About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

4 Rev. Eur. Stud. 110 (2012)
Whose Credibility Is It Anyway: Professional Authority and Relevance in Forensic Nurse Examinations of Sexual Assault Survivors

handle is hein.journals/rveurost4 and id is 702 raw text is: Review of European Studies; Vol. 4, No. 4; 2012 ISSN 1918-7173 E-ISSN 1918-7181 Published by Canadian Center of Science and Education Whose Credibility Is It Anyway: Professional Authority and Relevance in Forensic Nurse Examinations of Sexual Assault Survivors Gethin Rees1 1 Criminology, Division of Sociology, Social Policy and Applied Social Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK Correspondence: Gethin Rees, Criminology, Division of Sociology, Social Policy and Applied Social Sciences, University of Southampton, Building 58, Salisbury Road, Southampton S017 1BJ, UK. Tel: 44-2380-597-423. E-mail: g.rees@soton.ac.uk Received: July 5, 2012, 2012 Accepted: August 3, 2012 Online Published: August 3, 2012 doi: 10.5539/res.v4n4p 110 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/res.v4n4p 110 Abstract There is an inherent tension in the information gathering and recording stages of the forensic medical examination of rape survivors. Medical practitioners do not wish to record information that can undermine a complainant's credibility, but at the same time must ensure that they do not problematise their own credibility by appearing partisan (for instance, by omitting information that might be relevant). Drawing upon semi-structured interviews with Forensic Nurse Examiners (FNEs) and their trainers (Forensic Medical Examiners) in England, and Sexual Assault Nurse Examiners (SANEs) in Ontario, this paper will investigate the strategies that both sets of nurses employ in order to document medical, sexual and assault histories, as well as physical phenomena (injuries, tattoos and piercings). FNEs collect more potentially prejudicial information than SANEs; this is a result of their greater anxiety in regards to their perceived credibility and professional authority. Keywords: rape, forensic nurse examiners, bad character evidence, credibility, tattoos and piercings 1. Introduction The report produced following the forensic examination of a rape and/or sexual assault survivor is a mine of information for the defence team, who seek to undermine the complainant's credibility during cross-examination (Brown, Burman, & Jamieson, 1993; Burman, Jamieson, Nicholson, & Brooks, 2007; Kelly, Temkin, & Griffiths, 2006; Temkin, 1998, 2000). As part of the medical examination, forensic practitioners ask questions and record information related to (amongst other things) the complainant's recent sexual history, their medications (including contraception), and previous pregnancies. Disclosure of such information to the defence can result in an attempt to undermine the complainant's credibility during cross-examination by arguing that they were complicit in their own victimisation (Estrich, 1987; Harris & Grace, 1999; Horvath & Brown, 2009; Munro & Kelly, 2009; O'Keefe, Brown, & Lyons, 2009; Temkin, 2005; Temkin & Krahd, 2008). Drawing attention, for instance, to the clothing, sexual history or other aspects of the survivor's lifestyle, the defence is able to compare them unfavourably with mythical representations of rape victims as naive innocents, or the Madonna (Redmayne, 2003). (Note 1) The reality of rape as experienced by victims is that there is usually intoxication involved, there is often some form of acquaintance relationship between the suspect and the victim, and the assault usually takes place on one or the other's property. As a result the defence is able to posit that the victim's behaviour or provocative dress was such that it led the suspect to believe that she wanted sexual intercourse, i.e. it was her behaviour, history, etc. that caused the sexual violation. Increasingly, policymakers are getting wise to the tactic of blaming the victim in rape cases and are introducing legislation prohibiting (or requiring judicial approval for) the admissibility of evidence relating to the survivor's sexual history, with varying degrees of success (compare Kelly et al., 2006; Burman et al., 2007 for instance). Nevertheless the forensic medical report can still provide a foundation for an application by the defence to introduce prohibited evidence or can result in problematic questioning in the courtroom without need of such an application. While the potential for the forensic medical report to enable these character assassinations has been discussed in legal and social scientific scholarship (for instance Brown et al., 1993; Temkin, 1998), the question of why this problematic information is still recorded remains. In this paper, I aim to address the deficit by analysing the reasons for the recording of said information by a particular group of medico-legal practitioners: Forensic Nurse Examiners (FNEs, often called

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most