'You lured him in': Rape myths and what we still get wrong about sexual assault

After a long wait of five years, Ellie found herself in a courtroom, ready to share her painful story against the man who had assaulted her. She had been warned that the defense team would do everything possible to undermine her credibility. However, nothing could prepare her for the intense questioning she faced. When the jury was shown CCTV footage of her in a bar, adjusting her top, Ellie felt overwhelmed. She had to explain to a group of strangers that she was simply adjusting her clothing because of her body. The implications of the questioning made her anxious, leading her to wonder if the jury thought she was trying to be provocative. Unfortunately, Ellie’s experience is not unique. Research shows that a significant number of sexual assault victims are subjected to questions in court that are based on harmful myths and stereotypes about rape. These questions often focus on what the victim did to prevent the assault, whether they had been drinking or using drugs, and what they were wearing at the time. In Ellie’s case, the defense attorney suggested that her assault was merely the result of a drunken night out that she later regretted. The narrative painted by the defense was not only misleading but also deeply hurtful. Ellie had gone home alone after her night out, and a friend confirmed this in court. The next morning, she woke up to find her attacker on top of her. Her rapist, who had a history of offenses, was sentenced to 19 years in prison for his crimes against her and another victim. Despite the horror of her experience, Ellie considers herself one of the fortunate ones. Statistics reveal that for every 100 rapes reported to the police in England and Wales, only a small fraction leads to charges. One of the reasons for this is the lengthy wait victims endure before their cases are heard in court. After reporting the assault, victims can wait months or even years for their attacker to be charged. On average, it takes about two years for a case to reach trial, according to the Criminal Bar Association. This prolonged process can be incredibly distressing for victims, who often fear that their past will be scrutinized in court to discredit them. Research into public attitudes towards rape and sexual offenses indicates that many people hold misconceptions about these crimes. A study found that fewer than half of those surveyed could identify common rape myths, and one in ten believed it was up to women to take precautions against rape. Additionally, half of the respondents either agreed or were unsure that someone who had been drinking or using drugs should bear some responsibility if they were raped. Only a third of those surveyed believed that women rarely fabricate allegations of rape. Evidence shows that false allegations of rape or sexual assault are extremely rare. The nature of rape as a crime makes it particularly challenging to prove in court. Kama Melly KC, who heads the rape and serious sexual offenses division for the Criminal Bar Association, explains that most of the time, there are no witnesses or CCTV footage. Furthermore, forensic evidence is often lacking because, in most cases, consent is the primary defense. It is also uncommon for victims to have visible injuries from non-consensual sexual activity. This means that cases often come down to one person's word against another's, which can be difficult to navigate. The legal definition of rape is not just about sex without consent; it also involves the perpetrator not reasonably believing that the victim was consenting. When it comes to the questioning of victims, it is the defense attorney's responsibility to advocate for their client. However, this can lead to the victim being subjected to unfair questioning based on societal beliefs. If society continues to hold women accountable for their actions, such as being drunk and going home with a man, this can influence how cases are handled in court. Victims should have the opportunity to defend themselves against false claims made by the defense. Ultimately, it is the judge's role to intervene if questioning becomes excessive or irrelevant. But what happens when a victim feels that the judge is also perpetuating harmful myths? Leila, another victim, was left feeling shocked by the comments made by her judge during her case. Although the judge sentenced her abuser to three years in prison after he pleaded guilty to multiple charges, Leila felt that the judge's remarks were inappropriate. The judge made comments about Leila sleeping in her abuser's bed without underwear, which made her feel uncomfortable and judged. Leila expressed that she should be able to feel safe in her own skin without being scrutinized. The judge also suggested that Leila had reluctantly consented to sex as part of their relationship, which she found deeply upsetting. Leila's lawyer argued that the judge had diminished the severity of the offenses by using stereotypes and failing to treat Leila fairly. They appealed the sentence, but the court ultimately decided that the judge had considered the relevant factors when making the decision. Many people are now asking what can be done to ensure that victims like Ellie and Leila do not have to endure similar experiences. Victim Support is advocating for the courts to intervene when cross-examination becomes inappropriate and subjects witnesses to unwarranted attacks on their character. They also want to see the Crown Court Compendium updated with the latest research on understanding sexual violence. The goal is to reduce the time it takes for cases to reach court, allowing victims to complete the process without the fear of their memories being exploited. Additionally, a new training course is being introduced for barristers who work on cases involving trauma. This training will help them understand the effects of trauma on witnesses and how to treat them with respect. It will also provide guidance on how to prepare victims for the questioning process, ensuring they feel more comfortable and supported. The hope is that these changes will improve the experience for victims in court and help them feel empowered rather than disempowered.