Experience of guilt in court hearings—Comparing rape, assault and fraud cases

Abstract

Feelings of guilt often occur when people are subjected to crime. In this study, guilt is defined as a moral and emotional category, as opposed to the legal guilt. The aim of this study was to investigate how crime victims related to feelings of guilt in the court process. Interviews with plaintiffs in rape cases (10) have been compared to interviews with plaintiffs in assault (10) and fraud cases (10) in order find out if there are differences in the perceptions of guilt for each type of crime. The interviews are analysed by discursive psychology and three interpretative repertoires have been identified: self-blaming, guilt imposed and guilt resistance. The results show that plaintiffs in rape cases expressed more feelings of being guilt-imposed compared to plaintiffs in fraud and assault cases. Some plaintiffs in the rape cases describe how they actively opposed what they perceived was guilty-imposed practices in court.