Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (10)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by BRERETON, D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

The British Journal of Criminology 37:242-261 (1997)
© 1997 Centre for Crime & Justice Studies (formerly ISTD)

RESEARCH-ARTICLE

HOW DIFFERENT ARE RAPE TRIALS?

A Comparison of the Cross-Examination of Complainants in Rape and Assault Trials

DAVID BRERETON*

A common theme in the literature on rape trials is that complainants in such cases are routinely subjected to forms of questioning by defence counsel that would rarely, if ever, be utilized in other trial contexts. This paper critically examines this assumption, drawing upon a comparative study of transcripts of assault and rape trials conducted in the Melbourne County Court between 1989 and 1991. The paper concludes that, while the rape trials undoubtedly had some unique features, there were also strong similarities in the way in which complainants in the two types of trials were cross-examined. These findings suggest that a proper understanding of rape trials can only be obtained through comparative analysis, and by giving due explanatory weight to factors such as the constraints imposed by adversarial processes and structures, the structure and logic of legal language and techniques, and the assumptions which lawyers and judges make about what is relevant evidence


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Br J CriminolHome page
L. Ellison and V. E. Munro
Reacting to Rape: Exploring Mock Jurors' Assessments of Complainant Credibility
Br. J. Criminol., March 1, 2009; 49(2): 202 - 219.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Br J CriminolHome page
S. Cammiss
The Management of Domestic Violence Cases in the Mode of Trial Hearing: Prosecutorial Control and Marginalizing Victims
Br. J. Criminol., July 1, 2006; 46(4): 704 - 718.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 AffiliaHome page
M. Ajzenstadt and O. Steinberg
Never Mind the Law: Legal Discourse and Rape Reform in Israel
Affilia, August 1, 2001; 16(3): 337 - 359.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.