Your World of Legal Intelligence
 United Kingdom | +44 (0) 20 7284 8080

Improving the Management of Sexual Offence Cases in Scotland: the Dorrian Review

Document Cited in Related
DOI10.3366/elr.2021.0722
Author
Pages385-393
Date01 September 2021
Published date01 September 2021
Introduction

In March 2021, the Dorrian Review into Improving the Management of Sexual Offence Cases published its report.1 The Review was commissioned by the Lord Justice-General (Lord Carloway) to “develop proposals for an improved system to deal with serious sexual offence cases”.2 It comes at a time when there is increasing recognition that the prosecution of sexual offences is not all that it should be – conviction rates are low and complainers report that engagement with the criminal justice process leaves them traumatised. All three UK jurisdictions have undertaken similar reviews.3

In a lengthy report that draws on academic research, the review group's own experience, and evidence from those who have experienced sexual offence prosecutions, the Review made a wide range of recommendations. This article examines the background to the Review and outlines and assesses its main proposals.

 Background

The Review was undertaken against a background of low conviction rates and evidence that complainers are severely re-traumatised by their experiences of the criminal justice system. In Scotland, the conviction rate in prosecuted rape/attempted rape cases in 2019–20 was 48%.4 The Review noted this, pointing out that conviction rates after trial in the High Court are lower for rape than for any other crime,5 but focussing on convictions at trial understates the problem. In 2018–19, 2,426 rapes/attempted rapes were reported to the police,6 but there were only 152 convictions,7 a mere 6% of reported cases.8 The picture looks even worse when unreported incidents are considered – only half of those seeking support from Rape Crisis Scotland, for example, had reported their experience to the police.9 Other sources have put the rate of unreported sexual offences even higher – the Scottish Crime and Justice Survey 2019/20, for example, found that only 22% of those who had experienced forced sexual intercourse reported it to the police.10

In terms of the complainer experience, the Review drew heavily on the report Justice Journeys,11 which presents findings from seventeen in-depth interviews with sexual offence complainers. Justice Journeys makes for harrowing reading. Participants found the process of having their statement taken by police challenging and lengthy,12 had limited understanding of the legal process,13 experienced protracted delays,14 and those whose case did make it to trial found the process of giving evidence severely re-traumatising.15

 RECOMMENDATIONS

The Review made a wide range of recommendations – space precludes discussing them all. The focus will be on the specialist court, pre-recording of evidence, legal representation for complainers, the complainer's right to anonymity and measures aimed at preventing rape myths from influencing verdicts.

A specialist court

The Review recommended creating a national (Scottish) specialist sexual offences court.16 Its key features would be routine pre-recording of evidence for all complainers, judicial case management via ground rules hearings and trauma-informed training for all personnel (including judges and those given rights of audience).17

While this is a significant measure, the use of specialist courts in the Scottish criminal justice system is not new – a domestic abuse court has been running for several years.18 The Review was also influenced by the specialist sexual offences court in New Zealand, which has resulted in shorter case conclusion times and reduced trauma to complainers.19

The specialist court does raise certain practicalities. Indictments which feature sexual offences alongside other serious offences, such as murder/attempted murder, or where an Order for Lifelong Restriction might be under consideration, would be heard in the High Court (presided over by a judge with specialist training).20 There would be provision to transfer cases from the High Court to the specialist court and vice versa.21 The Review recommended that the sentencing powers of the new court be a maximum of ten years' imprisonment,22 although noted that this is “a...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT