Lundrigan Samantha, Dhami Mandeep K, Agudelo Kelly
Anglia Ruskin University, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Middlesex University, London, United Kingdom.
Front Psychol. 2019 Mar 29;10:526. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00526. eCollection 2019.
Despite there being no legal distinction between different types of rapes (e.g., those committed by strangers to the victim versus those committed by perpetrators known to the victim), stereotypical beliefs about rape have meant that these can be treated differently by the justice system. The aim is to explore the factors that predict juries' decisions to convict or acquit in stranger rape cases. : We measured the importance of a range of 20 perpetrator-, victim-, and offense-related factors in predicting outcomes for 394 stranger rape cases tried by a jury. A four-stage analytic process was employed: (a) Kendall's tau-b measured intercorrelations among the factors (predictors); (b) Chi-square and Welch -tests measured associations between factors and verdicts; (c) binary logistic regression measured the power of factors in predicting verdicts; and (d) Stein's formula was used to cross-validate the model. Jury verdicts were predicted by five offense-related factors and one victim-related factor. None of the perpetrator-related factors were significant predictors of convictions for stranger rape. The findings have potential implications for victims of stranger rape, as well as prosecution and courtroom policy. We show that if a perpetrator is identified and charged, the likelihood of securing a conviction by a jury is high for victims of stranger rape. We suggest that prosecutors could gather as much information as possible from victims about the factors found to be of importance to juries, and judges could instruct juries on assumptions about the characteristics of the offense in order to challenge incorrect beliefs and stereotypes. Ultimately, this could be used to encourage victims of stranger rape to report and testify in court.
尽管不同类型的强奸（例如，由受害者的陌生人实施的强奸与由受害者认识的犯罪者实施的强奸）在法律上没有区别，但关于强奸的刻板观念意味着司法系统可能会对它们区别对待。目的是探讨在陌生人强奸案中预测陪审团定罪或无罪判决的因素。我们衡量了一系列20个与犯罪者、受害者和罪行相关的因素在预测由陪审团审理的394起陌生人强奸案结果方面的重要性。采用了一个四阶段分析过程：（a）肯德尔tau-b系数衡量因素（预测变量）之间的相互关系；（b）卡方检验和韦尔奇检验衡量因素与判决之间的关联；（c）二元逻辑回归衡量因素在预测判决方面的能力；（d）斯坦因公式用于对模型进行交叉验证。陪审团的判决由五个与罪行相关的因素和一个与受害者相关的因素预测。没有一个与犯罪者相关的因素是陌生人强奸定罪的显著预测因素。这些发现对陌生人强奸的受害者以及检方和法庭政策都有潜在影响。我们表明，如果犯罪者被识别并被指控，陌生人强奸的受害者获得陪审团定罪的可能性很高。我们建议检方可以从受害者那里收集尽可能多的关于被发现对陪审团重要的因素的信息，法官可以就对罪行特征的假设向陪审团作出指示，以挑战错误的观念和刻板印象。最终，这可以用来鼓励陌生人强奸的受害者报案并出庭作证。
