In a significant reversal, the Scottish government has abruptly terminated a pilot program aimed at establishing juryless trials for rape cases—an innovative initiative that sought to address alarmingly low conviction rates for sexual assault prosecutions—following intense criticism from top legal professionals throughout the country.
Advocates for victims of sexual violence expressed profound disappointment at the abandonment of this proposal, which, if implemented, would have positioned Scotland as the pioneer within the UK to experiment with specialized courts and trials led exclusively by judges in cases of serious sexual offenses.
The initiative had received endorsement from Lady Dorrian, Scotland’s second highest-ranking judge, but it faced a wave of backlash from legal circles, prompting lawyers’ associations across Scotland to consider a nearly unanimous boycott of the pilot program.
This pilot was part of a broader agenda introduced by former First Minister Humza Yousaf and Justice Minister Angela Constance last year, aiming for fundamental reforms within the legal system, including the controversial proposal to eliminate the “not proven” verdict—a change that had been hailed as “transformative” by advocates and survivors of sexual assault at the time.
During an update to the Holyrood parliament on Thursday, Minister Constance remarked that there was “clearly not enough parliamentary support” for the juryless trial pilot, while expressing continued concern over “substantial evidence that juries may be influenced by rape myths” that have historically clouded judgment in such cases.
Rape myths encompass entrenched stereotypes and prejudiced beliefs regarding the behavior of sexual assault survivors—for instance, the misguided perception that a lack of physical resistance or a failure to call for help signifies that an assault was not of a serious nature.
Minister Constance later announced plans to amend the bill to facilitate more comprehensive research into the processes behind jury deliberations, coupled with initiatives aimed at dismantling pervasive rape myths—including the potential development of educational programs targeting jurors and the public.
Sandy Brindley, the Chief Executive of Rape Crisis Scotland, responded to the news with disappointment, stating that the decision to eliminate the judge-led trial pilot—considered a cornerstone of the reform bill—was a significant setback. She emphasized the critical need for juries to render decisions based solely on the evidence they are presented with, rather than being swayed by misleading assumptions surrounding rape.
Brindley did, however, recognize the research into jury decision-making in rape cases as “a very positive step,” highlighting the need for ongoing efforts to improve the judicial process.
This announcement follows a landmark ruling by Scottish judges, which determined that the emotional distress exhibited by a complainant in front of a witness can serve as corroborative evidence in determining whether a rape occurred—an evolution that is anticipated to lead to an increase in cases being heard in court.
Corroboration mandates that prosecutors present an additional, independent source of evidence to substantiate claims of criminal activity, which may come from either forensic analysis or witness testimonies. This requirement, along with the unique feature of the “not proven” verdict, has been a focal point of concern among advocacy groups pushing for reforms in how sexual assault cases are prosecuted in Scotland.
The Lord Advocate, Dorothy Bain KC, had called for this pivotal change in the aftermath of two high-profile sexual offense trials last year that culminated in acquittals.
-
Information and support for anyone affected by rape or sexual abuse issues is available from the following organisations. In the UK, Rape Crisis offers support on 0808 500 2222 in England and Wales, 0808 801 0302 in Scotland, or 0800 0246 991 in Northern Ireland. In the US, Rainn offers support on 800-656-4673. In Australia, support is available at 1800Respect (1800 737 732). Other international helplines can be found at ibiblio.org/rcip/internl.html
The claims made by a victim in sexual assault cases, a requirement that has long been criticized as a barrier to justice.
### Interview with Sandy Brindley, Chief Executive of Rape Crisis Scotland
**Interviewer:** Thank you for joining us, Sandy. The Scottish government has recently decided to terminate the pilot program for juryless trials in rape cases. Can you share your initial thoughts on this decision?
**Sandy Brindley:** Thank you for having me. I must express my profound disappointment regarding the government’s decision. The juryless trial pilot was seen as a significant and necessary step toward reforming a justice system that has struggled to provide fair outcomes for survivors of sexual violence. Abandoning this initiative not only undermines the voices of victims but also misses an opportunity to challenge the misconceptions that frequently influence jury decisions.
**Interviewer:** The program had received support from prominent legal figures, including Lady Dorrian. What do you think contributed to the backlash from legal associations?
**Sandy Brindley:** It’s clear that the proposal stirred deep concerns within the legal community. Many lawyers are understandably protective of existing trial processes, and there has been significant resistance to moving away from traditional jury structures. However, this program was specifically designed to address the troubling issues of bias and misunderstanding that historically affect jury decisions in sexual assault cases.
**Interviewer:** Minister Angela Constance has mentioned plans to focus on dismantling rape myths through research and educational initiatives. How do you view this approach?
**Sandy Brindley:** It’s certainly a step in the right direction. Understanding how rape myths influence jury deliberations is crucial. An educational effort aimed at both jurors and the public can help shift perceptions about sexual violence, empowering juries to base their decisions on evidence rather than stereotypes. However, I firmly believe that systemic change, like the proposed juryless trials, is equally vital for a comprehensive overhaul of the justice system.
**Interviewer:** Considering this setback, what do you believe are the next steps for advocates of sexual assault survivors in Scotland?
**Sandy Brindley:** It’s essential that we maintain momentum on the broader reform agenda. Advocates must continue to push for concrete changes within the legal framework, including revisiting the elimination of the “not proven” verdict. We also need to engage with lawmakers to ensure that any future proposals address the genuine needs of survivors and reflect a commitment to a fair legal process.
**Interviewer:** Thank you, Sandy, for sharing your insights with us today. Your perspective on these important issues is invaluable.
**Sandy Brindley:** Thank you for having me. It’s vital we continue this dialogue to ensure justice for survivors.
