This article references rape and sexual assault.
Should juries be used in rape and sexual abuse trials? Yesterday (2 July), Sean Combs, also known as Diddy, was found not guilty on the most serious charges in his trial, including the sex trafficking of Casandra Ventura and ‘Jane’, an anonymous claimant. He was found guilty of two counts of transportation to engage in prostitution.
As the verdicts were being announced, a party broke out outside the courthouse. Combs' supporters chanted his name, danced, and even covered themselves in baby oil – a grim reference to the large amounts of baby oil discovered at Combs' residence, which, many witnesses alleged, was involved in the music mogul's drug-fuelled sex marathons, or ‘freak-offs’.
Combs’s lawyer Marc Agnifilo called the verdict a “great victory” and said the jury “got the situation right – or certainly right enough” as he stood outside the federal court following the verdict. “Today is a victory of all victories,” he added.
UltraViolet, a US-based women's rights organisation, described the verdict as a “stain on a criminal justice system that for decades has failed to hold accountable abusers,” adding that it’s an "indictment of a culture in which not believing women and victims of sexual assault remains endemic.”
In such a misogynistic culture, do we really trust juries – comprised of ordinary people, selected at random – to deliver justice for survivors of rape and sexual abuse?
“Even within feminist communities, there is a lack of outrage for our trauma, our abuse, our mistreatment.”
The issue has previously been debated in the UK, particularly in Scotland. In 2023, the Scottish National Party recommended a temporary pilot scheme to research whether no-jury trials are more effective for prosecuting rape cases. Ultimately, the scheme was scrapped before it could be tested.
Across the UK, those accused of rape and sexual assault are tried by a jury, meaning the evidence for their alleged crimes is examined by a group or ordinary members of the public (12 in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland; 15 in Scotland), who ultimately determine whether they are found innocent, guilty, or sometimes, as in Scotland, “not proven.”
The SNP's proposals were met with derision from some of the legal profession, with the bar associations in Glasgow and Edinburgh each voicing their opposition; and Lady Hale, formerly president of the Supreme Court, and Wendy Joseph, a former Old Bailey judge, warning against the pilot (via Scottish Legal News).
However, some feminist campaigners and legal professionals support the pilot on the basis that jurors in rape trials are too often swayed by rape myths – such as the idea that victims were ‘asking for it’ based on their clothes, alcohol consumption, or whether they flirted with the accused – which prejudice their verdicts.
Here, Glamour deep-dives into the controversy surrounding no-jury rape trials, featuring expertise from Dr Charlotte Proudman, an award-winning barrister known for her feminist advocacy; Danielle Vincent, a lawyer in the sex abuse team at Hugh James Solicitors; and Lucia Osbourne-Crowley, an author and legal reporter.
He's been charged with sex trafficking and racketeering.
What's the problem with juries in rape trials?
Juries have been a mainstay of English common law since the Middle Ages, when trial by ordeal or combat (in which the defendant was subject to a painful experience or forced to fight – often to the death) was gradually phased out in favour of trial by jury.
In the UK, anyone accused of a serious crime (such as rape or other sexual offences) is generally entitled to a trial by jury, which means the evidence is considered by a group of – theoretically – impartial citizens who can then deliver a non-biased verdict.
Trial by jury is widely regarded as a linchpin of a truly democratic society, but it's not without fault. An enduring justification for juries is that they're comprised of ordinary folk – just like you or me – which reduces the potential for corruption. However – just like you or me – ordinary people are subject to all kinds of societal biases that may prejudice their interpretation of the evidence.
And sadly, myths about rape and sexual violence are still all too common across society. In a consultation, The Law Commission notes that “myths and misconceptions about rape and sexual assault still contaminate aspects of the trial process” before calling for more evidence about how these myths may impact juries' decision-making.
Conviction rates for rape and other sexual offences are disturbingly low. In Scotland, only 51% of rape and attempted rape trials result in a conviction, compared to a 91% overall conviction rate. In England and Wales, reporting a rape is “effectively a lottery” (per Dame Vera Baird), with only one in 100 rapes recorded by police in 2021 resulting in a charge that same year (per Rape Crisis).
While the government's Rape Review progress update in December 2022 notes that adult rape convictions increased from 68.3% in January to March 2022 to 69.1% from April to June 2022, the figures are still crushingly low.
It's clear that more radical change is needed, which is where no-jury rape trials come in.
Do we care more about trauma or the performance of trauma?
The idea was floated by the Labour MP Ann Coffey in 2018, who described the “scales of justice” as being “tipped against the victim” in rape trials.
After The Guardian published figures that less than a third of prosecutions brought by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) against young men resulted in a conviction (in 2018), Coffey argued that “a perfect storm” was developing in which “juries are reluctant to convict young men charged with rape.”
She notes that this has the knock-on effect of deterring the CPS from prosecuting; and in turn; the police are “reluctant to refer.”
“The result of this is that victims will stop coming forward, and justice will be denied.”
The controversy has rumbled on with the SNP’s Victims, Witnesses and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill, which aims “improve the experiences of victims and witnesses within Scotland's justice system, especially the victims of sexual crime.”
The bill sets out plans to implement a “pilot of single judge trials for cases of rape and attempted rape to take place to gather evidence on their effectiveness.” The measure is based on a review by Lady Dorrian, which noted that “juries lacked education to understand the unique complexities of rape cases,” such as “lacking knowledge of victim behaviour, rape trauma and forensic science.”
What are the main criticisms of rape trials without juries?
The SNP's proposed pilot scheme was criticised by many senior legal professionals who are concerned it may infringe on the defendant's right to a fair trial, increase the potential for bias, and be vulnerable to political pressure.
The chairman of the Scottish Criminal Bar Association, Tony Lenehan KC, wrote that the measures were "driven by ideology rather than evidence," describing them as “anti-democratic, short-termist and essentially unjust.”
Furthermore, a 2023 analysis by University College London found that juries in England and Wales (the research didn't look at the impact on Scottish juries) are more likely to convict than acquit a defendant once a rape case reaches court – and that this has been the case for at least 15 years.
Explaining the findings, Professor Thomas (UCL Laws), Director of the UCL Jury Project, said, “It’s clear that there are serious problems with how rape complaints are handled by police and how long cases take to reach court. But juries are not responsible for this.
“They can only decide the cases put to them, and this research shows that if rape complainants can put their evidence to a jury, they have a good likelihood of securing a conviction.”
Survivors, including those of domestic violence and sexual abuse, deserve more.
What are the proposed benefits of rape trials without juries?
As well as highlighting the potential pitfalls of no-jury rape trials, Lady Dorrian's review notes that the measure could improve the justice system for complainants by avoiding juror bias, making the process less confrontational, and making the court procedure less expensive and time-consuming.
Danielle Vincent, a lawyer in the sex abuse team at Hugh James Solicitors, tells Glamour, “Any change to the trial process which not only increases potential conviction rates but also reports of sexual abuse/assaults to the police must be considered a positive move," adding, “The focus of any criminal trial must be of course a fair trial but one that also protects the victim from further damage in the form of psychological injury through the trial process.”
Dr Charlotte Proudman, a barrister renowned for her feminist advocacy, told Glamour, "If judges hear rape trials instead of jurors, it could increase convictions. However, it is important that judges are trained in rape myths, stereotypes, memory and trauma.
“If we look at family court or civil courts, judges determine rape allegations rather than jurors. Lessons can be learned from other jurisdictions, and it is certainly worth exploring given that we live in a context where rape has almost become de-criminalised.”
Lucia Osborne-Crowley, a legal reporter who has also written extensively about her experience of sexual violence, agrees, noting, “It's important for our law reform bodies take a close look at the possibility of removing juries from rape trials as part of a sweeping, necessary reform to how the criminal justice system deals with rape.”
She adds, "This is a complex legal issue that requires careful consideration, but we do know, for example, that rape convictions are too often undermined by what are known as "rape myths" held by many jurors."
Aside from piloting no-jury rape trials, Osborne-Crowley notes that rape myths continue to stifle successful convictions. “I think we need to do a lot more to understand and combat rape myths held in society,” she explains.
“Whether we continue with jury trials or pilot bench trials for rape if a significant proportion of the population holds these beliefs, we will always risk these rape myths undermining fair convictions.”
For more information about reporting and recovering from rape and sexual abuse, you can contact Rape Crisis on 0808 500 2222.
If you have been sexually assaulted, you can find your nearest Sexual Assault Referral Centre here. You can also find support at your local GP, and voluntary organisations such as Rape Crisis, Women's Aid, and Victim Support, and you can report it to the police (if you choose) here.
For more from Glamour UK's Lucy Morgan, follow her on Instagram @lucyalexxandra.
The resources and helplines you need to know.
