Jules says ‘Why would I turn my whole world upside down and go through all that if I was lying?’
All names and identifying details have been changed.
Participants have given us permission to share their experiences.
Jules was groomed and sexually abused by a female friend of her family who was a respected member of the local community.
The abuser was charged but found not guilty and Jules feels that court processes could be improved in many ways.
The family friend, Marcie, was married with a child and was active in many aspects of the community, including the church and the Guides. She developed a close friendship with Jules’ parents. She would have Jules to stay overnight and take her on holiday.
On these occasions, Jules was expected to share a bed with Marcie, who slept separately from her husband. Jules does not remember exactly when Marcie began sexually abusing her, but she thinks she was about 10 years old. Marcie was about 20 years her senior.
The abuse continued for eight or nine years. During that period, Jules says ‘Every waking hour I could be there I was there … she infiltrated all aspects of my life’. She adds that Marcia touched her at ‘every opportunity’ and this happened every week.
Marcie picked Jules up from school every day and Jules says she was always using the school phone to call Marcie. She remembers someone once remarking to her mum that it was ‘odd’ how much time Jules and Marcie spent together.
The abuse ended when Jules met her current partner. For a while after, Marcie would follow Jules in her car, and she threatened to kill herself several times.
Several years later, a child in Jules’ care disclosed they had been abused. Supporting the child, Jules says ‘everything resonated’ and it made her think that she should report the abuse she experienced.
It was Jules’ experience with the criminal justice system that prompted her to come to the Truth Project. She says that during the investigation the police were very good, especially the support officer who was ‘fantastic’. She felt she was believed, although she did feel that they missed some opportunities in obtaining witness statements.
However, the court case was very difficult for Jules. It was delayed several times and the location changed. She met the barrister allocated to the case by the Crown Prosecution Service, but they were replaced by another barrister on the day of the trial. She had never met this barrister, and he seemed to know very little about the case.
She was advised to give evidence from behind a screen but the defence suggested she was doing this to ‘hide’ and no objection was raised to this. She feels she was let down by the prosecution who could have called more evidence in support of her.
Because she was unable to recall exact dates of the abuse that had begun nearly 30 years previously, she was accused of lying about specific incidents. The defence produced photographs of Jules looking happy with Marcie and used these to undermine her testimony.
Marcie had several character witnesses in court. She was found not guilty. Jules says ‘It was always my word against hers’. She adds that the police had been confident Marcie would be convicted, but the barrister said the reason she wasn’t was that Jules could not pinpoint the date the abuse started.
Jules received compensation following the court case and she is very confused by this. She says ‘... for something that theoretically didn’t happen … how can that be?’
She still finds the not guilty verdict hard to come to terms with. She suffers with anxiety because she says the perpetrator knows where she lives, but she has no idea where Marcie is, and worries she might see her.
Jules makes several suggestions concerning the court process and the way it could be improved for victims and survivors.
She would like to see victims and survivors being treated with more sensitivity, and more effort made to give them a ‘voice’. She says ‘You think you’re going to tell your side of the story, but you can only answer the questions you’re asked’ and she questions how barristers can ‘represent someone by just turning up on the day and you haven’t met them before’.
Although Jules thinks that awareness of child sexual abuse has improved, she wonders whether there should be specialist juries for court cases, who understand concepts such as grooming.