 1–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Charles, C. (2012). Special measures for vulnerable and intimidated witnesses: Research exploring the decisions and actions taken by prosecutors in a sample of CPS case files. London: Crown Prosecution Service.

    Google Scholar 

  • Council of Europe. (2012). Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Criminal Justice Act 1925. London: HM Stationary Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daly, K. (2016). Reconceptualising sexual victimisation and justice. In I. Vanfraechem, A. Pemberton, & F. Mukwiza Ndahinda (Eds.), Justice for victims: Perspectives on rights, transition and reconciliation (pp. 378–395). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doak, J. (2005). Victims’ rights in criminal trials: Prospects for participation. Journal of Law & Society, 32(2), 294–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doak, J. (2008). Victims’ rights, human rights and criminal justice: Reconceiving the role of third parties. Oxford: Hart Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Durham, R., Lawson, R., Lord, A., & Baird, V. (2016). Seeing is believing: The Northumbria Court Observers Panel Report on 30 rape trials 2015–2016. Newcastle: Northumbria Police and Crime Commissioner.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellison, L. (2007). Witness preparation and the prosecution of rape. Legal Studies, 27(2), 171–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellison, L., & Munro, V. (2013). Better the devil you know? ‘Real rape’ stereotypes and the relevance of a previous relationship in (mock) juror deliberations. International Journal of Evidence & Proof, 17(4), 299–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellison, L., & Munro, V. (2014). A special delivery? Exploring the impact of screens, live links and video-recorded evidence on mock juror deliberation in rape trials. Social & Legal Studies, 23(1), 3–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ewing, K. (2009). Attitudes and responses to rape in light of the low conviction rate. Plymouth Law Review, 2009, 48–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Findlay, L. (2015). Courting social media in Australia’s criminal courtrooms: The continuing tension between promoting open justice and protecting procedural integrity. Current Issues in Criminal Justice, 27(2), 237–246.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, M. (2009). Victims of crime: Policy and practice in criminal justice. Cullompton: Willan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, M. (2010). The relationship between victims and prosecutors: Defending victims’ rights? Criminal Law Review, 1, 31–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, M. (2017). Victims of crime: Constructions, governance and policy. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hamlyn, B., Phelps, A., Turtle, J., & Sattar, G. (2004). Are special measures working? Evidence from surveys of vulnerable and intimidated witnesses. Home Office Research Study 283, Home Office, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herman, J. L. (2005). Justice from the victims’ perspective. Violence Against Women, 11(5), 571–602.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herman, S. (2010). Parallel justice for victims of crime. Washington, DC: National Center for Victims of Crime.

    Google Scholar 

  • HM Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate [HMCPSI]. (2007). Without consent: A report on the joint review of the investigation and prosecution of rape offences. London: HMCPSI.

    Google Scholar 

  • HM Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate [HMCPSI]. (2013). Disclosure of medical records and counselling notes: A review of CPS compliance with rules and guidance in relation to disclosure of complainants’ medical records and counselling notes in rape and sexual offence cases. London: HMCPSI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ho, T. (2015). Televising Hong Kong courts: A study on its legitimacy and practicability. Hong Kong Journal of Legal Studies, 9, 121–147.

    Google Scholar 

  • Home Office. (2007). Cross-government action plan on sexual violence and abuse. London: Home Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hudson, B. (2002). Restorative justice and gendered violence: Diversion or effective justice? British Journal of Criminology, 42(3), 616–634.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kazmin, A. (2017, March 6). India’s court system offers little hope of justice. Financial Times. Retrieved October 10, 2017, from https://www.ft.com/content/e3e31e4e-0015-11e7-8d8e-a5e3738f9ae4

  • Kebbell, M., O’Kelly, C., & Gilchrist, E. (2007). Rape victims’ experiences of giving evidence in English courts: A survey. Psychiatry, Psychology & Law, 14(1), 111–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, L., Temkin, J., & Griffiths, S. (2006). Section 41: An evaluation of new legislation limiting sexual history evidence in rape trials. Home Office Report 20/06, Home Office, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, H. (2013, November 3). Cameras in court are a threat to justice. Guardian Online. Retrieved August 8, 2016, from https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/03/cameras-in-court-threat-justice

  • Konradi, A. (2007). Taking the stand. Wesport: Praeger Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lambert, P. (2013). Television courtroom broadcasting effects: The empirical research and the Supreme Court challenge. Lanham: University Press of America.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lepofsky, D. (2009). Cameras in the courtroom: Not without my consent. In E. Barendt (Ed.), Media freedom and contempt of court (pp. 161–232). Aldershot: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leveson, B. (2015). Review of efficiency in criminal proceedings. London: Judiciary of England and Wales.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lovett, J., Uzelac, G., Horvath, M., & Kelly, L. (2007). Rape in the 21st century: Old behaviours, new contexts and emerging patterns. ESRC End of Award Report (RES-000-22-1679), Economic and Social Research Council, Swindon.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacMillan, L., & Thomas, M. (2009). Police interviews of rape victims: Tensions and contradictions. In M. A. H. Horvath & J. Brown (Eds.), Rape: Challenging contemporary thinking (pp. 255–280). Cullompton: Willan Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDonald, E., & Tinsley, Y. (2011). Use of alternative ways of giving evidence by vulnerable witnesses: Current proposals, issues and challenges. Victoria University of Wellington Legal Research Papers, 1(1), Paper 2/2011.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGlynn, C., Downes, J., & Westmarland, N. (2017). Seeking justice for survivors of sexual violence: Recognition, voices and consequences. In M. Keenan & E. Zinsstag (Eds.), Sexual violence and restorative justice: Legal, social and therapeutic dimensions (pp. 179–191). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Justice. (2012). Swift and sure justice: The government’s plans for reform of the criminal justice system. London: Ministry of Justice.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Justice. (2015). Code of practice for victims of crime. London: Ministry of Justice.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Justice. (2016). Crown Courts to pilot filming for the first time. Retrieved January 17, 2017, from https://www.gov.uk/government/news/crown-courts-to-pilot-filming-for-the-first-time

  • Ministry of Justice. (2017). Lord Chief Justice’s report 2017. London: Judiciary of England and Wales.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mulcahy, L. (2008). The unbearable lightness of being? Shift towards the virtual trial. Journal of Law and Society, 35(4), 464–489.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Audit Office. (2016). Efficiency in the criminal justice system. London: National Audit Office with Ministry of Justice.

    Google Scholar 

  • Northern Ireland Law Commission. (2011). Vulnerable witnesses in civil proceedings. Belfast: Northern Ireland Law Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • Payne, J. (2009). Criminal trial delays in Australia: Trial listing outcomes. Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Payne, S. (2009). Rape victim experience review. London: Home Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearson, A. (2017, March 19). Rape trials: Liz Truss and the sisterhood are on the slippery slope to injustice. The Telegraph. Retrieved September 15, 2017, from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/19/rape-trials-liz-truss-sisterhood-slippery-slope-injustice/

  • Powell, M., & Wright, R. (2010). Professionals’ perceptions of electronically recorded interviews with vulnerable witnesses. Current Issues in Criminal Justice, 21(2), 205–218.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rock, P. (2014). Victims’ rights. In I. Vanfraechem, A. Pemberton, & F. Mukwiza Ndahinda (Eds.), Justice for victims: Perspectives on rights, transition and reconciliation (pp. 11–31). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rudgard, O. (2017, March 27). Liz Truss’ announcement that rape victims could give evidence by video ‘misunderstood’ the law, says Britain’s most senior judge. The Telegraph. Retrieved September 15, 2017, from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/22/liz-trusss-announcement-rape-victims-could-give-evidence-video/

  • Runciman, B., & Baker, B. (2016). An urgent need to address lengthy court delays in Canada: Report of the Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs. Ottawa: Senate of Canada.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, O., & Skinner, T. (2012). Observing court responses to victims of rape and sexual assault. Feminist Criminology, 7(4), 298–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stern, V. (2010). The Stern review: A report by Baroness Stern CBE of an independent review into how rape complaints are handled by public authorities in England and Wales. London: Home Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sumray, R. (2007). Metropolitan Police Authority and London Criminal Justice Board: Rape convictions review. Rape, the media and the criminal justice system conference: Post conference report, December 2007, Greater London Authority, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, N., & Joudo, J. (2005). The impact of pre-recorded video and closed circuit television testimony by adult sexual assault complainants on jury decision-making: An experimental study. Australian Institute of Criminology Research and Public Policy Series (No. 68), Australian Institute of Criminology, Canberra.

    Google Scholar 

  • Temkin, J. (2000). Prosecuting and defending rape: Perspectives from the bar. Journal of Law and Society, 27(2), 219–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Temkin, J., & Krahé, B. (2008). Sexual assault and the justice gap: A question of attitude. Oxford: Hart Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN General Assembly. (1985). Declaration of basic principles of justice for victims of crime and abuse of power: Resolution (A/RES/40/34). New York: United Nations.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker, S., & Louw, D. (2003). The court for sexual offences. International Journal of Law & Psychiatry, 26(1), 73–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Westera, N., McKimmie, B., Kebbell, M., Milne, R., & Masser, B. (2015). Does the narrative style of video evidence influence judgements about rape complainant testimony? Applied Cognitive Psychology, 29(5), 637–646.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Westmarland, N. (2015). Violence against women: Criminological perspectives on men’s violence. Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wheeler, B. (2015, November 24). Spending review: Department-by-department cuts guide. BBC News Online. Retrieved August 9, 2016, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34790102

  • Willis, J. (2015, October 10). Live video link a ‘radical’ step forward for victims of sexual assault, says senior judge. Northern Echo. Retrieved August 7, 2016, from http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/features/13838922.Live_video_link_a__radical__step_forward_for_victims_of_sexual_assault__says_senior_judge/

  • Wolhuter, L., Olly, N., & Denham, D. (2009). Victimology: Victimisation and victims’ rights. Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Youth Justice & Criminal Evidence Act 1999. London: HM Stationary Office.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Anglia Ruskin University, Cambridge, UK

    Olivia Smith

Authors
  1. Olivia Smith
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Smith, O. (2018). Rape Trial Practicalities: Delays, Special Measures, and the Survivors’ Experience. In: Rape Trials in England and Wales. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-75674-5_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-75674-5_2

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-75673-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-75674-5

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation