Rape Myths and Verdict Systems: What Is Influencing Conviction Rates in Rape Trials in Scotland?

Abstract

The Scottish verdict system includes three verdicts: ‘guilty’, ‘not guilty’ and ‘not proven’. Politicians propose that the three-verdict system is partially to blame for the low conviction rate of rape, whereas research suggests that rape myths may be having a larger impact. To test the effects of varying verdict systems (guilty, not guilty and not proven; guilty and not guilty; a series of proven and not proven verdicts) and rape myths on juror verdicts. A total of 180 participants answered questions regarding their acceptance of rape myths using the Acceptance of Modern Myth and Sexual Aggression (AMMSA) scale. They then watched a staged rape trial filmed in a real courtroom and reached a verdict. Participants also provided longer-form answers on which thematical analysis was conducted. The main findings are as follows: (1) The special verdict system leads to a higher conviction rate than the other systems when rape myth acceptance is controlled for. (2) The higher the rape myth acceptance, the more favourably the accused was perceived and the less favourably the complainer was perceived.

Keywords

• rape myths
• juror decision-making
• not proven verdict
• three-verdict system
• Scottish legal system
• jury reform