Article

Mock Juror Perception of Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner Testimony

University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, USA.
Violence and Victims (Impact Factor: 1.28). 08/2012; 27(4):500-11. DOI: 10.1891/0886-6708.27.4.500
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The perception of a sexual assault nurse examiner's (SANE) testimony in a criminal rape trial was investigated. Men and women undergraduates (N = 138) read a fictional criminal trial summary of a rape case in which medical testimony from a SANE or a registered nurse (RN) was presented, or no medical testimony was presented. Results indicated that mock jurors were more likely to render guilty verdicts when a SANE testified than when an RN testified, and this relationship was fully mediated by perceived credibility of the nurse as well as provictim perceptions. Results are discussed in terms of the impact of SANE involvement in legal proceedings.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Nesa E. Wasarhaley, Aug 12, 2015
2 Followers
 · 
198 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Stereotypes and prejudicial misconceptions are prevalent regarding sexual assaults and victims' responses. These are collectively referred to as rape myths. This study examines three rape myths purporting that sexual assault victims (1) immediately report the crime, (2) experience severe physical and/or anogenital injuries, and (3) forcefully resist their assailant. This is a cross-sectional descriptive study examining presence of physical or anogenital injury, level of physical resistance during a sexual assault, and time to sexual assault report. Study subjects were female sexual assault victims examined by a sexual assault nurse examiner at Regions Hospital in St. Paul, Minnesota, in 2011 and 2012. Sexual assault nurse examiner reports for 317 subjects met the inclusion criteria and were reviewed. Twelve (4%) victims experienced physical injury requiring medical intervention. Thirty-four (11%) sustained anogenital injuries requiring medical intervention. Overall, 253 (81%) victims did not actively resist at some point during the assault, with 178 (57%) victims never actively resisting. Nearly half (129, 43%) did not appear in the emergency department for 12 or more hours from the time of the assault. Women who seek emergency department assistance after a sexual assault take a variable amount of time to present to the emergency department, rarely experience moderate or severe physical or anogenital injury, and commonly do not exert strong physical resistance against their attacker during at least part of the assault.
    Journal of Forensic Nursing 10/2014; 10(4):217-25. DOI:10.1097/JFN.0000000000000044
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The present study investigated the impact of impeaching a rape victim with evidence of a simultaneous civil suit during a criminal trial. In three experiments, male and female undergraduates (Experiment 1) and community members (Experiments 2 and 3) read a rape trial summary in which the victim accused the defendant of raping her in a hotel. In the impeachment condition, the Defense mentioned that the victim simultaneously sued either the hotel (Experiments 1, 2, 3) or the alleged perpetrator (Experiment 3) for US$1 million. In the control condition, the Defense did not mention a civil suit. In all experiments, mock jurors were more likely to render not guilty verdicts and had higher pro-defendant ratings (e.g., defendant credibility) when the Defense impeached the victim than when the Defense did not impeach her. In addition, victim credibility (Experiments 1, 2, 3) and victim greed (Experiment 3) mediated the impact of impeachment on verdict. Results are discussed in terms of the prejudice rape victims may face in criminal court when they also seek justice in civil court. © The Author(s) 2015.
    Journal of Interpersonal Violence 02/2015; DOI:10.1177/0886260515584342 · 1.64 Impact Factor