Rape survivors' doubts over juryless trials pilot

The Victims, Witnesses and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill is intended to give more support to victims of crime, which would include establishing a specialist sexual offences court and scrapping the not proven verdict.

It would also reduce the number of jurors reduced from 15 to 12 of which a minimum of eight would be required to find a person guilty before they can be convicted.

READ MORE: What are the plans for sexual offences courts in Scotland?

The bill also proposes a time limited pilot for a single judge without a jury to preside over trials for cases of rape.

Scottish Conservative MSP Russell Findlay asked the three women whether they would have preferred that their cases were heard by a single judge rather than by a jury.

Ms McLaughlan, whose rapist was convicted, said she was "on the fence" about the juryless pilot plan and had some reservations about specialist sexual offences court. In terms of sexual offences courts she was concerned the move could increase delays in dealing with cases while she was concerned over bias if a case was heard by a single judge sitting without a jury.

"I sit on the fence regarding specialist courts and judge only trials not because I don't think it's a good idea, but because I'm aware of the time constraints and time frames of dealing with these cases would be widened. 

READ MORE: Lord Advocate defends proposed pilot for juryless trials

"If you think you have 25 courts and they are stripped down to just two that are specialised [with] the amount of rapes that we see every year that's quickly gonna build up a backlog, which is still going to result in the length of delay," she said.

"I would be concerned about the potential bias of a single judge only trial. The benefit to having a duty is that there's different points of views, different opinions, ideas can be expressed and explored and discussed to their full extent."

She added that another survivor she had spoken to, who was unable to come to the meeting today, also had reservations about judge only trials.

Instead, she said the make up of a jury could be an issue rather than the jury system itself and pointed to her own case when the trial was made up mostly of young males, who she believed may have been sympathetic to the accused, who was also a young man. 

Rape survivor Ellie Wilson and First Minister Humza Yousaf. Photo PA.

She added that juries may not always appreciate how complainers may act and they may expect them to break down while giving evidence. She said such misunderstanding could create a false perception among jurors of the effect of a crime on a victim.

Survivor Ellie Wilson, who also saw her rapist convicted, raised concerns about the reduction in the number of jury members from 15 to 12.

She said there was "no doubt" that the pilot of juryless trials was "controversial", that survivors were divided on the issue though she said she had no strong views on the matter.

READ MORE: Defence lawyers say juryless trials pilot 'an affront to justice'

However, she said many changes could have been made to improve the situation for complainers already and increase conviction rates for sexual offences.

"Something I do feel strongly about is there's about 100 other issues that we should have already addressed, which would have improved conviction rates, improve the process that haven't been done that have been ongoing for years," she said.

"I don't understand why we're not addressing some of these issues which are much which would create much broader consensus, which would be much easier to resolve."

Ms Wilson said she believes reducing the number of jurors could be "extremely detrimental for conviction rates".

She said: "In my case I had a taped confession of my rapist confessing to raping me, and I still didn't get a unanimous verdict, I got a verdict by majority."

Concerns were raised about whether moving sexual offences cases to a specialist court from the High Court could run the risk of downgrading their seriousness.

Last week the Lord Advocate told the committee what on average each case cost the prosecution service at the different courts with High Court cases costing £75,000, while cases heard in the sheriff court cost around £7,234. She estimated that each while each cases in the sexual offences court would cost £37,157.

Asked by SNP MSP Rona Mackay whether she would be reassured that this would not be the case, Ms Wilson said she agreed in principle with sexual offences courts.

However, she suggested the courts could be called the "Specialist High Court" to reflect the gravity of the crimes prosecuted there.

During their evidence to the committee, the survivors also told how they were treated as an "afterthought" by the criminal justice system, which left them feeling like an "outsider" or just "a bit of evidence" and spoke about the need for more support to be given to complainers in such cases.

The committee's convener Audrey Nicoll, the SNP MSP, said it is "very important to hear the views of survivors of sexual crimes who have personal experience of the criminal justice system".

Ms Wilson said: "We are treated like outsiders throughout the whole process."

She said the whole justice system needs to be "survivor-centric", adding that at the moment "it is as if victims are an afterthought".

Speaking about how the defence lawyer in her attacker's trial made her feel, she said: "I felt humiliated, I felt abused, I felt like I was treated like a criminal."

Ms McLaughlan spoke out about the need for change in the justice system along with other women who were attacked by the same serial rapist.

She told MSPs she felt "treated as a bit of evidence" during the court process - which resulted in Logan Doig being jailed for nine-and-a-half years.

She said: "I would say to people, I have endured trauma from my abuser but also from the system that is supposed to provide me with justice, and that is not acceptable and needs to change.

"When you are on the witness stand you should not be made to feel embarrassed, humiliated or undermined by someone.

"You are made to feel as if you are a bit of evidence that just gets put on a shelf and is brought out when you are needed and you are just disregarded afterwards."

She added complainers can be left feeling like they are "a miniscule part" of the justice process, saying: "It is your whole life, the lead up to it is all you are thinking about, but you are made to feel so small, such a small part of the process."

Ms McCann, who was also attacked by Doig, said: "As it stands the criminal justice system is built on a game of chance, from who you report to, right through to your case preparer, your fiscal, to your advocate, to your judge to your jury.

"It's a postcode lottery with a severe lack of consistency regarding procedures, support and trauma informed practice, and that's what needs to change."Other witnesses raised concerns about the plans to introduce judge-only trials for those accused of rape and attempted rape.

Sarah Ashby said: "I don't think having a single judge is in my personal opinion the way to go. I feel like there should be a jury. Whether it needs to be on the scale and size it is now I'm not sure.

"Personally if I was to go through this again, I would feel more comforted by having a jury than it being a single person making that decision about my life."

Ms Wilson meanwhile suggested the Bill should be changed to give abuse survivors a legal right to psychological support, telling MSPs: "Surely we could ringfence some funding for victims of the most serious crimes, who have actually taken that step to pursue justice, to actually provide some form of support for them, and I think that should be enshrined as a right in law."

All the women have waived their right to anonymity.