Rape Myths in the Courtroom

Juror characteristics on trial: Investigating how psychopathic traits, rape attitudes, victimization experiences, and juror demographics influence decision-making in an intimate partner rape trial

“…Vast theorizing has sought to understand why sexual violence continues to be perpetrated so frequently in an effort to explain prevalence and attrition rates within the CJS. Empirical evidence lends substantial support to the premise that widespread gender inequality and male dominance serve to normalize social and cultural acceptance of sexual violence against women and the misconceptions which surround sexual offenses ( 13 – 17 ). The prominence of factually incorrect, universally applied assumptions, beliefs, and attitudes which surround the circumstances of rape and sexual violence act as facilitators of societal ignorance toward such crimes and serve to normalize and misinform the public and professionals about the realities of rape, typically conceptualized as rape myths ( 18 – 20 ).…”

The exposition of rape in Cyprus: From the crime scene to the court room

“…Regrettably, victims’ resistance of rape is quintessential for proving the latter's rape, as (victim-blaming) stereotypes such as ‘she had it coming’ or ‘deep inside she wanted it’ (McMahon and Farmer, 2011) foster a not-real-victim discourse (Christie, 1986) and, lamentably, need to be rebutted, for they seem to influence the criminal procedure (Campbell and Fehler-Cabral, 2022; Constantinou, 2021; Hine and Murphy, 2019; Shaw et al, 2017; Wentz, 2020), as well as the outcome of court cases (Daly, 2022; Temkin et al, 2018).…”

“…Additional research supports that tonic immobility may come to the surface in as high as 37% of the reactions of rape victims (Galliano et al, 1993) and, though it increases the possibilities of rape completion, it lessens the odds of physical injuries (de Heer and Jones, 2017), as well as curtailing the likelihood of reporting rape to the authorities (Pinciotti and Seligowski, 2021). Regrettably, victims' resistance of rape is quintessential for proving the latter's rape, as (victimblaming) stereotypes such as 'she had it coming' or 'deep inside she wanted it' (McMahon and Farmer, 2011) foster a not-real-victim discourse (Christie, 1986) and, lamentably, need to be rebutted, for they seem to influence the criminal procedure (Campbell and Fehler-Cabral, 2022;Constantinou, 2021;Hine and Murphy, 2019;Shaw et al, 2017;Wentz, 2020), as well as the outcome of court cases (Daly, 2022;Temkin et al, 2018).…”

“…Nevertheless, it should be emphasised that the time (and way) of reporting/externalising -or not (Caron and Mitchell, 2022;Koss, 1985)-such a traumatic experience differs from person to person (Belknap, 2010), and this is evidenced by the reporting variance detected in the findings of this study. In addition, it is worth bearing in mind that Cypriot courts, like English courts (Daly, 2022), place particular emphasis on the time that has elapsed between the rape incident and the complaint (first complaint), but also on the way this complaint is made (i.e., the psychological state of the victim when recounting her rape); facts that, unfortunately, may be misinterpreted (i.e., discrediting the prime witness's testimony) by the discursive predisposition of the Cypriot courts (Charalambous, 2015), in case the victim does not report the incident shortly after its completion.…”