The most persistent rape myth? A qualitative study of ‘delay’ in complaint in Victorian rape trials

ABSTRACT One of the oldest myths to confound the achievement of justice for victims of sexual violence is that ‘genuine’ rape victims complain immediately, loudly and officially. Dismantling this myth—or at least banishing it from the court room—has been a high priority of the modern era of rape/sexual assault law reform. How successful has this attempt been? This article reports on the initial findings of a transcript analysis study of more than 30 rape trials finalised in the County Court of Victoria between 2013 and 2020. We discuss the multiple variations on ‘delay’ that continue to feature prominently in the cross-examination of complainants in rape trials. We also examine the operation of s 52 of the Jury Directions Act 2015 (Vic) which provides for a mandatory direction if, at any point during the trial, the judge considers that there is evidence suggestive of delay. Ostensibly one of the strongest corrective mechanisms currently operating in sexual offence trials in Australia, we discuss the unevenness of s 52’s operation, and consider the implications for reliance on jury directions more generally.

[1]  G. Byrne.  Helping jurors to understand: Misconceptions about delay in making a complaint , 2021, Alternative Law Journal.

[2]  F. Leverick,et al.  The provenance of what is proven: exploring (mock) jury deliberation in Scottish rape trials , 2021, Journal of Law and Society.

[3]  H. Flowe,et al.  Alcohol and Remembering Rape: Setting the Scene , 2021, Alcohol and Remembering Rape.

[4]  Alcohol and Remembering Rape , 2021 .

[5]  F. Leverick.  What do we know about rape myths and juror decision making? , 2020 .

[6]  F. Leverick,et al.  Scottish Jury Research: Findings from a Large Scale Mock Jury Study , 2019 .

[7]  Louise Ellison.  Credibility in context: Jury education and intimate partner rape , 2018, The International Journal of Evidence & Proof.

[8]  J. Ogloff,et al.  The judge as cartographer and guide: the role of fact-based directions in improving juror comprehension , 2018 .

[9]  D. Boduszek,et al.  Juries in Rape Trials: Balanced or Biased? , 2017 .

[10]  Wendy Larcombe.  Rethinking Rape Law Reform: Challenges and Possibilities , 2017 .

[11]  Tina Skinner,et al.  How Rape Myths Are Used and Challenged in Rape and Sexual Assault Trials , 2017 .

[12]  M. McMahon,et al.  Educating juries or telling them what to think? Credibility, delay in complaint, judicial directions and the role of juries , 2017 .

[13]  N. Henry,et al.  Improving the law reform process: Opportunities for empirical qualitative research? , 2016 .

[14]  E. Henderson,et al.  A Little Judicial Direction: Can the Use of Jury Directions Challenge Traditional Consent Narratives in Rape Trials? , 2016 .

[15]  Louise Ellison,et al.  ‘Telling tales’: exploring narratives of life and law within the (mock) jury room , 2015, Legal Studies.

[16]  C. Cunliffe,et al.  A systematic review of juries' assessment of rape victims: Do rape myths impact on juror decision-making? , 2015 .

[17]  E. McDonald.  From 'Real Rape' to Real Justice? Reflections on the Efficacy of More than 35 Years of Feminism, Activism and Law Reform , 2014 .

[18]  Jennifer Pierce,et al.  Review of Survey and Experimental Research That Examines the Relationship Between Alcohol Consumption and Men’s Sexual Aggression Perpetration , 2014, Trauma, violence & abuse.

[19]  N. Henry,et al.  Disputing Consent: The Role of Jury Directions in Victoria , 2012 .

[20]  Jamie Walvisch,et al.  Simplification of Jury Directions Project: A Report to the Jury Directions Advisory Group. Complicity inferences and circumstantial evidence other misconduct evidence jury warnings/unreliable evidence. , 2012 .

[21]  J. Rachlinski.  MORE PROBLEMS WITH CRIMINAL TRIALS: THE LIMITED EFFECTIVENESS OF LEGAL MECHANISMS , 2012 .

[22]  Julia Quilter.  Re-Framing the Rape Trial: Insights from Critical Theory about the Limitations of Legislative Reform , 2011 .

[23]  R. Croucher,et al.  Family violence : a national legal response : the ALRC and Indigenous people : continuing the conversation , 2011 .

[24]  J. Goodman-Delahunty,et al.  Enhancing the credibility of complainants in child sexual assault trials: the effect of expert evidence and judicial directions. , 2010, Behavioral sciences & the law.

[25]  Louise Ellison,et al.  Of ‘Normal Sex’ and ‘Real Rape’: Exploring The Use of Socio-Sexual Scripts in (Mock) Jury Deliberation , 2009 .

[26]  Louise Ellison,et al.  Turning Mirrors Into Windows?Assessing the Impact of (Mock) Juror Education in Rape Trials , 2009 .

[27]  Louise Ellison,et al.  Reacting to rape: Exploring mock jurors' assessments of complainant credibility. , 2008 .

[28]  Rachel K. Cush,et al.  The Influence of Limiting Instructions on Processing and Judgments of Emotionally Evocative Evidence , 2006 .

[29]  S. Sofaer,et al.  Qualitative Research Methods , 2011, QMiP Bulletin.

[30]  P. Easteal.  Balancing the Scales: Rape, Law Reform and Australian Culture , 1998 .

[31]  Timothy D. Wilson,et al.  Mental contamination and mental correction: unwanted influences on judgments and evaluations. , 1994, Psychological bulletin.

[32]  N. W. Allen.  The Treatise on the Laws and Customs of the Realm of England commonly called Glanvill , 1983 .