The impact of pre-recorded video and closed circuit television testimony by adult sexual assault complainants on jury decision-making: An experimental study

Abstract

ForewordSexual assault is regarded as one of the most serious crimes in our society. Perpetrators can receive lengthy sentences if successfully convicted and victims are often left traumatised both physically and psychologically. In 2003 the Australian Institute of Criminology interviewed 6677 women of whom four percent reported being the victim of sexual violence in the last 12 months and 11 percent had been a victim in the past five years. Despite condemnation of this crime another Institute study of 141 sexual assault case files from five jurisdictions found that 38 per cent of all cases were withdrawn from prosecution, 33 per cent of all cases were finalised by way of a guilty plea, 29 per cent of all cases proceeded to trial, and 38 percent of cases that proceeded to trial resulted in a guilty verdict.Increasing conviction rates is a key issue for the criminal justice system; so too is a genuine concern for the welfare of victims. The research that informs this report was commissioned by the New South Wales Attorney General's Department and resulted from a direct policy question: 'would the provision of evidence by an adult sexual assault victim, if given via a television monitor rather than face-to-face in the courtroom, influence the outcome that a jury would arrive at in determining guilt or innocence?'. The criminal justice system has come under criticism for re-victimising the victim through the means by which evidence is given and the lengthy appeal process that can occur from time to time. Others however have argued that the victim's face-to-face testimony is crucial to securing successful prosecutions.It is clearly a difficult research task to attempt to provide an objective and reliable evidence base on which to test this hypothesis.A randomised experiment was designed which involved 210 people participating in 18 mock trials. These jurors were randomly assigned to a particular mode of victim testimony -face-to-face, CCTV or video -and two styles of victim presentation -neutral or emotional.The key outcome from the study was that the mode of testimony did not have a meaningful impact on the jury outcomes. Nor was there any consistent impact on the jurors' perceptions or decisions from the victim's presentation style. However the study did find that jurors' personal beliefs, the requirement to convict beyond reasonable doubt and the difficulty in understanding what 'consent' meant were factors that influenced the jurors' deliberations in determining an outcome. None of the jury panels returned a guilty verdict.This work adds to the on-going research agenda on sexual assault that the Institute has been pursuing over the past three years. Funded by the Australian Government's Office for Women, continued funding into sexual assault research was renewed in the last budget.To date the Institute has published some key pieces of research that have focused on the Non-reporting and hidden recording of sexual assault, Recidivism of sexual offenders: rates, risk factors and treatment efficacy, Prosecutorial dec...

It is better, but does it look better? Prosecutor perceptions of using rape complainant investigative interviews as evidence

“…First, prosecutors were concerned that the use of the video-medium may detract from the persuasiveness of the evidence. This contrasts with research findings on child video testimony (see Davies, 1999) and the few studies on adult testimony that suggest any effects on credibility judgments and case outcome are negligible (Landstrom, Granhag, & Hartwig, 2005;Taylor & Joudo, 2005). Second, like police officers, prosecutors perceive the use of pre-recorded evidence improves the process for rape complainants (Westera et al, 2011a).…”

A systematic review of juries' assessment of rape victims: Do rape myths impact on juror decision-making?

“…Research has demonstrated that a judgement of credibility is more likely to be based on personal beliefs and attitudes than what a witness says. In a study involving 210 members of the public who participated in 18 mock trials Taylor and Joudo (2005) found that despite watching the same testimony juror opinions about credibility varied greatly and was mostly influenced by demographics, beliefs, expectations and attitudes about how a 'real' victim of rape would behave. In part this is evidenced by the common trends in verdicts amongst different demographic groups.…”

Falling Rape Conviction Rates: (Some) Feminist Aims and Measures for Rape Law

“…Jury attitudes are known to be a significant factor in conviction rates, through direct acquittals and 'up-stream' through defence decision-making regarding pleas and prosecutors' decisions to proceed with a case or not (see Brown et al 2007;Lievore 2004a). Major studies have analysed jury decision-making in sexual assault trials and confirmed that jurors typically make decisions with reference to a range of extra-legal factors, including rape myths, gender stereotypes, inferences drawn about the complainant or defendant and attitudes towards violence against women generally (see Ellison and Munro 2009;Taylor 2007;Temkin and Krahé 2008;Taylor and Joudo 2005). The inability of statutory reform to displace from the criminal justice process rape myths and community attitudes that support or minimise violence against women is likely to be a significant factor contributing to low conviction rates in rape cases.…”