Domestic Abuse (Scotland) Act 2018: interim reporting requirement

7. Victim and Witness Experiences of the Scottish Criminal Justice System

Main Findings

• The gap between expectations, intentions and lived experience - The research suggests that there was a marked difference between victims' and witnesses' expectations of the process and their lived experience. For many participants, their experience of the criminal justice system was reported as distressing, lengthy and difficult to navigate.
• Positive experiences of the justice system – All three reports described some examples of positive experiences of the criminal justice system. These were characterised by factors such as being listened to and believed, kind and empathic treatment, and professionals providing a clear explanation of the legislation and the criminal justice process.
• Communication, information and understanding of the justice system – Many research participants reported a lack of effective communication from justice agencies and involvement/transparency in decision-making, as well as a lack of knowledge and understanding of the system and the law. This contributed to feelings of disempowerment and undermined victims' trust in the process.
• Disempowerment and re-traumatisation - The research found that all stages of the process were at times distressing and potentially re-traumatising for most research participants. Many victims and witnesses reported a sense of marginalisation and exclusion from the process. The importance of choice and being treated with kindness and respect was emphasised.
• Victim safety and continued abuse – The research found that safety was not consistently ensured for victims and witnesses (and their families) as their case progressed through the justice system. Views on the impact of sentencing on victims' safety was mixed, with many victims reporting how the perpetrators 'used' or 'exploited' the system to further their abuse.
• Minimisation of abuse and dissatisfaction with justice outcomes – A common finding across the research was victim dissatisfaction with the case or court outcome. Many research participants were reported to have felt that sentences were too lenient and did not reflect the severity of the abuse. Some research participants were reported as feeling confused and let down by system responses and decisions.
• Support and recovery - Measures put in place to support victims, such as special measures, interdicts and NHOs were welcomed, but were sometimes reported to provide temporary respite rather than permanent safety. Advocacy and support services were reported as the most significant mechanisms for minimising trauma and enhancing victims'/witnesses' feelings of safety.
• Considerations relating to children and young complainers (and other third parties) – Many victims and witnesses interviewed emphasised the relational aspect of domestic abuse and felt that the abuse of a third party, including children and wider family and friends, was not taken account of adequately. Key themes of importance to children and young people included safety, trust, understanding the impact of domestic abuse on children, clear information and involvement in decision making, and support (for as long as they need it).
• Experiences of male victims of domestic abuse - The men's survey report found that the majority of survey respondents reported feeling that there was a system-wide gender bias against them – as men. A striking finding in the men's survey report was the number of male respondents who said that a malicious or false report had been made against them (by the alleged perpetrator).
• Longstanding issues for female victims of domestic abuse - Many of the themes identified in the research echo wider pre-pandemic evidence. This suggests that despite significant progress in legislation and policy in Scotland, female victims of domestic abuse (and related crimes) continue to convey negative experiences of the justice system in research.

This section describes the common themes across the three research reports relating to victim and witness experiences of the justice system as a whole. As noted, the Reporting Requirement in the Act focuses specifically on the experiences of victims and witnesses 'at court', but it is helpful to consider this in the context of their experience of the criminal justice system as a whole. Some of the findings presented below echo those of COVID-19-related research as well as that of wider pre-pandemic evidence (see Chapter 3). This suggests that some of the issues raised by research participants are longstanding ones which may have been exacerbated by the pandemic.

The gap between expectations, intentions and lived experience

It is widely reported that the Act is held up as an exemplar piece of legislation internationally, which reflects a modern understanding of domestic abuse and provides the necessary legislative tools to address new forms of criminal behaviour.

The research findings broadly echoed sentiments that the Act is a leading piece of legislation which better reflects the lived experience of victims, as evidenced by their accounts of psychological, physical and, for some, sexual harm over time. However, the research suggests that in the early years of its implementation - beset by the COVID-19 pandemic as it was - there was a marked gap between the intentions of the Act, and the lived experience of many of the victims and witnesses who participated in the research.

For many participants, their experience of the criminal justice system was reported as distressing, lengthy and difficult to navigate. There appeared to be discord between victim and witnesses' expectations of the process – primarily safety for them and their families but also expectations around procedural aspects such as witnesses not having to go to court, how/which evidence was used and consequences for perpetrators - and their actual experience.

For example, in the men's survey report, 16 out of 18 respondents said that none of their desired outcomes had occurred^[27], with only one respondent reporting a positive outcome. This was reflected in the research with women and children which reported that overall, the process did not deliver a sense of justice for most victims in the research, even where cases resulted in a guilty verdict or plea.

Limitations were also raised in relation to the extent to which the process and sentencing ensured the safety and wellbeing of all victims' children and other third parties involved e.g. family and friends.

Victims and witnesses across the research reported concerns about the effectiveness of the system response to continued abuse – which research participants reported occurred at all stages of the process. In the women's survey, for example, some victims reported that perpetrators were able to breach their bail, interdicts and non-harassment orders reportedly without consequence. The qualitative research report found that, for some victims, the onus was on them to keep themselves safe, particularly immediately after reporting to the police. Victim safety is covered in more depth below.

When participants were asked for their general reflections on their journey through the system the findings were mixed. In the women's survey report, there were limited responses^[28], with a small number of respondents reporting positive sentiments, such as being listened to and valued, whilst others reported frustration with long delays or felt that it was not worth it. When asked on the advice they would give to a friend, the most common response in the women's survey was that engaging with the criminal justice system (CJS) was 'the right decision' (Figure 20, p36). In contrast, the men's survey reported that almost all respondents said that the system had got 'nothing' right (14 out of 15).

Positive experiences of the justice system

All three reports described some examples of positive experiences of the criminal justice system. Both the women's survey and the qualitative research reported positive encounters with the police. For example, in the women's survey the most common response to a question about how respondents felt when they spoke to the police was that they felt 'the Police Officers dealt with the situation respectfully'. However, a fifth of respondents felt that 'the police officers treated the perpetrator with more respect than me'.

"The initial police officers believed me and didn't question anything I said (make it seem like they doubted it). Nothing was minimised and nothing was dismissed. It was the most empowering thing that they could have done." (Women's Survey Report, p41)

Positive experiences at various stages of the system were characterised by the following factors:

• Being listened to and believed;
• Professionals providing a clear explanation of the legislation and the criminal justice process, and, help and advice on how to navigate the system;
• Good communication skills - this was central to how women (who completed the survey) experienced the CJS regardless of the outcome;
• Kind and empathic treatment made a significant difference to women's experiences as a whole;
• Support with safety planning without putting the onus on victims.

These findings align with previous research which has found that victim satisfaction is associated with respectful and meaningful engagement, the provision of adequate information, and access to support, as described in Chapter 3 (SCCJR, 2019).

Overall, the research reporSCCJRat positive experiences were limited, however, and mostly depended on the response of one individual rather than a consistent approach at an institutional level.

Communication, information and understanding of the justice system

A common theme across the women's survey report and the qualitative research report was difficulties experienced by victims and witnesses due to a lack of communication and involvement/transparency in decision-making.

Poor communication, or the absence of it, was reported to have a negative impact on the victims in this research. It was reported to exacerbate victims' feelings of a lack of control which the women's survey report stated was a common theme at all stages of the process, but particularly at the pre-court stage.

"PF [Procurator Fiscal] decided to drop rape charges at this point but continued with attempted rape charges however no one told me about the dropped charges until a week before the court case. Communication with VIA^[29] very poor." (Women's survey report p31)

Similarly, the qualitative research reported that many victims and witnesses felt uninformed and excluded from the management of the criminal case, unaware of or not understanding the rationale for decisions made about the case.

A lack of knowledge and understanding of the system was a common theme. For example, the qualitative research study reported participants' lack of awareness or understanding of the rationale behind evidence-gathering processes. The report states that some participants felt that important evidence was disregarded or overlooked, with some victims reporting that they proactively collected and pushed for particular evidence to be considered during investigations.

The qualitative research also reported poor communication and/or understanding of which charges were being brought and why e.g. parents not understanding why a DASA child aggravation was not applied to their case. This was also evident during the pre-court process. For example, it was reported that several parents and children believed a video recorded joint investigative interview would mean a child would not be required to give evidence in court, only to later find out this was not the case. This was reported as distressing for the victims and witnesses concerned and undermined their trust in the process.

These findings suggest that many victims in this research did not feel the system consistently delivered 'procedural justice' for them (loosely defined as perceptions of fairness of processes, decision-making and treatment). This includes things like the provision of adequate information about the process, a sense of inclusion, and meaningful and respectful engagement (SCCJR, 2019). Delays and frustrations with the progress of cases suggests that there may have also been challenges in delivering some aspects of 'effective justice' (whereby the process is efficient, legal and accurate).

Disempowerment and re-traumatisation

The research found that all stages of the process were at times distressing and potentially re-traumatising for most research participants. The period after reporting domestic abuse to the police was reported to be a time of particular vulnerability for victims and witnesses, especially with regard to safety. Long delays whilst waiting for trials, and waiting to give evidence were also described as stressful. Other factors reported to impact on research participants' wellbeing included feeling uninformed or excluded, a perception that some professionals did not comprehend the emotional impact of the process and abuse on victims/witnesses and – related to this - having to give evidence in an adversarial process. The women's survey research reported that even where an outcome of a case resulted in a woman being protected from harm, the process was often felt to be damaging and traumatic.

This was attributed to a lack of regular communication from the authorities and poor understanding, knowledge and/or involvement in the processes and decisions made within it (as discussed in the previous section). These findings echo those of wider pre-pandemic research as discussed in Chapter 3.

In the women's survey, respondents were asked at different points whether CJS responses made them feel more or less in control. From the data available, it appears that the majority of respondents did not feel in control at any of the stages covered in the report findings (after reporting to police, after PF investigation, awaiting court)^[30]. For example, during the time waiting for trial, the most common response to a question about whether respondents felt 'in control of what was happening' was 'no' (n=9), compared to zero responses for 'yes', and two responses to 'sometimes' (Women's Survey Report, p34).

The importance of choice was highlighted as important for victims and witnesses when giving evidence and requesting special measures. The women's survey reported mixed views on special measures. One respondent, for example, stated that she could not have given evidence without it, whilst another suggested that it was disempowering saying that "having a screen made me feel like I had done something wrong" (p34). As noted, victims and witnesses interviewed in the qualitative research who gave evidence (n=11) expressed a strong preference for providing their evidence remotely. However, only one participant was able to give evidence via videolink. This evidence suggests that victims of domestic abuse are not a homogenous group and that individual needs and circumstances will vary.

Although there was limited evidence on this aspect in the men's survey, one respondent indicated that choice over how to report abuse was important, stating that:

"The online form was really helpful as I was too scared to call the police." (Respondent 4, Men's Survey p16).

Being treated with respect and kindness, and being listened to, was reported as central to victims' wellbeing and satisfaction with the process. Overall, however, the research found limited evidence of victims and witnesses in the studies experiencing healing or empowerment through the criminal justice process. Even where engaging with the CJS had led to improved safety, the women's survey reported that many respondents did not experience their engagement with the system as healing. In some cases, the process triggered or facilitated further abuse. This suggests that there were few examples of 'therapeutic justice' provided in the evidence (defined as a process that supports long term recovery and empowerment (SCCJR, 2019).

Victim safety and continued abuse

The research found that victims involved in the studies reported abuse in order to protect themselves and their families. However, a common theme across all three reports was that safety was not consistently ensured for victims and witnesses (and their families) as their case progressed through the justice system.

Methodological limitations make it difficult to draw conclusions about the effectiveness of system responses at different stages (e.g. after a report has been made to the police, after charges are brought etc). However, across the three reports concerns about safety were evident at all stages of the process. For example, the women's survey report states that the police response had a limited impact on women's safety, with the most common response to the question 'Did any of the police responses make you more or less safe?' being that it had 'made no difference' (n=38), followed by 'feeling more safe' (n=24) and 'feeling less safe' (n=14) (Figure 8^[31], p24). As the quote below shows, feelings of safety can be nuanced and interlinked with other themes such as control.

"I felt slightly safer knowing that the police had the backstory should the situation has escalated. However, I did not feel safe with the police or safe in general. I felt less safe when there was a possibility that they were going to try to force me to disclose more details about the abuse". (Survey Respondent, Women's survey p24)

The qualitative research report reported that the period after reporting domestic abuse to the police was a time of particular vulnerability for victims and witnesses, with some participants having felt that the onus was on them to keep themselves safe during this time.

The period before a court date appeared to be the time that the greatest proportion of female survey respondents reported feeling safe^[32]. In contrast, the qualitative research report states that during the pre-trial period, many participants reported continued abuse or harassment. Changes to custody arrangements and bail conditions were reported to have further impacted on safety, particularly when such changes were not communicated to victims in a timely or effective manner.

The views of research participants on the impact of sentencing on victims' safety were mixed, with some reports of enhanced safety but other reports that court disposals had little impact on the accused's behaviour. A common view across the women's survey report and qualitative research report was that imprisonment was the only court disposal which participants felt provided safety for them.

Post sentencing, there were reports by some research participants of perpetrators continuing to harass victims. Both the women's survey report and the qualitative research report highlighted concerns about perpetrators continuing the abuse and exploiting the system even when NHOs were in place, either by ignoring the order or finding loopholes. Examples were provided of perpetrators sending unsolicited mail and encouraging family members to engage in harassment, thereby complying with the conditions of NHOs but still harassing the victim. Concerns about being monitored via social media were also raised.

Finally, a consistent finding was that perpetrators were reported to 'use' or 'exploit' the system to exert control and instil fear. The men's survey, for example, describes how, some survey respondents reported that their involvement with the CJS was because of a false allegation (against them) made by the perpetrator as a means of furthering abuse.

"It was highly stressful knowing I should never have been there and was only there as the perpetrator was using the system as an extension of her abuse." (Men's Survey Report, Respondent 9 p20)

Safety concerns about children and other third parties are covered below.

Minimisation of abuse and dissatisfaction with justice outcomes

A common finding across the research was victim dissatisfaction with the case or court outcome. Many research participants were reported to have felt that sentences were too lenient and did not reflect the severity of the abuse. This was interpreted by some as the system not valuing them and minimising their experiences of abuse.

Participants reported feeling confused and let down by system responses and decisions. For example, there were reports of bail conditions not being enforced and breaches not being effectively dealt with. Victims were reported to feel that there were insufficient consequences for perpetrators, with decisions being made before cases reached court such as a decision to accept a plea of guilty to lesser or amended charges.

The women's survey reported participants feeling disappointed by some pre-court decisions, whilst the men's survey stated that respondents voiced frustration about the lack of repercussions for those who they said had made false reports against them. The minimisation of abuse was felt very keenly by male survey respondents as a gendered issue. This theme is explored more in the next section.

Even where cases resulted in a guilty plea (18 of 22 cases in the qualitative research report), concerns that the prosecution and sentencing did not reflect the severity of abuse was reported as a common theme. Where the accused was found not guilty, participants were especially negative about the justice system. These victims were reported to have been left feeling very vulnerable, with bail conditions and other protective measures ending abruptly.

These research findings suggest that there was limited evidence of 'distributive justice' (where outcomes are perceived as fair). However, as noted above, the importance of the process and how victims and witnesses are treated ('procedural justice') was, in some cases, as important for research participants as the outcome.

Support and recovery

As noted, participants in this research were reported to have found the process difficult and for some, re-traumatising. Measures put in place to support victims, such as special measures, interdicts and NHOs were welcomed but were reported to provide temporary respite rather than permanent safety.

The women's survey report states that long delays, often without information, were compounded by a lack of support. The qualitative (interview-based) research found that specialist support and advocacy services, where available, were highly valued by victims and witnesses in the study e.g. support from a named worker during the pre-court period to help victims/witnesses prepare, manage expectations and explain special measures to them. Advocacy and support services were reported as the most significant mechanisms for minimising trauma and enhancing victims'/witnesses' feelings of safety. However, as noted, gaps in provision were identified, particularly earlier in the process and post court.

The women and men's surveys asked respondents about their experiences of statutory support services including social work, the Children's Reporter, child contact centres and the Children's Panel. However, very few responses were received. The women's survey reported that experiences were mixed, with both positive and negative experiences recorded, but no specific findings on this were reported. The men's survey found that respondents generally reported negative experiences of the criminal (and civil) justice support agencies they had contact with. Responses were underpinned by a common view from respondents that the system was prejudiced against them because of their gender, particularly in relation to their parenting rights.

Finally, as noted previously, kind and empathetic treatment was reported to make a significant difference to victims' and witnesses' experience of the justice system. The women's survey suggests that 'therapeutic justice' could be achieved by introducing more trauma-informed practice and support such as empathic listening and validation (e.g. being taken seriously and believed).

Experiences of Different Victim and Witness groups

This section covers findings specific to the experiences of different groups of victims/witnesses namely: children and young complainers, male victims, female victims, and, a limited discussion on some protected characteristics (ethnicity and disability). It is important to note that victims and witnesses are not a homogenous group. The research found that even within these groups, victims and witnesses had different perspectives and needs.

Considerations relating to children and young complainers (and other third parties)

The qualitative research included in-depth interviews with five court-cited child witnesses (age 12-17) and four young victim complainers (age 17-22 but who were under 18 when first subject to domestic abuse)^[33]. Information about five other child cited witnesses was also included in the study through their mother's perspectives when interviewed. Key themes relating to the experiences of children and young people, young complainers and parents are summarised below, alongside any relevant findings from the men's and women's survey reports (from the perspective of parents).

A common theme was that victims felt perpetrators were not always held accountable for the impact that domestic abuse had on children. All child and parent interviewees detailed children being subjected to, witnessing and being adversely affected by domestic abuse.

As noted in Chapter 6, NHOs were identified as a particular aspect of the new law that some parents felt could have been used more effectively. Several adult participants were critical that the NHOs did not extend to any or all of their children, with child contact arrangements being perceived to have influenced court decisions^[34].

Other issues raised in relation to child contact arrangements included limited effectiveness of bail conditions, continued abuse to the (adult) victim via child contact, and cumulative negative impacts on children and families involved in both criminal and civil justice (family court) proceedings. Forthcoming research funded by the Scottish Government explores the interactions between civil and criminal proceedings in the context of domestic abuse and child contact in Scotland^[35].

Like adults, giving evidence was reported to be a stressful experience for those children involved. Only 2 of the 5 children interviewed gave evidence in proceedings, which they did remotely. The children interviewed felt that going to court was especially intimidating for them and that this was not always recognised or fully understood by those working in courts. Although the protection offered by giving evidence remotely was welcomed by children (and parents), as noted, the experience and impact of cross-examination was recounted by some parents as distressing for children, as were court rules related to contamination of evidence.

The lack of regular communication and involvement and/or explanation of decision-making was raised as a concern. Some of the child cited witnesses reported not being party to or understanding decision-making and felt that justice professionals did not understand the impact of decisions on them.

"I think the only thing that was really bad was they told us we most likely wouldn't have to give a statement again or go to court. And then a year later, we found out, like, we had to do it." (Child 4, Qualitative Research Report p47)

Many of these themes were captured in The Everyday Heroes Report on Justice (Houghton & MacDonald, 2018) which reported on children and young people's priorities for action in relation to gender-based violence and inequality in Scotland. Of note are priorities relating to involvement in decisions affecting them including contact with the accused, access to support throughout the process, improved communication and information provision and a focus on reducing re-traumatisation.

The reader is also directed to the 'Justice, Safety & Support' booklet which was co-created by children and young people with lived experience of domestic abuse and highlights the research findings they felt were most important. These included themes around safety, trust, understanding the impact of domestic abuse on children, clear information and involvement in decision making, and support (for as long as they need it).

"I think it would have been better if it was not four or five different court dates." – 13 year old

"I think I should have got longer with [my advocacy worker] than what I did. But in the short time that I had, it was really beneficial" – 14 year old

(Justice, Safety & Support Report)

Finally, the research reported that many of the victims in the study felt that abuse of a third party, including wider family and friends, was not taken account of adequately throughout the process. A key message was that domestic abuse affects all family members. The qualitative research report states some victims felt that the relational aspect of abuse was inadequately recognised in decision-making, particularly in the way that family members' safety was interconnected. For example, some participants reported that adult children and other individuals were often subject to abuse and harassment from the accused and victims were concerned that they were not included in protective measures such as NHOs^[36].

Experiences of male victims of domestic abuse

There were 18 responses to the men's survey and two men interviewed in the qualitative research. The small number of men interviewed meant that any meaningful analysis relating to gender was not possible and findings specific to men were therefore not reported in the qualitative research report.

A striking finding in the men's survey report was the number of male respondents, all of whom had identified as victims of domestic abuse, reporting that the perpetrator had made a malicious or false report against them (11 out of 18)^[37]. Indeed this was the reason that some respondents had come into contact with the justice system in the first place. Furthermore, the report states that in the majority of cases, no further action was taken against the alleged perpetrator (13 out of 18)^[38], with only 3 such cases referred to the criminal courts. The decision to take no further action against the perpetrator was associated with feelings of being disbelieved and unsupported by a system which was perceived to not take domestic abuse against male victims seriously.

"They were not able to help me, mainly because I am a man and my abuser is a woman, not the other way." (Respondent 6, Men's Survey p21)

Although direct comparisons between the men's and women's surveys are problematic^[39], it is interesting to note that the women's survey found that where women report having had false allegations made against them by the perpetrator the experience was not wholly negative. One of the two women who had experienced this felt that the situation was 'dealt with respectfully,' the police officers 'made her feel safer', 'like they listened', 'like they cared' (p26). Due to the very small sample size, no conclusions can be drawn from this, but it does contrast sharply with the men's survey findings. The women's survey reported that an arrest or charges were made against the perpetrator in approximately half of cases (as reported by survey respondents).

The men's survey report found that the majority of survey respondents reported feeling that there was a system-wide gender bias against them – as men. Whilst wider evidence on male victim experiences of the criminal justice system appears to be limited, some UK (not Scottish) studies have reported similar findings. Again based on very small sample sizes, research has reported male victims feeling unfairly treated and fearful of not being believed, not taken seriously and being judged (e.g. McCarrick et al., 2016; Hogan, 2016 & Bates, 2020).

A final main finding in the men's survey was that most respondents who had children reported a perceived gender-bias against them in relation to parenting rights. Respondents raised issues of gendered assumptions and preferences that they felt were given to women in relation to the care and custody of children. Survey respondents reported feeling that the accused could use their interactions with agencies as a means to continue to abuse them and/or their children because the agencies were unwilling to listen to them (the male victims) or take their experiences seriously.

Longstanding issues for female victims of domestic abuse

The women's survey included responses from 29 women whilst the qualitative research included interviews with 11 women and four young female complainers. The findings reported in Chapters 3-5 largely reflect the views of women and their experiences of the justice system. As with men, female adult participants reported concerns about the extent to which they felt the investigation, prosecution and sentencing for domestic abuse offences adequately reflected the severity of abuse. Going to court was reported as difficult and distressing for most female participants. Both surveys reported mixed results on whether or not those who completed the survey would have chosen to become involved in the justice process had they known what it would be like, with responses overall painting a mostly negative picture. The women's survey found, however, that the most common response that female respondents gave to a question about the advice they would give to a friend who was considering reporting domestic abuse was 'it's the right decision'.

Many of the themes covered in the previous section echo wider pre-pandemic evidence which focuses largely on the experiences of female 'survivors'^[40]; as described in Chapter 3. These themes are all referenced to some extent in the women's survey and/or qualitative research report. This suggests that despite significant progress in legislation and policy in Scotland, female victims of domestic abuse (and related crimes) continue to convey negative experiences of the justice system in research. Issues such as longer waiting times which were already reported as lengthy and re-traumatising for female victims (Forbes, 2021), were exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Although there were not many instances of female participants describing their experiences themselves through a gendered lens, domestic abuse is widely accepted to be a gendered form of violence. The exception to this was one respondent in the women's survey report who felt that her word 'as a woman' was worth less than that of the accused (who was male).

Child contact was another part of the system which some female research participants felt valued the role of men as fathers more highly than other factors including their safety (for example the issue with NHOs excluding some/all children being perceived to be influenced by child contact arrangements). Issues associated with a 'pro-contact' culture in family courts, such as safety risks to victims and children, has been evidenced elsewhere (e.g. Morrison, 2015; Hester & Radford, 1996; Brooks-Hay et al., 2019).

Absence of perspectives of victims and witnesses from ethnic minority backgrounds and other protected characteristics

Despite efforts to recruit participants from 'seldom heard from' groups, the small number of minority ethnic participants meant that no meaningful analysis on this basis could be undertaken. One out of 22 participants identified as 'Black Minority Ethnic' in the qualitative study; the other 21 identified as White Scottish or White British. In the women's survey, one respondent identified as 'Asian or Asian British - Pakistani'; the other 28 identified as White Scottish or other White category. In the men's survey, one respondent identified as 'Black or Black British – African' and one identified as 'Mixed – Any other mixed background'; the remaining 16 identified as White Scottish or other White category (15) or 'prefer not to answer' (1).

Wider research suggests that the experience of ethnic minority victims of domestic abuse may not be well understood, with other factors, in addition to gender, influencing victim experiences of abuse such as kinship patterns (e.g. preference for sons, status/role of the mother-in-law), immigration status, race and ethnicity (Anitha and Gill, 2021; Gangoli et al., 2011). Forthcoming Scottish Government funded research Diversifying Justice: Revealing viable pathways for South Asian women will explore South Asian female victims' perceptions of justice and the justice system (amongst other factors).

Due to data constraints it was also not possible to undertake any analysis related to victims or witnesses with disabilities. Data on disabilities was only available in the men's survey report which stated that seven (out of 18) respondents reported that they had a disability (of which six said it was not visible to other people)^[41]. Ethical considerations meant that disability data (and other protected characteristics) were not gathered in the qualitative research.

Similarly, data on research participants' sexuality was not reported, with the exception of the men's survey^[42]. Due to sample size it was not possible to undertake any analysis of data in respect of this.