Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T22:23:24.288Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Too Little, Too Late: Prosecutors' Pre-court Preparation of Rape Survivors

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 December 2018

Amanda Konradi
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Little research has been conducted on the behaviors of prosecuting attorneys and their interactions with rape survivors between charging and court events. Yet this period, during which prosecutors prepare rape survivors for their witness roles, may be crucial for obtaining successful convictions. Using intensive interviews with 32 rape survivors and background interviews with prosecutors, victim witness advocates, and rape crisis workers, I evaluated the nature of directives and information given to rape survivors and the frequency with which directives were conveyed before preliminary hearings and court events. I concluded that prosecutors employ 20 modes of preparation to construct rape survivors as credible victims for judges and jurors. They orient the rape survivor to the scope of the witness role and her place in the interaction with legal actors, direct her to enhance the credibility of her story, and enhance the credibility of her self'presentation. Research showed that prosecutors prepared respondents more thoroughly for trials than for preliminary hearings, but little overall. A large minority of respondents, consequently, reported dissatisfaction with the preparation they received. On the basis of the findings, I call for an extension of Martin and Powell's “politics of victim's needs,” attention to the importance of maintaining a perception of procedural justice among rape survivors, and further research into pre-court preparation.

Type
Articles
Information
Law & Social Inquiry , Volume 22 , Issue 1 , Winter 1997 , pp. 1 - 54
Copyright
Copyright © American Bar Foundation, 1997 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bernstein, B., Clayman, L., Harris, J. & Sampson, J. 1982. The Child Witness: A Model for Evaluation and Trial Preparation. Child Welfare 61 (2):95–104.Google Scholar
Blumer, Herbert. 1969. Symbolic Interactionism: Perspective and Method. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Conley, John & O'Barr, William. 1990. Rules versus Relationships: The Ethnography of Legal Discourse. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Cucklanz, Lisa M. 1996. Rape on Trial: How the Mass Media Construct Legal Reform and Social Change. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Davis, Angela. 1981. Women, Race, and Class. New York: Vintage.Google Scholar
Davis, R. C, Kunreuther, F. & Connick, E. 1984. Expanding the Victim's Role in the Criminal Court Dispositional Process: The Results of an Experiment. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 75:491–505.Google Scholar
Elias, R. 1986. Community Control, Criminal Justice and Victim Services.” In From Crime Policy to Victim Policy: Reorienting the Justice System, edited by Fattah, E. A. New York: St. Martins Press.Google Scholar
Fairstein, Linda. 1993. Sexual Violence: Our War against Rape. New York: William Morrow & Co.Google Scholar
Finn, P. & Lee, B., 1985. Collaboration with Victim-Witness Assistance Programs: Payoffs and Concerns for Prosecutors. Prosecutor 18 (4):27–36.Google Scholar
Florida Criminal Justice Assistance Bureau. 1982. Victim /Witness Services in Florida and Projected Needs. Tallahassee: Florida Criminal Justice Assistance Bureau.Google Scholar
Frohmann, Lisa. 1991. Discrediting Victims' Allegations of Sexual Assault: Prosecutorial Accounts of Case Rejections. Social Problems 38:213–26.Google Scholar
Goffrnan, Erving. 1959. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday.Google Scholar
Goldberg-Ambrose, Carol. 1992. Unfinished Business of Rape Law Reform. Journal of Social Issues 48:173–85.Google Scholar
Greenberg, M. & Ruback, R. B. 1992. After the Crime: Victim Decision Making. New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
Hochschild, Arlie. 1979. Emotion Work, Feeling Rules, and Social Structure. American Journal of Sociology 85:551–75.Google Scholar
Hochschild, Arlie. 1983. The Managed Heart: Commercialization of Human Feeling. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Holmstrom, Lynda & Burgess, Ann. 1983. The Victim of Rape: Institutional Reactions. New Brunswick, N.J.: Transaction Books.Google Scholar
Katz, Jack. 1983. A Theory of Qualitative Methodology: The Social System of Analytic Fieldwork.” In Contemporary Field Research: A Collection of Readings, edited by Emerson, R. M. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
Kerstetter, Wayne A. 1990. Gateway to Justice: Police and Prosecutorial Response to Sexual Assault against Women. The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 81:267–313.Google Scholar
Kerstetter, Wayne A. & Van Winkle, Barrick. 1990. Who Decides? A Study of the Complainant's Decision to Prosecute in Rape Cases. Criminal Justice and Behavior 17:268–83.Google Scholar
Konradi, Amanda. 1993. Discovering Role Modeling: An Activist Approach to the Recruitment of Rape Survivors. Presented at Annual Meetings of American Anthropology Association, Washington, D.C., Nov.Google Scholar
Konradi, Amanda. 1994. Taking the Stand: Rape Survivors' Agency Reporting, Preparing, and. Testifying in the Criminal Justice Process. Unpub. Ph.D. diss., University of California, Santa Cruz.Google Scholar
Konradi, Amanda. 1995. Emotion Management in the Rape Trial Process: Pre-emptive and Recovery Strategies. Presented at Annual Meeting of Pacific Sociological Association, San Francisco, Cal., April.Google Scholar
Konradi, Amanda. 1996a. “Preparing to Testify: Rape Survivors' Negotiating the Criminal Justice Process,” Gender & Society 13:404–32.Google Scholar
Konradi, Amanda 1996b. “Understanding Rape Survivors' Preparations for Court: Accounting for the Influence of Legal Knowledge, Cultural Stereotypes, Personal Efficacy and Prosecutor Contact, Violence against Women 2 (1):25–62.Google Scholar
Konradi, Amanda. n.d. Constructing Victim-Witnesses: Prosecutors' Reaffirmation of Rape Myths through Witness Preparation.” Unpub. MS., Ohio University.Google Scholar
Koss, Mary P. 1993. Rape, Scope, Impact, Intervention, and Public Policy Responses. American Psychologist, Oct., 1062–69.Google Scholar
Koss, Mary, Gidycz, C. & Wisniewski, N. 1987. The Scope of Rape: Incidence and Prevalance of Sexual Aggression and Victimization in a National Sample of Higher Education Students. Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology 55:162–70.Google Scholar
Lees, Sue. 1989a. Trial by Rape. New Statesman & Society 2 (77):10–13.Google Scholar
Lees, Sue. 1989b. Blaming the Victim. New Statesman & Society 2 (78):14–15.Google Scholar
Leive, Cindi. 1994. The Final Rape Injustice. Glamour, Nov., 198 Google Scholar
Madigan, Lee & Gamble, Nancy. 1989. The Second Rape: Society's Continued Betrayl of the Victim. New York: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
Martin, Patricia Yancey. 1993. The Local Politics of Rape Processing. MS., Dept. of Sociology, Florida State University, Tallahassee.Google Scholar
Martin, Patricia Yancey. 1996. Gender(ing) Ambiguities and Contradictions in Rape Processing Work. MS., Dept. of Sociology, Florida State University, Tallahassee.Google Scholar
Martin, Patricia Yancey & DiNitto, Diana. 1987. The Rape Exam: Beyond the Hospital Emergency Room. Women & Health 12:5–28.Google Scholar
Martin, Patricia, DiNitto, Diane, Byington, Diane & Maxwell, Sharon. 1992. Organizational and Community Transformation: The Case of a Rape Crisis Center. Administration in Social Work 16:123–45.Google Scholar
Martin, Patricia & Powell, Marlene. 1994. Accounting for the “Second Assault”: Legal Organizations' Framing of Rape Victims. Law & Social Inquiry 19:853–90.Google Scholar
Matoesian, Gregory. 1993. Reproducing Rape: Domination through Talk in the Courtroom. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Merry, Sally Engle. 1990. Getting Justice and Getting Even: Legal Consciousness in Working-Class Americans. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
New York Times. 1994. “Program to Help Rape Victims Also Helps Win More Sexual-Assault Cases,” New York Times, 30 Dec. 1994.Google Scholar
Norton, L. 1993. Witness Involvement in the Criminal Justice System and Intention to Cooperate in Future Prosecutions. Journal of Criminal Justice 11 (2):143–52.Google Scholar
Pierce, Jennifer L. 1996. Gender Trials: Emotional Lives in Contemporary Law Firms. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Rose, Vicky McNickle & Randall, Susan. 1982. The Impact of Investigator Perceptions of Victim Legitimacy on the Processing of Rape/Sexual Assault Cases. Symbolic Interaction 5:23–36.Google Scholar
Russell, Diana. 1984. Sexual Exploitation. Beverly Hills, Cal.: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Sanday, Peggy. 1996. A Woman Scorned: Acquaintance Rape on Trial. New York: Doubleday.Google Scholar
Smith, Dorothy E. 1974. Women's Perspective as a Radical Critique of Sociology. Socio-logical Inquiry 44 (1):7–13.Google Scholar
Smith, Dorothy E. 1990. Conceptual Practices of Power: A Feminist Sociology of Knowledge. Boston: Notheastern University Press.Google Scholar
Stanko, Elizabeth. 1981. The Impact of Victim Assessment on Prosecutor's Screening Decisions: The Case of the New York District Attorney's Office. Law & Society Review 16:225–39.Google Scholar
Stanko, Elizabeth. 1982. Would You Believe This Woman? Prosecutorial Screening for “Credible” Witnesses and a Problem of Justice. In Judge, Lawyer, Victim, Thief, edited by Rafter, N. & Stanko, E. Boston: Northeastern University Press.Google Scholar
Tyler, Tom R. 1990. Why People Obey the Law. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Vacchs, Alice. 1993. Sex Crimes Ten Years in the Front Lines Prosecuting Rapists and Confronting Their Collaborators. New York: Random House.Google Scholar