Mapping the Theory and the Conviction Rate Attractor

Part of the Palgrave Socio-Legal Studies book series (PSLS)


This chapter presents an overview of the theoretical framework developed and deployed in the book and explores a pivotal ‘attractor’ that emerged from the data: conviction rates. The first section, mapping the theory, advances the book’s theoretical framework through introducing key concepts in an accessible manner as possible. This enables diverse audiences, of varying levels of familiarity with the theory, to effectively engage with the book. The book’s concepts are drawn from the synthesis of Deleuze’s materialist philosophy of affect and sense, Deleuze and Guattari’s affective assemblage theory and complexity science and theory. The final section utilises the theoretical framework to explore barristers’ perspectives on the conviction rate for rape, which emerged as a key theme and ‘stable attractor’ in the data/assemblage. This enables us to bring the theory and data into conversation from the outset and lays the foundation for the following chapters.


New materialism and affect theory Complex systems Affective assemblagesConviction rates Barristers 


  1. Bonta, M., & Protevi, J. (2004). Deleuze and Geophilosophy: A Guide and Glossary. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Carline, A., & Easteal, P. (2014). Shades of Grey – Domestic and Sexual Violence Against Women: Law Reform and Society. Abingdon: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Carline, A., & Gunby, C. (2017). Rape Politics, Policies and Practice: Exploring the Tensions and Unanticipated Consequences of Well-Intended Victim-Focused Measures. The Howard Journal, 56, 34–52.Google Scholar
  4. Carline, A., & Gunby, C. (2019). Justice for Rape Complainants: Limitations and Possibilities. In P. Carlen & L. A. Franca (Eds.), Justice Alternatives (pp. 306–320). Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  5. Conaghan, J., & Russell, Y. (2014). Rape Myths, Law and Feminist Research: ‘Myths About Myths’. Feminist Legal Studies, 22(1), 25–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Coveney, P., & Highfield, R. (1995). Frontiers of Complexity: The Search for Order in a Chaotic World. London: Faber and Faber.Google Scholar
  7. Crown Prosecution Service (CPS). (2018). The Code for Crown Prosecutors. Retrieved from
  8. Deleuze, G. (1990). Logic of Sense. London: Athlone Press.Google Scholar
  9. Deleuze, G. (1991). Bergsonism. New York: Zone Books.Google Scholar
  10. Deleuze, G. (1992). Expressionism in Philosophy: Spinoza. New York: Zone Books.Google Scholar
  11. Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1986). Kafka: Toward a Minor Literature. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  12. Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1994). What Is Philosophy? London: Verso.Google Scholar
  13. Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (2004). A Thousand Plateaus. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
  14. Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (2017). Anti-Oedipus. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
  15. Ellison, L., & Munro, V. E. (2010). Getting to (Not) Guilty: Examining Jurors’ Deliberative Processes in and Beyond the Context of a Mock Rape Trial. Legal Studies, 30(1), 74–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gunby, C., Carline, A., & Beynon, C. (2012). Regretting It After? Perspectives on Alcohol Consumption, Nonconsensual Sex and False Allegations of Rape. Social and Legal Studies, 22(1), 87–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hohl, K., & Stanko, B. (2015). Complaints of Rape and the Criminal Justice System: Fresh Evidence on the Attrition Problem in England and Wales. European Journal of Criminology, 12(3), 324–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Home Office. (2000). Setting the Boundaries: Reforming the Law on Sex Offences (Vol. 1). London: Home Office.Google Scholar
  19. Kauffman, S. (1995). At Home in the Universe: The Search for Laws of Self-Organisation and Complexity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Kauffman, S. (2000). Investigations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Krahe, B. (2013). Myths About Myths? Let the Evidence Speak. A Common on Reece. Retrieved from
  22. Ministry of Justice (MoJ), Home Office, and Office for National Statistics (ONS). (2013). An Overview of Sexual Offending in England and Wales. London: Ministry of Justice, Home Office, and ONS.Google Scholar
  23. Massumi, B. (1995). The Autonomy of Affect. Cultural Critique Part, 31(II), 83–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mulcahy, L. (2011). Legal Architecture: Justice, Due Process and the Place of Law. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  25. Probyn, E. (2005). Blush: Faces of Shame. Minnesota: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  26. Prochuk, A. (2018). We Are Here: Women’s Experiences of the Barriers to Reporting Sexual Assault. Vancouver: West Coast Leaf.Google Scholar
  27. Reece, H. (2013). Rape Myths: Is Elite Opinion Right and Popular Opinion Wrong? Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 33(3), 445–473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Sommers, I., & Baskin, D. (2011). The Influence of Forensic Evidence on the Case Outcomes of Rape Incidents. The Justice System Journal, 32(3), 314–334.Google Scholar
  29. Spinoza, B. (2000). Ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Stern Review. (2010). A Report by Baroness Vivien Stern CBE of an Independent Review into How Rape Complaints Are Handled by Public Authorities in England and Wales. London: Home Office.Google Scholar
  31. Tamboukou, M. (2008). Machinic Assemblages: Women, Art Education and Space. Discourse, 29(3), 359–375.Google Scholar
  32. Temkin, J. (2002). Rape and the Legal Process. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Temkin, J., & Krahe, B. (2008). Sexual Assault and the Justice Gap: A Question of Attitude. Oxford: Hart Publishing.Google Scholar
  34. Waldrop, M. (1992). Complexity: The Emerging Science at the Edge of Order and Chaos. Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
  35. Walker, J. T. (2007). Advancing Science and Research in Criminal Justice/Criminology: Complex Systems Theory and Non-Linear Analyses. Justice Quarterly, 24(4), 555–581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Wetherell, M. (2012). Affect and Emotion: A New Social Science Understanding. London: Sage Publications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of LiverpoolLiverpoolUK
  2. 2.Institute for Applied Health ResearchUniversity of BirminghamBirminghamUK
  3. 3.Liverpool Hope UniversityLiverpoolUK

Personalised recommendations