Compliance and credibility: a critique of the sexual assault forensic examination from international perspectives

The forensic medical examination is often lauded as an effective intervention to reduce case attrition by providing evidence that supports a rape or sexual assault complaint. 

New research shows that, despite nearly universal enthusiasm for such programmes, the examination also serves as an extra-legal opportunity for criminal justice and medical personnel to assess the credibility of rape and sexual assault complainants. Drawing on five case studies from three countries, researchers have investigated the medico-legal exam as a complicated process that helps shape case outcomes often in ways unanticipated by proponents of forensic medical examinations. They argue that through co-optation of language about choice, consent, and empowerment, and despite significant variation in procedures, protocols, and legal rules, personnel involved with the medico-legal process often use it to impose formal and informal ‘tests’ for assessing complainant credibility and to dismiss or cast doubt upon some rape and sexual assault reports.

Read the full article