What do we know about the effectiveness of juror education in rape and serious sexual offence trials?

Addressing jurors’ false beliefs in rape and serious sexual offence (RASSO) cases has been a priority for law reformers worldwide. This includes the Law Commission, whose 2025 report Evidence in Sexual Offence Prosecutions recommended that juror misconceptions be addressed in England and Wales by enhanced judicial directions, supplemented by expert evidence where issues are particularly complex. This paper reviews existing evidence on the effectiveness of jury directions and expert evidence in this context, including quantitative and qualitative studies, and presents new findings from the Scottish Jury Research. It concludes that ‘the jury is out’ in terms of the ability of judicial directions or expert evidence to address false beliefs. This is partly because the evidence base is limited, with a paucity of realistic studies. But there are also reasons for scepticism about the effectiveness of ‘myth-busting’ judicial directions, because they are attempting something different to directions instructing jurors about the law. The latter are attempting to convey information, but the former are trying to impact attitudes, which may be deep-seated and resistant to change. The difficulty is that there are few feasible alternatives. As such, further research into how to maximise their impact, or whether expert evidence might be more effective, is vital.