Sex attack victim who sued over humiliation in witness box issues warning to courts (Scotland)

[IwantToRetire]

Shannon won £35,000 in damages after claiming her human rights were breached - and she believes more cases like hers may be on the way.

She claimed her human rights were breached when she was questioned over the length of her clothing and accused of drug dealing. And she believes a landmark ruling this month will spark more cases like hers.

It comes after five Supreme Court judges said excluding evidence about a complainant’s credibility or previous and subsequent sexual behaviour was “liable to result in violations of defendants’ rights to a fair trial”.

Shannon warned Scots courts may face an influx of legal claims if the rights of victims are not respected.

She said: “The way trials for sexual offence cases are held should have no room for error. But that hasn’t been the case. My PF, who was meant to look after me, failed me and the judge did not stop the defence either.

Full article https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/sex-attack-victim-who-sued-36290718

See also

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5407732-rape-and-abuse-survivors-clash-with-convicted-mens-rights-group-outside-scottish-parliament

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5436039-rape-sentencing-guidelines-will-enhance-consistency-scotland

The lawyers and judge obviously haven't seen the exhibition "what you were wearing". Not that that would matter though, I'm not sure we'll ever shake the All About Eve attitude.

I did wonder when posting whether the system in Scotland is worse than other parts of the UK.

Or whether it is that news media in Scotland makes more effor to cover issues like this. Or not even more effort, but compare to other news outlets who just aren't interested in women's issues they appear to do more. After all anything compared to nothing is something.

The fact that this is still acceptable twenty years after a 17 year old killed herself because she'd been made to hold up the underwear she'd been wearing the night she was raped and read the wording on the knickers is utterly appalling. The rapist in that case was found guilty but not before the victim was made to relive her trauma multiple times so the defence counsel could insinuate that the underwear she'd put on that day meant she must have consented.

I was sexually abused as a 15 year old by a family ‘friend.’ I had to go to court earlier this year as a witness. I was asked if I was a ‘wild child’ when being cross examined by his defence barrister. He asked if I had lots of house parties with my friends and if my friends were rough. It really pissed me off. Why does it matter what you were wearing or if you were a rebellious teenager?

So, so sorry that this happened to you.

I cant believe that in 2025 anyone in the legal system would ask questions like that.

Were you offered any support as a witness.

I am not sure if you can complain, but maybe contact someone like Centre for Women's Justice and see if they can help.
https://www.centreforwomensjustice.org.uk/

It doesnt. Of course it doesnt, the utter bastards.

Thanks for sending me the link. I will have a look at this. Not sure if anything can be done about it. The judge allowed it. Not sure how it was relevant. Thankfully in my case the guy was found guilty. I can’t imagine how it would feel to be grilled about stuff like this then have to deal with a not guilty verdict.

I had a lovely support worker who looked after me. I also had a lady from witness care in the box with me.

Thanks for your response.

And glad to know you did have some support.

And glad the man concerned was found guilty.

This is my local area, Lindsay was my age, it was absolutely fucking horrendous the treatment in court. I’m not a violent person, but wanted to slap someone who told me “the lawyer was just doing their job”

Sorry @Liverpool52 for hijacking your post

Not at all. I feel exactly the same. There's doing your job but every job has a line that shouldn't be crossed. Not cheating in sport, not committing fraud to make money for investment clients, not being clinically negligent as a surgeon. Clearly the line for the defence lawyer was wrong.