University of Southampton Research Repository Copyright © and Moral Rights for this thesis and, where applicable, any accompanying data are retained by the author and/or other copyright owners. A copy can be downloaded for personal non-commercial research or study, without prior permission or charge. This thesis and the accompanying data cannot be reproduced or quoted extensively from without first obtaining permission in writing from the copyright holder/s. The content of the thesis and accompanying research data (where applicable) must not be changed in any way or sold commercially in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holder/s. When referring to this thesis and any accompanying data, full bibliographic details must be given, e.g. Thesis: NGF Orr (2017) " Trial outcomes in child death cases: influenced by mothering myths?", University of Southampton, Faculty of Business, Law and Art, School of Law. UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHAMPTON Faculty of Business, Law and Art School of Law Trial outcomes in child death cases: influenced by mothering myths? NGF Orr Thesis for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy 6 November 2016 i ii UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHAMPTON ABSTRACT FACULTY OF BUSINESS LAW AND ART School of Law Doctor of Philosophy TRIAL OUTCOMES IN CHILD DEATH CASES: INFLUENCED BY MOTHERING MYTHS? NGF Orr This thesis draws on the insights of rape myth scholarship and also critical responses to battered women who kill to argue that trial outcomes in child death cases may have been influenced by mothering myths. It argues that in order to understand the reasons for wrongful convictions in such cases, we must look beyond the issue of flawed expert evidence, namely to possibly stereotypical interpretations of maternal behaviours around the time the children died. Notwithstanding the difficulties in reading across from rape trials to child death cases, and that both rape myth acceptance research and the carceral approach have been challenged, Gerger et al’s definition of a rape myth is adapted here to theorise a mothering myth. Child death cases are interrogated to identify evidence admitted of maternal behaviours, and using the theorisation of a mothering myth, this thesis suggests that if fixed beliefs were used to interpret maternal behaviours, biased inferences may have been made. Little evidence of the probative value of such material has been identified. This thesis therefore examines why evidence of maternal behaviour was admitted and whether mothering myths may have informed aspects of child death cases including admissibility, the absence of judicial directions and jury deliberations. Options to limit the extent to which juries in future child death cases can rely on mothering myths are considered, and proposals for new judicial directions are made. A roadmap of empirical research is proposed to test the suggested analogies between rape myths and mothering myths, drawing on the methodological insights of rape myth work. iii iv Acknowledgements I would like to thank my supervisory team of Professor Hazel Biggs, Professor David Gurnham and Dr Caroline Jones together with Professor Emma Laurie and Mrs Debbie Evans for their kind support. v vi List of Contents Page Table of Cases …………………………………………………………………………………………1 Table of Statutes……………………………………………………………………………………...11 Abbreviations…………………………………………………………………………………………15 Introduction: Trial outcomes in child death cases: influenced by mothering myths? I—1.0 Introduction………………………………………………………………………………..…19 I—1.1 Wrongful convictions: reasons and consequences…………………………………....23 I—1.2 Are there hidden reasons for wrongful convictions?....................................................41 I—1.2.1 Fathers…………………………………………………………….......45 I—2.0 Chapter layout : summary explanations……………………………………………………....45 Chapter One: Interpreting the feminine: seeking analogies in the criminal justice system 1.0 Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………..49 1.1 Women’s behaviour as evidence……………………………………………………………..50 1.1.2 Women’s behaviour: is it stereotypically interpreted in homicide cases?....................53 1.1.3 Women’s behaviour: is it stereotypically interpreted in rape cases? ……...................67 1.1.4 Women’s behaviour: is it stereotypically interpreted in child death cases?.................76 1.2 Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………………89 Chapter Two: Using rape myth acceptance scholarship to theorise the mothering myth 2.0 Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………...93 2.1 Definitions…………………………………………………………………………………….98 2.1.1 Defining stereotypes………………………………………………………………..…99 2.1.2 Rape myths: definitions, issues and relevance to child death cases…………………103 2.1.3 Defining attitudes to rape……………………………………………………………107 2.1.4 Stereotypes, myths and attitudes in child death cases……………………………….110 vii 2.2 Why are stereotypes or myths used?........................................................................................113 2.3 Mothering: ideology and discourse……………………………………………………..........119 2.3.1 An alternative discourse of mothering…………………………………………..........125 2.3.2 Mothering and beliefs…………………………………………………………….......128 2.3.3 - Altruism…………………………………………………………………………..…130 2.3.4 - Bonding……………………………………………………………………………..131 2.3.5 - Childcare…………………………………………………………………………....132 2.4 Conclusion…………………………………………………………………………………....134 Chapter Three: Maternal behaviours in child death cases: indicative of guilt or mothering myths? 3.0 Introduction………………………………………………………………………………….137 3.1 Mothering myths……………………………………………………………………………..140 3.1.1 Is alcohol dependency indicative of guilt?...................................................................142 3.1.2 Are emotional over reactions indicative of guilt?........................................................145 3.1.3 Is failing to use an apnoea monitor indicative of guilt?...............................................151 3.1.4 Is not calling for an ambulance supportive of guilt?....................................................155 3.1.5 Does maternal mental ill health indicate guilt?............................................................165 3.1.6 Is attention seeking behaviour indicative of guilt?.......................................................171 3.1.7 Does evidence of behaviour indicate guilt?.................................................................176 3.2 Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………………179 Chapter Four: Admissibility of maternal behaviour evidence: influenced by mothering myths? 4.0 Introduction………………………………………………………………………………….181 4.1 Which factors influence the admissibility of behaviour evidence?.........................................182 4.2 Do rape myths influence the admissibility of behaviour evidence in rape trials?....................192 4.2.1 Bad character and similar fact evidence………………………………………….......195 4.2.2 S 278 CCC and personal records……………………………………………………..198 4.2.3 Hearsay rule and the late complaint………………………………………………..…199 viii 4.3 Do mothering myths influence the admissibility of maternal behaviour in child death cases? 200 4.3.1 Similar Fact evidence, common sense and multiple child deaths…………………….201 4.3.2 Section 78 and alcohol dependency…………………………………………………..209 4.3.3 Hearsay and mothering capability……………………………………………………..211 4.3.4 Opinion and witness statements……………………………………………………….212 4.4 Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………….……219 Chapter Five: Jury decisions in child death trials: influenced by mothering myths? 5.0 Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………….223 5.1 Judicial directions: purpose and influences?..............................................................................224 5.1.1 Judicial directions in child death cases………………………………………………..232 5.1.2 Judicial directions: influenced by defence counsel?......................................................234 5.1.3 Judicial directions: influenced by judicial deference to experts?..................................238 5.1.4 Judicial directions: influenced by expert’s gendered thinking?.....................................240 5.1.5 Judicial directions: influenced by judicial gendered thinking or mothering myths?......242 5.1.6 Judicial directions, rape myths and rape trials…………………………………………246 5.2 Jury decision making: what are the influences?.........................................................................249 5.2.1 Jury decision-making: influenced by judicial directions?..............................................255 5.2.2 Jury decision-making: influenced by juror deference?..................................................257 5.2.3 Jury decision-making: influenced by mothering myths?...............................................260 5.2.4 Jury decisions: influenced by the media?.......................................................................261 5.3 Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………………..262 Chapter Six: Mothering myths: countering the consequences 6.0 Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………267 6.1 Consequences for mothers: do mothering myths matter?..........................................................272 6.1.1 Normal consequences of punishment………………………………………………….276 6.1.2 Additional consequences of punishment………………………………………………278 ix 6.2 Mock juror rape trials and behavioural cues…………………………………………………..285 6.3 Countering juror reactions to behavioural cues in child death cases………………………….292 6.3.1 Judicial directions……………………………………………………………………..299 6.3.2 Trial management……………………………………………………………………..300 6.3.3 Circumstantial evidence……………………………………………………………….301 6.3.4