Many fear that, after years of waiting, their behaviour and sexual past will be torn apart to sway the jury.
We know from research into public attitudes and understanding of rape and sexual offences that this is likely to be an effective strategy.
After surveying more than 3,000 people, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), external concluded that “the public’s accurate understanding of rape is outweighed by false beliefs, misunderstanding, lack of knowledge, and underlying stereotypes”.
Fewer than half of those surveyed could identify common rape myths and perceptions, and one in 10 agreed that it was up to women to take precautions against rape.
Half were either unsure or agreed that someone who had been drinking or taking drugs should take some responsibility if they are raped, while only a third agreed that women rarely make up rape allegations. Evidence shows that very few people fabricate allegations of rape or sexual assault.
Underpinning all this is that the nature of rape as a crime makes it particularly hard to prove, explains Kama Melly KC.
She is head of rape and serious sexual offences for the Criminal Bar Association, and has both prosecuted and defended in sexual offence cases.
“The vast majority of the time there’s not going to be any witnesses or CCTV,” she says.
“Secondly, there’s not going to be forensic evidence, because in the vast majority [of rape cases] consent is the defence.
“Thirdly, it’s pretty rare to have injuries even through non-consensual sexual activity. So you’re not going to have forensics. So you are going to have one person’s word against another’s about sexual matters which nobody finds easy to describe or talk about.
“And then you’ve got, ‘what is rape?’ [In a legal context] rape isn’t just sex without consent. Rape is sex without consent with the male not reasonably believing that she was consenting.”
When it comes to rape myths, she points out that it is the defence barrister’s duty to represent their client’s best interests in court, within the bounds of their own code of conduct.
“Fundamentally, the issue is that our courts often reflect society. If our society still holds women slightly accountable for being really drunk and going back to a bloke’s house, then should a barrister – [who is] trying to fight as hard as they can for a man who says that they are innocent – take some of that on board?”
What’s more, questioning a victim about something the defendant will say in their evidence at least gives them a chance to defend themselves against it, she argues.
“It would be so wrong if they [the victim] were not given the opportunity to say, ‘no, that’s absolutely not what happened.”
Ultimately, she suggests it is for the judge to intervene if questioning has gone too far or is irrelevant.
But what happens when a victim thinks a judge is also playing into rape myths?
