SEXUAL offence survivors told MSPs they were “abused” and “humiliated” by the courts system.
Campaigners said they felt “victimised” by lawyers while having to face their attackers.
1
Ellie Wilson — who went public about being raped to expose concerns about the system — told Holyrood’s criminal justice committee: “I did not feel at all respected by the defence. In fact, I felt humiliated, I felt abused. I felt like I was treated like a criminal.”
Hannah McLaughlan said being quizzed on the witness stand over her rape made her feel like a “joke”.
She added: “You’re made to feel like you’re a bit of evidence that gets put on a shelf and just gets brought out when needed, and then you’re disregarded afterwards. I felt very victimised standing in the witness box giving my evidence.
“It almost felt like it was a game to the defence lawyer. I did not feel respected at all.”
Ministers have brought forward proposals to radically reform how courts treat sex offences — including creating a specialist court, scrapping the “not proven” verdict and piloting juryless trials.
The proposals sparked anger from lawyers and judges who warned it could undermine the right to a free trial.
But Lady Dorrian — one of Scotland’s most senior judges whose review led to the proposals — said she backed a pilot of juryless trials.
She added: “I took the view this was something worth looking at.”
Most read in The Scottish Sun
However, some survivors told MSPs they were worried about the plans.
Ms Wilson said victims were “split and torn” on them, and urged MSPs to focus on “100 other issues we should have already addressed”.
Another abuse survivor, Jennifer McCann, said: “I’d be concerned about a potential bias of a single judge-only trial.
“The benefit to having a jury is there are different points of views — and different opinions and ideas can be expressed, explored and discussed to their full extent.”