Characteristics associated with rape attrition and the role played by scepticism or legal rationality by investigators and prosecutors

By Jennifer Brown, C. Hamilton, D. O’Neill. 2007

114 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Rape and Attrition in the Legal Process: A Comparative Analysis of Five Countries (2010, background): “Other studies considered but not included are those by Heenan and Murray (2006) and Brown, Hamilton, and O’Neill (2007), who tracked cases from police reports to charging or court proceedings but did not give court outcomes, and Hanly (2007), who focused solely on jury trials.20”
Prospective lawyers’ rape stereotypes and schematic decision making about rape cases (2008, background): “If such stereotypic beliefs are endorsed by legal professionals, this may assist in undermining the position of the victim in the criminal justice system and may be a causal factor underlying the high attrition rates in rape cases (Brown, Hamilton, & O'Neill, 2007 ).”
Reacting to rape: Exploring mock jurors' assessments of complainant credibility. (2008, background): “…Joudo 2005 ) and studies examining conviction patterns in sexual assault cases in England and Wales ( Harris and Grace 1999 ; Kelly et al. 2005 ; Brown et al. 2007 ) have indicated that claims of non-consensual intercourse that are not accompanied by evidence of physical force and attendant…”