The provenance of what is proven: exploring (mock) jury deliberation in Scottish rape trials

Chalmers, J. , Leverick, F. and Munro, V. E. (2021) The provenance of what is proven: exploring (mock) jury deliberation in Scottish rape trials. Journal of Law and Society, 48(2), pp. 226-249. (doi: 10.1111/jols.12287)

[img] Text
226566.pdf - Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.



This article presents findings from the largest research study of the nature of mock jury deliberations in rape cases undertaken in the UK to date – and the first such study to be undertaken in the Scottish context. The study found considerable evidence of the expression of problematic attitudes towards rape complainers. These included the belief that a ‘real’ rape victim would have extensive external and internal injuries and would resist attack by inflicting injuries on her attacker and shouting for help, that even a short delay in reporting a rape is suspicious, and that false allegations of rape are commonly made by women and difficult to refute. There was, however, also evidence that some jurors were willing to challenge these attitudes and that they often relied – explicitly or implicitly – on third‐sector campaigns to do so. The article concludes by drawing out the implications of this research for policy and practice.

Item Type:Articles
Glasgow Author(s) Enlighten ID:Chalmers, Professor James and Leverick, Professor Fiona
Authors: Chalmers, J., Leverick, F., and Munro, V. E.
College/School:College of Social Sciences > School of Law
Journal Name:Journal of Law and Society
ISSN (Online):1467-6478
Published Online:29 March 2021
Copyright Holders:Copyright © 2021 The Authors
First Published:First published in Journal of Law and Society 48(2): 226-249
Publisher Policy:Reproduced under a Creative Commons license

University Staff: Request a correction | Enlighten Editors: Update this record