Criminal trial delays in Australia : trial listing outcomes
This research examines the reasons for which criminal trials in Australia fail to proceed on the day of listing. The rationale of such an inquiry is that matters that fail to proceed as scheduled contribute to backlog and delay, both of which consume significant criminal justice resources. Moreover, delay in the criminal trial system may result in adverse effects, not the least of which is the anguish endured by the victims of crime and their families, and the community demanding protection from criminal offenders. This research used quantitative data from courts across a number of Australian states and territories to demonstrate that more than half of all listed criminal trials fail to commence on the listed day. After an analysis of data about trials and extensive interviews with court administrators, it is found that those trials that do not proceed can be placed into two categories: those trials that are finalised on or near the trial date either by way of late guilty plea or late withdrawal by the prosecution, and those trials that are adjourned and re-listed. While some delays will be inevitable, the report builds on recommendations made by a working group of the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General to suggest ways of reducing the backlog of criminal trials across Australia.
The impact of pre-recorded video and closed circuit television testimony by adult sexual assault complainants on jury decision-making: an experimental study
A mock sexual assault jury trial research project investigated whether the impact of adult sexual assault complainant testimony on juror perceptions and decisions differed if presented via CCTV, pre-recorded videotape or face-to-face in the courtroom. Natalie Taylor and Jacqueline Joudo also investigated the impact of emotional versus neutral testimony. Eighteen mock trials were held in a mock courtroom in which 210 members of the public participated as jurors. The report outlines the methodology used, the key findings, issues arising from juror feedback and the difficulties encountered by jurors in trying to reach unanimous verdicts.
Prosecuting sexual assault: A comparison of charging decisions in sexual assault cases involving strangers, acquaintances, and intimate partners
In this study of prosecutors' charging decisions in sexual assault cases, we test the hypothesis that the effect of victim characteristics is conditioned by the relationship between the victim and the suspect. We categorize the victim/suspect relationship as one involving strangers, acquaintances/relatives, or intimate partners, and we examine the effect of victim, suspect, and case characteristics on charging decisions in each type of case. The results of our analysis reveal that the effect of victim characteristics, with one exception, is confined to cases involving acquaintances and intimate partners. In these types of cases, prosecutors were less likely to file charges if there were questions about the victim's character or behavior at the time of the incident. In contrast, the victim's reputation and behavior did not affect charging in cases involving strangers; in those types of cases, prosecutors were more likely to file charges if the suspect used a gun or knife or if the victim was white. We conclude that stereotypes of “real rapes” and “genuine victims” continue to influence the charging decision in at least some types of sexual assault cases.