Rape Myths and Verdict Systems: What Is Influencing Conviction Rates in Rape Trials in Scotland?-Reference-Cited by-同舟云学术

Rape Myths and Verdict Systems: What Is Influencing Conviction Rates in Rape Trials in Scotland?

Published:2024-07-21 Issue:7 Volume:14 Page:619
ISSN:2076-328X
Container-title:Behavioral Sciences
language:en
Short-container-title:Behavioral Sciences

Author:

Curley Lee John¹^ORCID,Lages Martin²^ORCID,Sime Pamela J.¹,Munro James³^ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Psychology, Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow G4 0BA, UK

2. School of Psychology & Neuroscience, University of Glasgow, Glasgow G12 8QQ, UK

3. Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, School of Psychology and Counselling, The Open University, Milton Keynes MK7 6AA, UK

Abstract

The Scottish verdict system includes three verdicts: ‘guilty’, ‘not guilty’ and ‘not proven’. Politicians propose that the three-verdict system is partially to blame for the low conviction rate of rape, whereas research suggests that rape myths may be having a larger impact. To test the effects of varying verdict systems (guilty, not guilty and not proven; guilty and not guilty; a series of proven and not proven verdicts) and rape myths on juror verdicts. A total of 180 participants answered questions regarding their acceptance of rape myths using the Acceptance of Modern Myth and Sexual Aggression (AMMSA) scale. They then watched a staged rape trial filmed in a real courtroom and reached a verdict. Participants also provided longer-form answers on which thematical analysis was conducted. The main findings are as follows: (1) The special verdict system leads to a higher conviction rate than the other systems when rape myth acceptance is controlled for. (2) The higher the rape myth acceptance, the more favourably the accused was perceived and the less favourably the complainer was perceived.

Publisher

MDPI AG

Link

https://www.mdpi.com/2076-328X/14/7/619/pdf

Reference66 articles.

1. Ormston, R., Chalmers, J., Leverick, F., Munro, V., Murray, L., and Scottish Jury Research: Findings from a Large-Scale Mock Jury Study (2023, November 01). Crime and Justice, Available online: https://www.gov.scot/binaries/content/documents/govscot/publications/research-and-analysis/2019/10/scottish-jury-research-fingings-large-mock-jury-study/documents/scottish-jury-research-findings-large-scale-mock-jury-study/scottish-jury-research-findings-large-scale-mock-jury-study/govscot%3Adocument/scottish-jury-research-findings-large-scale-mock-jury-study.pdf.

2. A third verdict option: Exploring the impact of the not proven verdict on mock juror decision making;Hope;Law Hum. Behav.,2008

3. Proven and not proven: A potential alternative to the current Scottish verdict system;Curley;Behav. Sci. Law,2022

4. Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (2023, November 01). Statement on the Lord Advocate’s Reference to the Court of Appeal, Available online: https://www.copfs.gov.uk/about-copfs/news/statement-on-the-lord-advocate-s-reference-to-the-court-of-appeal/.

5. Richardson, A., and Gardiner, R. (2021, April 29). Not Proven—Is Evidence Weighted against Scotland’s 3-Verdict Justice System?. The Courier, 6 April 2021., Available online: https://www.thecourier.co.uk/.