ABSTRACT
Despite decades of sexual offences reform in England and Wales, and Scotland, there remains a substantial confidence-deficit amongst survivors of rape regarding the prospects of, and potential for, the criminal process to deliver justice. Drawing on recent research which has documented the complexity of the procedural and substantive, as well as individual and collective, interests that are engaged in survivors’ journeys through the criminal complaint, this chapter interrogates the foundations of this confidence-deficit and reflects critically on the extent to which it can ever effectively be redressed within the frames of the adversarial process. More specifically, it focusses on reforms associated with access to independent legal representation, regulation of the tone and content of cross-examination, and interventions upon jurors’ deliberative function (including their potential removal). In a context in which such reforms – though potentially radical – can be situated as part of a broader trajectory in which incursions into the trial status quo have been tolerated, if not encouraged, in order to ameliorate the excesses of adversarialism, the chapter questions their capacity to bring sustained change. In so doing, it also encourages us to confront the thorny question of whether it is possible to increase survivor confidence whilst being faithful to the logics and aims of adversarial justice.
