Jonathan Sandiford KC

It already happens. A quick explainer: There already are legal protections in the courts to counter rape myths and stereotypes. It is routine for Judges trying sexual offences cases to direct or caution juries against the risk of any assumptions or stereotypes that they might have about sexual behaviour and how a rape victim behaves or should behave. In other words, there is no typical rapist or rape victim. The direction will be adapted according to what is relevant to the evidence and typically cautions that experience shows that people react differently to the trauma of a serious sexual assault -there is no one classic response- and also that some people will complain immediately and others after some time. These factors alone do not mean false accusations, rather the jury must approach the evidence according to their legal oaths and without prejudice. The direction often is given at the beginning of the case and it is a standard direction at the end of the case. The appropriateness of these directions was established by the Court of Appeal nearly 20 years ago and is contained in detail within the Crown Court Compendium, which guides Judges,and is constantly updated. The Law Commission further examined these directions and published its report in July 2025. It supported that directions should remain within the discretion of the Judge according to the relevance to the evidence in the case.