1. Justice, Inequality and Gender Based Violence
Funded by ESRC,
Justice project website:

2. What today is about
Introduction: the Justice, Inequality and GBV project
What we have been doing - Methods
Some Key findings
Rape, inequality and the criminal justice response
Civil protection
Alternative justice – faith based
What victims/survivors say about justice
Experiences and perspectives of BAME victim/survivors
What about children?
Sex with third parties
Marianne

3. Background Should we/ should we not use criminal justice systems?
Research and government inspections/consultations have consistently shown a justice gap in relation to domestic and sexual violence (e.g. HMIC, 2014)
Should we/ should we not use criminal justice systems?
Women’s movements and NGOs – CJS symbolic: from private to public
But CJS may not fit GBV crimes:
DV is pattern over time – CJS about incidents
Rape myths, gender and ‘rational victims’
WHAT DO VICTIMS/SURVIVORS SAY? DO THEY FIND OTHER MEANS OF JUSTICE?
Led to wider look at justice and justice systems – criminal, civil, family, faith-based, alternative
Marianne
Why do women use the Criminal or Civil Justice Systems?
Safety?
Containment?
Punishment?
Or what/why?

4. The justice, inequality & GBV project
How is ‘justice’ (in its wider sense) understood, sought and experienced by victims/survivors of GBV (SV, DVA, HBV) and practitioners – ACROSS England and Wales
Research questions:
How do victims of GBV experience and perceive justice?
How does inequality* affect access to support pathways and trajectories through informal and formal justice systems?
*(inequality may be linked to: gender, race, ethnicity, immigration status, sexual orientation, age, religion, mental health, disabilities, economic status etc)
Marianne

5. The team Professor Marianne Hester – Principal Investigator
Bristol University: Dr Hilary Abrahams, Dr Nadia Agtaie (CI), Dr Lis Bates, Dr Nathan Eisenstadt, Dr Geetanjali Gangoli (CI), Professor Marianne Hester (PI), Dr Andrea Matolcsi, Dr Natasha Mulvihill, Dr William Turner (CI), Mary Wakeham, Sarah-Jane Walker, Dr Emma Williamson (CI)
University of the West of England (UWE): Duncan McPhee (CI), Professor Philip Rumney (CI), Anneleise Williams
Welsh Women’s Aid: Gwendolyn Sterk
Women’s Aid: Lizzie Magnusson
Cardiff University: Dr Amanda Robinson (CI)
Marianne

6. Methods Range of research methods and approaches:
Literature – Systematic review and synthesis of the existing literature (39,000 pieces of which 1,217 were relevant, and only 300 with voices of survivors);
Police and Women’s Aid data - Quantitative analysis of about 1,500 domestic violence and rape cases in police databases, plus Women’s Aid survey data for about 1,400 survivors and women’s domestic abuse services;
Interviews - Qualitative analysis of interviews with 251 victims/survivors of gender-based violence and 40 key practitioners to elicit experiences and perceptions of ‘justice’.
Using findings with practitioners & NGOs – Northumbria PCC, My Sister’s Place, Research in Practice, Women’s Aid, Peabody Trust
Marianne
Check number of practitioner interviews

7. ANALYSIS - ECOLOGICAL MODEL

8. Victims’ experiences seeking justice
Individual
Micro / Interpersonal
Meso / Community
Macro / Society
Enablers
Barriers
Awareness
Light bulb moment, naming the abuse
Lack of education/ awareness
Friends/family believing the disclosure
Not being believed, especially by parents
Professionals not ignoring abuse
Professional incompetence,
Not following policy
Awareness raising through education
Stigma associated with ‘being a victim’
Emotions
Emotional strength/ resilience
Self-blame
Childhood abuse
Emotional support from family/ friends
Isolation/ being shunned
No support network
Supportive demeanour from professionals
Routine discourtesy from professionals
Women’s empowerment
Blame culture
Services
Help-seeking
Knowledge of services
Didn’t know where to get help/ couldn’t access help
Friends/family helping to access services
Perp manipulating services
Availability of specialist services
Inadequate provision of services
Woman-centred services
Activism
Male-dominated institutions
Finances
Employment
Own financial resources
No resources
Negative equity
Friends/family lending money or place to stay
Being kicked out
Financial abuse by perp
Availability of legal aid
Legal/ court costs
Class position and resources
Poverty & benefits system
Property laws
Examples of enablers/barriers – as described in the interviews – where the description incorporates several levels of analysis.
“Did not receive legal aid:
She said she did not get legal aid.
She said her ex-husband “took all of our money and bought another house. He bought it in his name”.
She is renting now and living on benefits having had to give up her job for financial and stress reasons.
Initially, she could not afford a solicitor to organise the contact arrangements: she had to save for 6-7 months.
Participant had to litigate for herself: she asked for an adjournment as, despite “having a good education”, she was unwilling to interrogate her ex-husband.”
“Well just thinking back to the Hillsborough thing I said, do you know what I mean, about realising that … I think there’s something about actually.. that you’ve got to acknowledge that justice is actually really important … and I think that’s really dawned on me recently. That it’s like something about this fucking … I don’t know … you go to therapy, you go to recovery, do all these things, take responsibility da-da-da … but there’s no emphasis on … actually they can … do you know what I mean like … it keeps putting the emphasis back on the victim or survivor to like be a better person and deal with the shit. It’s not that I don’t believe in that, but it’s completely like out of proportion. So it’s almost like you never get a message that says no wonder you want justice … it’s like nobody’s ever said to me … you know no counsellors, nobody’s ever said ‘Have you thought about going to the police about that?’”

9. Literature findings – models of justice
Community justice
Cultural context model
Economic/financial/distributive justice
Effective justice
Affective justice
Feminist jurisprudence/ Legal thinking
Gender justice
Interactional justice
Kaleidoscopic
Neo-liberal justice
Parallel justice
Peacemaking
Private/ family justice
Procedural justice
Problem solving justice
Social justice
Therapeutic justice/jurisprudence
Transformative justice and participatory victims rights
Women’s / human rights
Marianne

11. Key findings
Part 1: Criminal and Civil Justice Responses