The Effect of Delayed Reporting on Mock-Juror Decision-Making in the Era of #MeToo

The #MeToo movement has given voice to victims of sexual harassment and assault. In many of these cases, there have been long delays in reporting of the sexual offence (e.g., the Harvey Weinstein case). The purpose of this study was to examine how the type of sexual offence (harassment vs. assault) and the length of delayed reporting (15, 25, 35 years) influenced mock-juror decision-making. Mock-jurors ( N = 319) read a mock trial transcript depicting an alleged sexual offence and were asked to render a dichotomous verdict, continuous guilt rating, and defendant and victim perception ratings. The data indicated an effect of sexual offence type such that mock-jurors held more favorable perceptions of the defendant when the alleged offence was harassment compared with assault. There also was an effect of delayed reporting such that mock-jurors rendered more guilty verdicts when there was a 25-year delay compared with a 15-year delay. Intriguingly, these results suggest that jurors in sexual offence cases may perceive longer delays in reporting as more believable than shorter delays.

Blame Attributions in Multiple Perpetrator Rape Cases: The Impact of Sympathy, Consent, Force, and Beliefs

Victims of multiple perpetrator rape (MPR) have been found to be an especially vulnerable group. This study examined effects of MPR and perpetrators’ use of force on attributions of victim and perpetrator blame. In two large experiments (total N = 2,928), Swedish community members read scenarios depicting an MPR and subsequently made several ratings of blame, rape myth acceptance (RMA), just world beliefs, sympathy for the victim, perception of consent, and trust in the legal system. Data were analyzed with a multianalytical approach using both analyses of variance as well as exploratory analyses. In Experiment 1, more blame was attributed to a victim of MPR than a victim of a lone perpetrator rape (LPR). In Experiment 2, no effect of used force was found on levels of attributed blame. In both experiments, hierarchical multiple regression analyses indicated that four components, identified through principal components analyses, explained substantial shares of the variance in both victim and perpetrator blame. The best individual predictors were participants’ perception of consent, sympathy for the victim, and RMA. The study shows the importance of studying participants’ beliefs and attitudes about rape and that victim-blaming research needs both theory development and greater methodological awareness. Implications for victim support services are also discussed.

Crime, Punishment, and Victim Distress

The costs of crime to victims are well-known and research has described the physical, emotional, and financial injuries sustained by crime victims. To date, however, there has been little empirical work which investigates the correlates of victim distress vis-à-vis victim involvement in the criminal justice process. The present study explores the role played by the criminal justice experience in victim distress level and the relative importance of victim, offense, and system participation variables. Multivariate analysis revealed that the level of distress following the victimization is largely a function of offense type, victim perception of sentence severity, and victim demographic characteristics of sex and age. Investigation of the factors predictive of current victim distress level indicated that receiving restitution and the level of distress following the victimization are most important, in addition to the personal characteristics of race and marital status. The implications of these findings for research on victim participation and for policy concerning crime victims are discussed.