Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorHelm, R
dc.date.accessioned2023-04-24T07:21:39Z
dc.date.issued2023-06-01
dc.date.updated2023-04-22T09:35:51Z
dc.description.abstractIn many common law jurisdictions, the jury have a key role to play in adjudicating cases involving serious sexual offences. Key aspects of these offences can often only be evaluated through scrutiny of complainant and defendant testimony, without strong corroborative evidence. Concerns have been raised about the appropriateness of the jury to perform this scrutiny, primarily due to the potential influence of “rape myths” (also known as “false assumptions”) on jury decisions. This article cohesively examines how jurors are likely to function in assessing complainant and defendant credibility absent strong corroborating evidence in an attempt to move the discussion in this area beyond rape myth endorsement only. It draws on findings identified from a review of research on determinations of truth in basic and applied cognitive science and accompanying theory to suggest that assessment of credibility is likely to be a constructive process undertaken by amalgamating a range of context with statements themselves., and to highlight how systematic biases and misconceptions may feed into decision-making through this process. It concludes by drawing on the analysis to suggest that the jury can be an appropriate decision-making body in cases involving serious sexual offences but that evidence-based policy is needed to guide the function of the jury to ensure consistency with normative legal goals.en_GB
dc.description.sponsorshipUK Research and Innovationen_GB
dc.identifier.citationIssue 6 (2023), pp. 399-410en_GB
dc.identifier.grantnumberMR/T02027X/1en_GB
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10871/132980
dc.identifierORCID: 0000-0003-1429-3847 (Helm, Rebecca)
dc.language.isoenen_GB
dc.publisherSweet & Maxwellen_GB
dc.rights© 2023. This version is made available under the CC-BY 4.0 license: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/  en_GB
dc.subjectCredibility
dc.subjectCriminal evidence
dc.subjectJurisprudence
dc.subjectJurors
dc.subjectRape
dc.subjectSexual offences
dc.subjectVictims
dc.titleConstructing truth in the jury box in serious sexual offence casesen_GB
dc.typeArticleen_GB
dc.date.available2023-04-24T07:21:39Z
dc.identifier.issn0011-135X
dc.descriptionThis is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available via Westlaw UKen_GB
dc.identifier.journalCriminal Law Reviewen_GB
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/en_GB
dcterms.dateAccepted2023-04-20
dcterms.dateSubmitted2023-02-22
rioxxterms.versionAMen_GB
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2023-04-20
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Reviewen_GB
refterms.dateFCD2023-04-22T09:35:53Z
refterms.versionFCDAM
refterms.dateFOA2023-07-28T14:56:35Z
refterms.panelCen_GB


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

© 2023. This version is made available under the CC-BY 4.0 license: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/  
Except where otherwise noted, this item's licence is described as © 2023. This version is made available under the CC-BY 4.0 license: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/