Fallout from Duke Case Clouds Future Rape Trials

This is an viewpoint done by Sandra Thompson, Thompson is Professor of Law at the University of Houston Law Center, where she directs the Criminal Justice Institute.
UH Law Foundation

Viewpoints, Outlook May 31, 2007, 8:40PM
Fallout from Duke case clouds future rape trials
New doubts from jury selection to victim credibility
By SANDRA GUERRA THOMPSON Copyright 2007 Houston Chronicle

Duke University once again competed for the national title in men's lacrosse, and life seems to be returning to normal after the dismissal of rape charges against three of the school's student-athletes. But in courtrooms in Houston and throughout the country, the celebrated Duke rape case has wrought significant changes in the way sexual assault cases are pursued and prosecuted.

The false allegations of rape that nearly destroyed the lives of the three young lacrosse players were tailor-made for tabloid journalism. In the wake of blanket news coverage of the case, prosecutors and defense attorneys are now wary of prospective jurors who may have changed their "personal opinions" of anyone involved in a sexual assault case.

Personal opinions, of course, are the roadblocks to impartiality that can undermine any jury and can ruin the chances for a fair trial. The jury selection process has always been a key component in any trial, but the Duke case has raised the stakes even higher in sexual assault cases.

When attorneys in these trials interrogate prospective jurors, they fire a series of questions to help identify people who can render opinions based solely on the evidence presented at trial. In a larger sense, the five questions included here serve as a quick litmus test on the lingering effects of the Duke rape case.

• Do you believe that women who bring rape charges are likely to lie?