In this article, first published on the Halsbury's Law Exchange blog, Felicity Gerry responds to questions about whether advocates are doing enough to look after victims in sensitive cases

Last week I was asked to take part in a radio programme featuring a discussion which I was told was about 'Rape trials: What needs to change?' I couldn't go as, ironically, I was in court making a prosecution speech in a rape. It occurred to me that the title was a loaded one, especially when three out of five rape trials result in conviction. These statistics, released by the Crown Prosecution Service, tend to suggest that, broadly speaking, rape trials are being conducted fairly. I was also told that the producer wanted to look at what has changed since Baroness Stern's review and recommendations.

Recently, there have been changes in judicial directions on delayed complaints, rejecting stereotypes and the effect of trauma on consistency. In addition, this week CrimeLine reported on R v E [2011], in which the Court of Appeal upheld a conviction for sex offences where psychological evidence that the complainant's presentation was consistent with a post-traumatic stress disorder reaction was admitted where the defence was that the allegations of sexual abuse were a complete fabrication. Repeated prolonged trauma such as extensive child abuse is considered to be type two trauma.

Like my specialist rape advocate colleagues, these issues are dealt with in every trial whilst balancing the proper presentation of the defence case. It is said that there is some new research out that looks at the effects of the trial on victims. I have no doubt that for some victims the experience of reliving their experience is traumatic, but cases have to be proved and such proof has to be based on evidence of what happened, which is always grim. The question "what did he/she do?" is the hardest for a victim to answer, but it has to be asked. If the issue is what the defendant believed, then the question sometimes has to be "and what did you do?"

Again, to demonstrate it was obvious that there was no consent, such a question has to be answered. Every effort is made to accommodate the needs and wishes of a complainant, but where the allegation of rape is challenged, they need to be as stoic as they can in order to assist in the conviction of the perpetrator. The decision in R v E demonstrates what difficulties there can be as, for some victims, the idea of psychological assessment will feel as though, in addition to the defendant suggesting they are lying, there is a suggestion that they have something mentally wrong. Progress can be useful but we have to be careful not to add insult to injury.

I was asked: "How much does a barrister concentrate on getting a conviction, as opposed to looking after the victim?" I think that the best a prosecutor can do is to make every effort to fairly and safely secure a conviction. Seeing that such an effort is being made will reassure a victim that they are being taken seriously.

I meet victims on a regular basis. A couple have refused to come to court unless I was the prosecutor. Cases are criticised for keeping victims in court for days but sometimes it takes that long for them to put their traumatic experience across. What really needs to change is the suggestion that advocates don't care and for the public to realise that, where suspects are charged, on balance, we are getting it right. Trials are about proof not presumption. If there is insufficient evidence to charge, then it is not rape trials we need to look at but the reasons for the failed allegations and why the evidence is not available or not being collected. Good luck to my replacement, as such a vexed issue will be hard to put across without an unbalanced response.

The future victims in my trials may thank me for my sensitive approach but will only be really pleased if I win. I can only promise to try. The rest is up to the evidence and the decision of the jury.

Felicity Gerry is a criminal barrister and a contributor to the Halsbury's Law Exchange blog. Click here to follow the Halsbury's Law Exchange on Twitter and click here to follow Felicity.