Tested Neutrality: Emotional Challenges in Qualitative Interviews on Homicide and Rape

The relationship between interviewer and interviewee in the qualitative research interview implies a power imbalance as the researcher possesses the authority to frame the interview and ask the questions. Many feminist researchers have thus emphasized the importance of establishing rapport with the informant. In this article the consequences of the researcher's sym/antipathies towards her informants are examined. Parts of two interviews are presented in order to show how the researcher's emotional reactions entail hers as well as the informants' verbal responses and consequently the generation of data. In the interviews the female researcher was particularly emotionally challenged as they were of a delicate nature in which gender interplayed: a woman doing interviews with male refugees convicted for homicide and rape against female victims. It is further discussed whether sympathy and rapport or antipathy and a confrontational interview style—the consequences of the researchers' emotional responses to the narratives of the offences and the attitude of the interviewees—produced the best data. The article concludes that good intentions about avoiding prejudice by not reading the men's files and verdicts in advance may have been a wrong decision as it left the researcher insufficiently emotionally prepared for the information revealed in the interviews and for the encounter with the informants.     

Gender ‘Hostility’, Rape,and the Hate Crime Paradigm

This article examines whether crimes motivated by, or which demonstrate, gender ‘hostility’ should be included within the current framework of hate crime legislation in England and Wales. The article uses the example of rape to explore the parallels (both conceptual and evidential) between gender‐motivated violence and other ‘archetypal’ forms of hate crime. It is asserted that where there is clear evidence of gender hostility during the commission of an offence, a defendant should be pursued in law additionally as a hate crime offender. In particular it is argued that by focusing on the hate‐motivation of many sexual violence offenders, the criminal justice system can begin to move away from its current focus on the ‘sexual’ motivations of offenders and begin to more effectively challenge the gendered prejudices that are frequently causal to such crimes.     

Doing Justice: Perceptions of Gender Neutrality in the Jury Selection Process

There is a paucity of research on juries in general including the jury selection process. Very little of it examines the effect of gender. This study surveyed 138 potential jurors to determine whether jurors believed they were excluded from jury service due to gender. Additionally the study assessed whether gender affected attitudes about women serving on juries and whether perceptions about women and jury service were associated with general views about the fairness of the justice system. Findings suggest that gender had little effect on jury service or views about women serving on juries, but views about women and their role in jury service was associated with perceptions of general fairness in the system, regardless of the respondent’s gender. These findings point to the need for a more complex understanding of gender when examining the jury selection process.     

American Skin: The Duke Lacrosse Rape Scandal and the Intersection of Race,Class, Gender,and Injustice

The Duke lacrosse team rape case showcased how race and the criminal justice system can intersect in troubling ways. This is not news to students of the history of race in America. What makes this case unusual is white men were the ones who were mistreated by the police, prosecutor, media, and others, all of who used the rape allegations to further their cause rather than to seek justice. This book review essay examines three recent books that describe and analyze the Duke scandal.     

Race-Specific Gender Equality and Rape: A Further Test of Feminist Hypotheses

Feminists have long argued that structural inequality between men and women influences the prevalence of rape. The patriarchal maintenance hypothesis predicts that gender inequality increases rape, while gender equality ameliorates rape (Whaley and Messner 2002). Alternatively, the backlash hypothesis predicts that gender equality exacerbates the rape problem (Russell 1975; Williams and Holmes 1981). To date, no study has explored this relationship with respect to race. In the present study, we use a cross-sectional design with racially disaggregated census and crime data in order to assess the differences among White and Black women in terms of their status along educational, employment, income, and occupational dimensions, and their risk of victimization. The findings indicate that the relationship between equality and rape is masked in the model that includes all women, but becomes apparent in the race specific models. This revised version was published online in July 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

Public Reason,Neutrality and Civic Virtues

In this paper I argue that political liberalism is not the “minimalist liberalism” characterised by Michael Sandel and that it does not support the vision of public life characteristic of the procedural republic. I defend this claim by developing two points. The first concerns Rawls's account of public reason. Drawing from examples in Canadian free speech jurisprudence I show how restrictions on commercial advertising, obscenity and hate propaganda can be justified by political values. Secondly, political liberalism also attends to the identity, and not just the interests, of its citizens. It attempts to cultivate certain virtues of character. But it does so in a way that does not entail the acceptance of a comprehensive or perfectionist doctrine. Rawls's defence of neutrality of aim does not mean the state should be neutral towards all the views its citizens espouse. I conclude that political liberalism shares little with the doctrine Sandel claims is embedded in American law.     

The New Trial by Ordeal: Rape Kits,Police Practices,and the Unintended Effects of Policy Innovation

One of the most highly touted improvements in the criminal justice response to rape has been the wide‐scale adoption of sexual assault nurse examiner (SANE) programs that provide specialized medical care and forensic evidence collection to victims. Though previous studies have emphasized the benefits of SANE programs in improving criminal case outcomes, this study illustrates how the post‐rape forensic examination can also discourage reporting, investigation, and prosecution. Interviews with local rape care advocates across the United States show how the increasing emphasis on forensic evidence collected through rape kits may provide an opportunity to reflect and enact persistent law enforcement stereotypes toward sexual assault complainants. Unless police resistance to taking rape seriously is confronted and addressed, even well‐intentioned policy reforms such as SANE programs may end up undermining—rather than enhancing—fair and thorough investigation of sexual assault allegations.     

Rape,burglary, and opportunity

Following on the recent development of opportunity theory in criminology, we apply an opportunity approach to rape. Although rape is commonly viewed as a street crime, a substantial proportion of rape occurs inside homes following an unlawful entry of the residence. Drawing on this observation, we argue that rape and burglary, because they share a common locus in the home, should exhibit similar opportunity structures. That is, characteristics that place particular types of homes and householders at greater risk of burglary should also place (female) residents at greater risk of rape. An analysis of UCR rates and censusderived opportunity variables for 155 SMSAs in 1980 supports this position. We conclude that home-intrusion rape (rape following an unlawful entry of the home) is a violent crime with the opportunity structure of a property crime.     

Judicial Summation: The Trial Judge's Version of the Facts or the Chimera of Neutrality

This paper analyses some of the rhetorical and linguistic features of two judges' summations to two different juries in a criminal case that was tried twice in the Tasmanian Criminal Court. In the first trial, the jury failed to reach a verdict upon a number of counts in the indictment. In the second trial, the jury returned guilty verdicts on all counts. The purpose of this paper is to cast light upon how the linguistic and rhetorical features observed in the summations lent colour or weight to a particular interpretation of the events tried. The paper argues that the judge's summing up is part of the persuasive process of the criminal trial and that judges do present a version of the facts to the jury, deploying various language strategies to construct and communicate that version. The analysis focuses solely upon the judges' summing up of the evidence and the facts. It does not deal with directions or determinations concerning the law. Three major differences between the summations are considered: their distinct thematic approaches to the factual issues, the disparate levels of assistance they provide to the jury in assessing the evidence and their relative comprehensibility. The different thematic approaches produced disparate choices concerning the evidence -- its selection for consideration and its evaluation. The approach in the first summation resulted in an analysis of the evidence that favoured the accused. In the second summation, the thematic approach facilitated a more critical appraisal of the accused's case and a more favourable assessment of the complainant's version of events. The summations also provide differential levels of assistance and achieve differential levels of comprehensibility. The first summation provides relatively little guidance to the jury in evaluating significant items of evidence. In contrast, the second trial summation gives a more directional appraisal. It also achieves a greater level of clarity in the communication of key ideas than the first summation. Both distinctions are attributed to the discourse structures of the summations and to the second summation's reliance upon such organisational and rhetorical devices as repetition, enumeration and rhetorical questions. They are also attributed in part to the comparative syntactic simplicity of the second summation's sentences. It is the conclusion of this paper that the trial judge's linguistic, discourse construction and rhetorical skills are central to the clarification or obfuscation of the facts and issues in a case. How judges say what they say is significant at two levels of sense construction -- at the level of what Bernard Jackson calls signification and at the level of communication.     

Neutrality and Judicial Review

Law and Philosophy -     

Political Neutrality and Punishment

This paper is concerned with the tensions that arise when one juxtaposes one important liberal understanding of the nature and use of state power in circumstances of pluralism and (broadly) retributive accounts of punishment. The argument is that there are aspects of the liberal theory that seem to be in tension with aspects of retributive punishment, and that these tensions are difficult to avoid because of the attractiveness of precisely those features of each account. However, a proper understanding of both liberalism and retributive punishment allows us to dissolve some of the tensions whilst also bringing each position into sharper relief. The paper begins by introducing the liberal position and outlining the apparent tensions that may arise with retributive punishment. In so doing, there is also a brief discussion of how this debate relates to the more familiar dispute between legal moralists and their opponents. The paper then proceeds by considering each of the areas of tension in turn.     

Rape Victim Blaming as System Justification: The Role of Gender and Activation of Complementary Stereotypes

This research examined reactions towards female rape victims from a system justification perspective. Study 1 demonstrated that gender-related system justification motivation (Modern Sexism) predicted the propensity to blame a female rape victim among men, but not among women. Modern sexism predicted rape victim blaming among men even when statistically controlling for a general antipathy towards women, and the results were unaffected by social desirability concerns. Consistent with previous study on system justification theory, we demonstrated in Study 2 that system justification motivation can predict victim blaming also among women, provided that complementary stereotypes about women have been activated. By contrast, system justification motivation predicted men’s propensity to blame a rape victim irrespective of whether complementary stereotypes about women had been experimentally activated.     

离婚案件审理中法官话语的性别偏向

运用听审记录和访谈资料进行的话语分析,向我们展示了离婚案件审理中法官话语的男性偏向,其深层次原因包括:照顾弱者政策的执行受到女性形象转变的冲击、中国日趋格式化的司法体系缺乏对性别意识和女性话语的关注,以及法官话语性别议题背后的权力配置。通过对这些因素的揭示与分析,希望促进人们对司法领域中失语群体的关注,从而有助于构建更为完善合理的司法体系。     

Oil, Rape and State Crime in Nigeria

This case study seeks first to explore the culpability of the state of Nigeria in regards to recent allegations of rape and sexual torture by security forces and, secondly, to question why these rapes continue to occur despite Nigeria’s responsibility to address them. Though exact rates of violence are impossible to ascertain, reports by the media and various non-governmental organizations describe the widespread abuse of women, specifically at the hands of military officials. Evidence suggests that, by failing to respond appropriately to these acts of violence, the state of Nigeria is in direct violation of international law. Moreover, the decentralized nature of the Nigerian legal system creates an environment in which those Nigerian laws that do address rape and/or torture are rendered ineffective. This paper argues that what is happening in Nigeria does in fact constitute a state crime and, thus far, has not received appropriate attention from the International Criminal Court, to which Nigeria is a party, or the international community at large. As no action has yet been taken, we consider the factors that create an environment in which international and national punitive measures, as they are currently practiced, are ineffective.

---