In a study of 40 adult rape jury trials, aimed at identifying how and why the questioning process in rape trials results in re-traumatisation, researchers noticed how often adult women complainants gave evidence of clearly expressed lack of consent – through words or conduct or a combination of both. In 26 cases the complainant also gave evidence of multiple attempts to negotiate the desired limits of sexual intimacy. Her evidence was challenged in cross-examination and during closing arguments by emphasis on aspects of her conduct argued to be indicative of consent. Clearly articulated absence of consent was not a predictor of convictions, even in the Aotearoa New Zealand Sexual Violence Court Pilot. Only 13 of these 26 cases resulted in a guilty verdict. In this article, I will examine how the narratives about consent in recent adult rape trials illustrate the ongoing significance of feminist critiques of the concept, particularly its efficacy regarding gendered sexual violence, as well as counselling caution about expectations of a reformed definition of consent.

在一项针对 40 名成人强奸陪审团审判的研究中，旨在确定强奸审判中的提问过程如何以及为何导致再次创伤，研究人员注意到成年女性申诉人提供明确表示不同意的证据的频率 - 通过言语或行为或两者的结合。在 26 起案件中，申诉人还提供了多次试图协商性亲密限制的证据。她的证据在盘问和结案陈词中受到质疑，强调她的行为方面被认为表明同意。即使在 Aotearoa 新西兰性暴力法庭试点中，明确表达的不同意也不能预测定罪。在这 26 起案件中，只有 13 起被判有罪。在本文中，