LOUISA SIMMONDS

Prima Facie places a necessary spotlight on the discrimination shown to survivors in sexual assault cases

Recently, I re-read Suzie Miller’s novel Prima Facie for my book club. I wanted to check for anything I had missed during my first read and to find salient points to encourage discussion.

The story details the personal cost to sexual assault survivors who proceed with their case to court, highlighting the injustice of our current judicial system.

‘While this work is a lot about survivors’ experiences, it’s also a scathing indictment of the legal system.’ Bri Lee

Silence changes nothing

It is not a comfortable read, and I never intended to voice my thoughts publicly about the book. With no legal expertise and sensitive to the recent battering feminism has taken, I was reluctant to put myself back in the eye of the storm. But then, why not? If we remain silent, nothing changes. Though the Australian government chose to ignore violence to women in our recent election, their decision does not alter the fact that we are not given a fair trial in sexual assault cases.

Each time I re-read a book, my views shift slightly – sometimes, I gain a greater understanding of the themes, sometimes irritations become more pronounced. This time, the Imposter Sydrome and unconscious bias of Tessa, the central character, struck more of a chord. I am ashamed to admit that the author’s decision to reveal her flawed characteristics made me question several times her true motivation for proceeding with her trial.

Women do not cause rape

Which was Suzie Miller’s intention, I imagine. After all, every one of us is ingrained with prejudices from our experiences in life, and whilst Tessa’s childhood of poverty and violence made her more sensitive to the unfairness of class and money, they did not cause her rape.

One of the questions raised by the story is the necessity to dissect every aspect of the victim’s life and lifestyle prior to their assault when clearly, these public villifications create stigma. And Miller delves deeper, questioning how much emotional damage the cross-examinations do to the victims and the length of time it takes for these cases to come to trial, which must also exacerbate their trauma and sense of isolation.

Victims are irresponible drinkers, profiteers or “asking for it”. Perpetrators are presented as a blank canvas

The current legal process allows defense lawyers to paint a picture of victims as guilty until proven innocent, as irresponsible drinkers, profiteers or “asking for it”. Conversely, the behaviours and lifestyle of perpetrators cannot be used as evidence, they are a blank canvas.

Unsurprisingly, once they consider the mental and financial impact of a potentially lengthy trial, not to mention the longterm effects on their family and future relationships, many victims crack under the pressure.

‘But I will tell you what I have lost;
I have lost my dignity and my sense of self
I have lost my career path, friends, peace of mind, my safety,
the sense of joy in my sexuality. But most of all, I have lost my faith in this,
the law,
the system I believed would protect me.’
― Suzie Miller, Prima Facie

It is known (and accepted) that one role of the defense barrister is to interrogate the victims “to cast doubt on the witness’s narrative” (Purely Dicta). As such, Tessa is demonised during her trial for not only her lifestyle before her attack but her inability to remember every detail of what happened, with no regard for her state of mind at the time or any consideration that she may have blacked out during the most harrowing parts of her assault.

Cross-examinations seek to affirm rape myths and prejudices

‘Tessa’s cross examination demonstrates that the process of interrogation plays not only the role of being an investigation of evidence. It is also an opportunity to confuse and distort a witnesses’ testimony and to affirm rape myths or prejudices in the minds of the jury. In place of interrogating and challenging the efficacy and the assumptions of the law, ‘we persist in interrogating victims’. Purely Dicta

Without witnesses, rape trials are understandably difficult to prove. Miller asks in this story if a character assassination of the victim is a fair way to determine the outcome or should the final judgment be based on the evidence to hand or through a thorough investigation of both parties.

Despite what some men believe, women do not ask to be raped and neither do the majority lie about sexual assault.

Around 5% of victims make false allegations. 1 in 5 women have experienced sexual abuse.

The low chance of a conviction is the main reason women don’t come forward

Indeed, in most sexual assault cases, women do not report their abuse or pursue a trial for the reasons above. Hounded and treated as liars from the moment they file their report – as evidenced in the recent Brittany Higgins trial – many are dissuaded from proceeding with their case due to lack of evidence, trial costs and personal stress.

Ultimately, it is their low chance of a conviction (less than 10%) that discourages them from coming forward, encouraging the perpetrators who commit these heinous crimes to reoffend.

Photo by Addy Mae on Unsplash