In 2020 rape prosecutions were more common in Scotland than in England, by 13% to 1.6% despite reports of rape being more than twice as high in England.
I’m not, this time, going to make much of that because the 13% level of prosecutions seems lower than it should be and the Scottish Government’s plans to pilot juryless trials is a very sensible thing to try out.
Since May 2023, the UK media in Scotland have pounced on the objections of some defence lawyers (What else would a defence lawyer do?) with a view to irresponsibly blocking another progressive SNP policy, intended to protect the vulnerable, just for the sake it.
Today, the Herald tries to give the story a wee blood injection with:
Juryless rape trial pilot in doubt as lawyers prepare to boycott
See that ‘prepare?’ There’s a ballot. No one knows how it will go.
What happens elsewhere in the UK?
Ironically in the light of the above figures:
In England and Wales, rape cases are heard by a judge and a panel of three lay assessors, who are trained to understand the complex legal issues involved in sexual assault cases. This system has been in place since 2019 and has been praised by some as a fairer and more equitable way of delivering justice in sexual assault cases.
https://www.open.edu/openlearn/society-politics-law/law/will-piloting-juryless-trials-rape-cases-scotland-lead-reduction-bias
Maybe someone, in the media even, should tell Scotland’s defence lawyers about this?
Other sources:
https://www.rapecrisisscotland.org.uk/resources-stats-key-info/#rlslider_4
Talking-up Scotland 'Albatraz' 
Thought that the “English” (Scottish) media would be happy that “Scotland comes into line with England”………,obviously not……..damned if you do damned if you don’t!!!
Vote for Scotland…It’s time to leave their asylum and westmonster bedlam, vote SNP it is our only chance!!!
LikeLiked by 5 people
It is not that the ‘Scottish’ media want Scots Law to be in line with England’s. What they want, as an end in itself, is to BLAME the Scottish Government. On the one hand, they have anti rape campaigners wanting to increase the rate of successful prosecutions and, on the other we have defence lawyers wanting to protect their defence arguments.
The media are not interested in facilitating a resolution.
At the heart of the issue is the requirement in Scots Law for corroboration.
Alasdair Macdonald
LikeLike
So let me get this straight, Hearald:
It’s all the Scottish Government’s fault (as usual) because lawyers don’t like the system that is marvelously employed elsewhere in our “muscular Union”?
Shurely shome mishtake.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Remove corroboration in rape trials would increase prosecutions and conviction.
Women who cohabit, the majority, do not have equal rights. If women who cohabit had equal rights, there would be less abused women. With more support.
LikeLike
A trial period!! what happens to the cases if it is decided it did not work can they accused or victims appeal??
Would it not be better to put the papers of current cases through a test court. i.e the existing court rules apply but the papers will be reviewed by judges and if over a year or so there is room for change then fine. At least you will not be putting innocent people in jail.
I wonder if they would have considered this had they found Mr Salmond guilty.
I see no reason to trust a privately educated establishment clone sitting in a wig and silk stockings over a bunch of jurors who in my experience take their decision very seriously.
LikeLike
Lay people with experience will be involved in the decision. Like a jury.
Rape prosecutions and convictions are too low. No justified.
LikeLike
Just because things happen in another country doesn’t make it a good thing. Getting rid of jury trials for any crime is not a good move, the administration of justice is not about increasing convictions rates or saving money. There are reasons why recorded rape conviction rates are low – some of the reasons are the way figures are recorded, some to do with the process of getting to trial but the most important reason is the nature of the crime itself – in the same way as it is difficult for the murdered corpse to give evidence in the trial of his murderer. Generally, rape trials are ‘she said he said’ without witnesses. Rape trials suffer because there are no witnesses and very little dispute over forensic evidence. Having some snob deciding who is guilty or not is a retrograde step, better to be judged by one’s peers, people who live the same kind of lives as those on trial, that’s why the system was introduced. This is another bad idea by the SNP and unfortunately there have been many.
LikeLike