Turning Mirrors Into Windows?

In 2006, the Government proposed allowing prosecutors in England and Wales to adduce ‘general’ expert witness testimony in rape cases. This initiative was based on two assumptions—first, that jurors currently lack an adequate understanding of rape complainants’ post-assault behaviour (which, in turn, generates inappropriate inferences regarding credibility) and, second, that expert testimony offers a useful vehicle for addressing such juror ignorance. In a previous article, the authors reported on a mock jury study that provided empirical support for the first of these claims—at least in regard to a complainant's calm demeanour, delayed reporting or lack of physical resistance. In this article, the authors investigate whether educational guidance presented at trial—via expert testimony or an expansive judicial instruction—can have the intended beneficial impact of redressing popular misconceptions, thereby leading to a fairer assessment of complainant credibility in rape cases.