Navigating the Complexity of Justice for Sexual Assault Victims
Sexual assault trials take place to aid a victim in gaining complete justice for the assault that they had to endure as well as sentencing the defendant with the punishment that they deserve. In many cases, the verdict reached does not reflect the truth of the incident. Many different factors contribute to this issue.
Rape Myths:
Rape myths have become a very large problem in society that may contribute to false verdicts. Rape myths can be defined as generalized and false beliefs about sexual assault that trivialize a sexual assault, suggest that a sexual assault did not occur, and encourage blaming the victim and exonerating the offender (Chiara Rollero; Renae Franiuk). This idea was first mentioned by author, Susan Brownmiller, in a book published in 1975 (Brownmiller). The discussion of rape myths was then furthered by a study done in 1980 that showed specific myths that are employed to downplay sexual assaults (Burt). These include suggestions that the victim is either lying, deserved the sexual assault, or asked for it due to their actions or attire (Burt). Other myths that have formed suggest that either the defendant could not help themselves or that they merely are not the type of person to commit a sexual assault (Burt).
Defining Sexual Assault:
Aside from the contribution of rape myths to pre-existing juror bias, the definition of sexual assault is something that is not clearly defined for many individuals. Many people hold the belief that if the assault was not rape, then it was not sexual assault at all. Sexual assault may be defined as any of the following forms: non-contact unwanted sexual experiences, unwanted sexual contact, sexual coercion, and attempted and completed rape (Sapir Sasson). Within this definition, many factors are debated largely among society. For example, not all individuals agree that oral intercourse is a sexual act that may count towards unwanted sexual contact or coercion (Sapir Sasson). This lack of universal acceptance of the various sexual actions may lead to many implications in an observer’s perception of sexual assaults as well as in the victims. Consequently, the misunderstanding of what constitutes a sexual assault often leads to biases present in juror assessments.
Juror Bias and the Justice Gap:
Ultimately, many different factors sway juror verdict decisions pertaining to sexual assault cases. A very large factor must be assessed regarding how a juror’s implicit stereotyping and prior experience shapes their interpretation of a situation. In cases evaluating the issue of sexual assault, it is very important to first understand the types of bias that may occur within the jurors. Juror bias may be defined as integrated extralegal elements that influence juror’s consideration of trial evidence when coming to a verdict (Mobley). Many different factors may contribute to this bias including the defendant’s characteristics, plaintiff’s characteristics, pretrial publicity, evidence presented, and philosophical ideals of the juror (Mobley).
Jury selection may occur through a process typically known as voir dire. In this process, citizens who have been called for jury duty are asked a series of questions that act to determine whether they may serve as impartial and fair jurors (Hafemeister). If any of the individuals are seen to present a challenge for cause, or bias, they are excused from their jury duty and removed from the specific jury being selected for (Hafemeister). However, bias is likely to still present itself in most jurors. There is a large effect of juror bias on the court outcomes of sexual assault cases. A commonly noticed pattern has come to be called the “justice gap” within the pattern of attrition for sexual assault cases (Huhtanen). Only 5-20% of sexual assaults are reported, 0.4-5.4% of the perpetrators are prosecuted, and 0.2-5.2% of cases result in a conviction of any kind (Huhtanen).
​
Effect of Bias on Court Outcomes:
There is a large effect of bias on the court outcomes of sexual assault cases. Overall, approximately 99.7% of perpetrators in sexual assault are never prosecuted or held accountable for their criminal actions (Johnson). The prosecution rate for sexual assaults is seen to have very low numbers in comparison to various other crimes. There have been investigations in the existence and impact of this gender bias, and other forms of bias, on court operations and judicial decision-making (Huhtanen). It has been determined and observed that often times the injuries and experiences of the victims are ignored and disregarded (Huhtanen).
As a result of the bias present, jurors may also assign extraneous meaning to evidence that is presented (Mobley). If they have created a story in their mind based off their perception of the plaintiff and defendant, then they may fill in any gaps of evidence as they think would make sense (Mobley). Likewise, if they feel as though evidence presented does not fit the narrative they have created in their mind, they may ignore important factors (Mobley). Studies conducted using a mock trial have supported this idea and shown that mock jurors either showed better recognition of evidence that matches their decided verdict preference, or they incorrectly recalled information changing it to fit their narrative (Burd). This therefore causes partial viewpoints and distortion in the outcome of the trial.
A large aspect to consider when examining the effect of bias on court outcomes is clarifying the bias that is implicit and how it relates to the ranking of importance that jurors may find with the evidence presented. A recent study done on the presentation of the forensic evidence showed that DNA evidence pushed the juries towards more guilty verdicts for rape cases than did other forms of evidence (Shichun Ling). This effect has led to reform being needed in the requirement of substantiated reasons being provided by the jury regarding their verdict (Burd). Although this requirement has a solid basis in seeking to provide more fact based reasoning for verdicts reached, more research is needed to find a more suitable way to actually lessen the bias that presents itself prior to a verdict being reached (Burd).
Compiled References:
Ashley A. Wenger, Brian H. Bornstein. "The Effects of Victim's Substance Use and Relationship Closeness on Mock Jurors' Judgements in an Acquaintance Rape
Case." Sex Roles 54 (2006). Print.
Brownmiller, Susan. Against Our Will: Men, Women and Rape. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1975. Print.
Burd, Kayla Ann. "When and Where Do Biases Emerge? Memory and Decision Making across Legal Contexts." Cornell University, 2018. Print.
Burt, Martha R. "Cultural Myths and Supports for Rape." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 38.2 (1980): 217-30. Print.
Chiara Rollero, Stefano Tartaglia. "The Effect of Sexism and Rape Myths on Victim Blame." Sexuality & Culture 23 (2019): 209-19. Print.
Daniel M. Rempala, Andrew L. Geers. "The Effect of Victim Information on Casuality Judgements in a Rape Trial Scenario." The Journal of Social Psychology 149.4
(2009): 495-512. Print.
Dawson, Myrna. "Rethinking the Boundaries of Intimacy at the End of the Century: The Role of Victim-Defendant Relationship in Criminal Justice Decisionmaking over
Time." Law & Society Review 38.1 (2004). Print.
Edith Greene, Heather Koehring, Melinda Quiat. "Victim Impact Evidence in Capital Cases: Does the Victim's Character Matter?" 28.2 (1998). Print.
Felson, Richard B., and Paré Paul-Philippe. "The Reporting of Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault by Nonstrangers to the Police." Journal of Marriage and Family
67.3 (2005): 597-610. Print.
Gotovac, Sandra M. A., and Shelagh PhD Towson. "Perceptions of Sexual Assault Victims/Survivors: The Influence of Sexual History and Body Weight." Violence and
Victims 30.1 (2015): 66-80. Print.
Hafemeister, Thomas L. "Supreme Court Examines Impact of Errors in Detecting Bias During Jury Selection." Violence and Victims 15.2 (2000). Print.
Holland, Kathryn J., and Lilia M. Cortina. ""It Happens to Girls All the Time": Examining Sexual Assault Survivors' Reasons for Not Using Campus Supports." American
Journal of Community Psychology 59.1/2 (2017): 50-64. Print.
Huhtanen, Heather. Gender Bias in Sexual Assault Response and Investigation: End Violence Against Women International, 2020. Print.
Johnson, Holly. "Limits of a Criminal Justice Response: Trends in Police and Court Processing of Sexual Assault " Sexual Assault in Canada. University of Ottawa
Press, 2012. Print.
Kaplan, Jacob. "Public Beliefs About the Accuracy and Importance of Forensic Evidence in the United States." Print.
Karl L. Wuensch, Matthew W. Campbell, Frederick C. Kesler, Charles H. Moore. "Racial Bias in Decisions Made by Mock Jurors Evaluating a Case of Sexual
Harassment." The Journal of Social Psychology (2002). Print.
Linda Cassidy, Rose Marie Hurrell. "The Influence of Victim's Attire on Adolescents' Judgements of Date Rape." Adolescence 30.118 (1995). Print.
Logan A. Ewanation, Susan Yamamoto, Jordan Monnink, Evelyn M. Moeder. "Perceived Realism and the Csi-Effect." Cogen Social Sciences 3 (2017). Print.
Maddera, Julia C. "Batson in Transition: Prohibiting Peremptory Challenges on the Basis of Gender Identity or Expression." 116. Print.
Mobley, Sara Jane. "Identifying Juror Bias: Using the Pretrial Juror Attitude Questionnaire for More Effective Voir Dire." (2007). Print.
Monica Romero-Sanchez, Jesus L. Megıas. "How Do College Students Talk About Sexual Assault?" Journal of Gender Studies 24.6 (2015). Print.
Podlas, Kimberlianne. "Please Adjust Your Signal: How Television's Syndicated Courtrooms Bias Our Juror Citizenry." American Business Law Journal 39.1 (2001).
Print.
Renae Franiuk, Jennifer L. Seefelt, Joseph A. Vandello. "Prevalence of Rape Myths in Headlines and Their Effects on Attitudes toward Rape." sex Roles 58 (2008): 790-
801. Print.
Sable, Marjorie R., et al. "Barriers to Reporting Sexual Assault for Women and Men: Perspectives of College Students." Journal of American College Health 55.3
(2006): 157-62. Print.
Sapir Sasson, Lisa A. Paul. "Labeling Acts of Sexual Violence: What Roles Do Assault Characteristics, Attitudes, and Life Experiences Play?" Behavioral and Social
Issues 23 (2014): 35-49. Print.
Schuller, Regina A., and Patricia A. Hastings. "Complainant Sexual History Evidence: Its Impact on Mock Jurors' Decisions." Psychology of Women Quarterly 26.3
(2002): 252-61. Print.
Shichun Ling, Jacob Kaplan, Colleen Berryessa. "The Importance of Forensic Evidence on Decisions of Criminal Guilt." Science & Justice (2020). Print.
Slyder, Leah M. "Rape in the Civil and Administrative Contexts: Proposed Solutions to Problems in Tort Cases Brought by Rape Survivors." Case Western Reserve Law
Review 68.2 (2017). Print.
Spencer, Chelsea, et al. "Why Sexual Assault Survivors Do Not Report to Universities: A Feminist Analysis." Family Relations 66.1 (2017): 166-79. Print.
Tisha R. A. Wiley, Bette L. Bottoms. "Effects of Defendant Sexual Orientation on Jurors' Perceptions of Child Sexual Assault." Law and Human Behavior 33.1 (2008).
Print.
Tuerkheimer, Deborah. "Incredible Women: Sexual Violence and the Credibility Discount." University of Pennsylvania Law Review 166.1 (2017). Print.