Scotland: Jury less rape trials.

[ArabellaScott]

https://www.lawscot.org.uk/news-and-events/law-society-news/msp-s-report-shows-juryless-rape-trials-plan-divisive-and-flawed/

'A parliamentary report shows the Scottish Government’s plans for juryless rapes trials are divisive and flawed, according to the Law Society of Scotland.
The Scottish Parliament’s Criminal Justice Committee published its 197-page Stage 1 report on the Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill on Good Friday, 29 March 2024.
Support for a pilot of juryless rape trials was equally split among committee members, with four SNP members in favour while two Conservative and two Labour members believe it should not proceed.'

@IwantToRetire to be honest the upsetting part was not listening to the women recount their story’s as they were so similar to what I’ve heard from relatives and friends over the years. The upsetting part was listening to the men on that jury and being pretty sure at least three of them felt quite a lot of empathy for the accused and none for the victims. It made me realise, rather naively that there are a number of sex offenders in our society and they must end up sitting of jury’s too.

I totally agree. I also sat on a rape trial and all the men in the jury wanted to go for a not guilty vote. I found that quite shocking. I also thought the judge (male) was quite regretful about accepting a guilty verdict. I found the whole experience quite eye opening.

I was recently in the jury on a rape trial in Scotland and only a few people voted not proven and one of them was a woman so it wasn't just men. We found the man guilty majority for all 13 charges a few of which included rape so I can confirm the outcomes aren't always that the accused are not found guilty. It is very hard for a jury to prove these given there is always very little evidence as it happens behind closed doors. It's crap that so many must get away with it but I can understand there is also a chance some women could be lying and equally innocent people are charged. I'd hope not given all you need to go through but who knows.

It made me realise, rather naively that there are a number of sex offenders in our society and they must end up sitting of jury’s too.

Yes a worrying thought.

But in fact that is the flaw in the jury system. Even assuming the court part if unbiased and professionally presented, who the jury are is total chance.

People come with their own prejudices and history.

I don't think that's how it works sorry.
The police have a duty to investigate crime and pass their findings on to the prosecution service if they believe the evidence is strong enough. Both the police and prosecution ignore the presumed innocent, but for everyone else presumed innocent is the default legal position.
Presumed innocent simply does not apply to those two agencies because of their purpose. But they still have to follow due process.

To give an example of how strong this presumption is. In America during jury selection Voir dire one defense tactic to disqualify a juror the defense didn't like the look of used to be to ask "Is my client guily or innocent in you opinion?" It was a sort of trick question. Any answer other than "innocent" was sufficient grounds to have that juror disqualified. What might sound like a reasonable answer e.g. "I don't know I havn't heard any evidence yet." showed the juror didn't presume innocence, and that was grounds for disqualification.
I think they knocked this tactic on the head after a while, I think it was sailing a bit too close to the wind, but it illustrates the point. Presumed innocent is a cornerstone of the most legal processes. ( nb : excludes HMRC )

In an attempt to get this topic back on track. ( Given I'm a derailer )
Do you think Juryless trials will be more or less fair overall?
Better or worse?
Why?

I’m not against juryless trial in general. I don’t think we have any evidence that the jury system is a particularly good one, we are just left with it because it’s what we’ve done historically. Most of our criminal trials are in magistrate’s courts without a jury and they aren’t a seething hotbed of false guilty verdicts.

But rape cases need far greater resources and real will put in at the investigation stage. As the Beira’s place statement indicated, that is where rape victims are really let down. The budget for investigating sexual crimes is way below adequate and the techniques & standards of many police forces and individual officers are appalling.

One flaw I did find with the jury was by the time we reached the verdict day (a week and a half in) most people were desperate to end the jury duty as they had plans next week etc so I think a lot of people would favour just coming to a quick agreement rather than having long debates. That's not really what you want for important decisions

It seems by the time it gets to court, if it ever gets to court, it's far too fucking late.

I can only think the work has to happen much further upstream. I know there is a fair bit in the curriculum on consent, for example. No idea what effect this will have, whether it'll be enough to counter the effect of pornification and rape culture.

One of the issue with seeing the solution to low conviction rates being to change the culture is that getting more rape convictions will be one of the best ways to change the culture. Rape myths flourish to a significant extent because so many men get away with rape and other sexual assaults.

Yes, I can see that. I just don't know how it can be tackled, legally.

I do also get the feeling that the Scotgov approach is to aim for legal solutions to problems that may not be best solved in court.

Not sure that anyone will care but this is a press release from Rape Crisis Scotland https://www.rapecrisisscotland.org.uk/news/news/our-response-to-the-stage-one-report-on-the-victims-witnesses-and-justice-reform-bill/

'It is disappointing to see the split in the Committee on the judge led pilot. There is overwhelming evidence about the impact of rape myths on jury decision making. These are deeply ingrained views about what a ‘real’ rape is or how a ‘real’ victim would look or behave. There is a real perception among jury members that ‘false allegations are routine’ and that delay in reporting, and/or a lack of physical injury is indicative of a false allegation. It is clear that action is required.
We had grave concerns about the Bill’s proposal to increase the proportion of jurors required for a conviction. Conviction rates for rape are already the lowest of any crime type in Scotland. It would be devastating if a bill introduced with the aim of improving complainers’ experiences of the justice process actually made it more difficult to access justice after rape. This is what the change in jury majority would have meant, and we are very relieved to see the Committee reject this.'

From the Rape Crisis statement.

It's a really tough dilemma.