Scotland Scraps Its Unique Legal Verdict

Scotland is dropping its unique, centuries-old "not proven" verdict—a third option for juries that felt that while the defendant might not be innocent, there wasn't enough evidence to convict them. The move will end a legal quirk that critics say has long muddied justice for victims, especially in rape and sexual assault trials, the Guardian reports. Members of the Scottish Parliament voted 71 to 46 in favor of a sweeping reform bill that puts an end to the controversial option for juries, which used to acquit defendants without fully clearing them.

The not proven verdict, unique to Scotland since the 1700s, had been under fire for years, with campaigners arguing it left victims in limbo and contributed to disproportionately low conviction rates in sexual offense cases. In 2022 and 2023, 61% of rape and attempted rape acquittals were "not proven" instead of the more definitive "not guilty." The verdict was much rarer in other criminal cases. A rape survivor known as Miss M, who won a landmark civil lawsuit after the man she accused of raping her was acquitted in a not proven verdict, campaigned against the verdict and praised lawmakers for "giving survivors and their families back their voice."

The overhaul does more than ditch "not proven." Juries, which have 15 members in Scotland, will now have to vote two-thirds in favor to secure a guilty verdict, which previously required only a simple majority. It also creates a specialist court for sexual offenses. Rape complainants will have lifelong anonymity by law and the right to independent, publicly funded legal representation in certain hearings. Still, not everyone is sold. Rape Crisis Scotland warned that raising the jury threshold could make convictions even harder.

story continues below

Other critics complained that the move was eroding the "distinctiveness" of Scottish law, the Times of London reports. "Not many things are unique to Scotland but our criminal justice system developed over 300 years was one of them," said Tommy Ross, a prominent defense lawyer. "The not proven verdict perfectly encapsulated the function of a jury—to decide whether the charge has been proven or not."