Sexist stereotypes in the judicial reasoning of acquitals for multiple offender sexual assault: Spain, 2010-2020

Abstract

Introduction. The credibility of victims of sexual violence are influenced by myths and stereotypes of rape culture that considers most allegations by the women to be false, claiming malicious or vengeful. This article aims to examine the presence of sexist stereotypes in the legal reasoning on judicial absolutions with a multiple perpetrator rape. Methodology. This research is based on a mixed content analysis (qualitative-quantitative) on a documentary of 50 acquittals sentences for "sexual assault" with multiple perpetrator rape, between 2010 and 2020, in Spanish Provincial Courts. In this qualitative phase, three concepts were operationalized: "myth of the real rape", "myth of the genuine victim" and "culture of skepticism". In the quantitative phase, it was measured the frequencies of appearance of the stereotypes. Conclusion. The findings of this case study describe the presence of sexist stereotypes in 84% of the reasoning for acquittal proceedings. We analyzed eleven items, and we observe the preeminence of three factor of incredibility: 1) the expectation of finding physicial injuries in their bodies, 2) the contradictions in the different declarations statements proceeding of the victim, 3) the moral reproaches to the behaviour of the victim. These practices contribute to impunity for this crime and consequently victims' lack of trust in the judicial system.