Judging Juries: The Common Sense Conundrums of Prosecuting Violence against Women

Abstract

The jury plays a pivotal role within many criminal justice systems. It has often been lauded for its unique ability to ensure the involvement of, and accountability to, members of the public in the application of criminal laws to citizens. At the same time, however, what goes on in the jury room has remained remarkably opaque. We know little about the nature and content of jury deliberations, about how legal tests are understood and applied therein, and about what persuasive strategies are most effective in securing a verdict. Over the past two decades, I — together with colleagues — have conducted several studies, using trial simulations, designed to explore jurors’ approach to decision-making in rape cases. In this article, I reflect on the key findings from that work and situate them in the context of ongoing international dialogue about both how to respond to the “justice gap” in rape cases, and what to do about juries.