I was quoted over £7,000 for details of my rapist’s trial

I was sitting in the House of Commons on Wednesday listening to a debate about my life.

My MP, Sarah Olney, asked the Prime Minister if he would support our campaign to ensure that rape victims are entitled to a copy of a transcript of the trial they were part of, free of charge.

Rishi Sunak’s response was a slap in the face to rape survivors like me. 

For me, this fight is personal.

In February 2020, my boyfriend at the time drugged me, tied me up, then raped me and filmed it all. I had no idea it even happened until a month later when I found out there was video evidence – when I kicked him out for stealing £300 from my paypal account.

Once I realised there was a video, I knew that I had to report him. What followed was a two-year fight to bring this dangerous sexual predator to justice.

It took everything for me not to give up and go back to Brazil – my home country – as I knew that if I didn’t see this through, he wouldn’t stop abusing women.

Thankfully, in April 2022, he was found guilty of rape, sexual assault and theft. He was sentenced to 18 years in prison.

In the aftermath of the conviction, it was recommended to me by my therapist – who had been treating me since the crime happened – that reading court transcripts from a perpetrator’s trial can be a monumental part of the healing process for victims, helping them come to terms with their experience.

But I was quoted £7,459.20 to receive a copy. In the Open Justice For All campaign – led by a group of survivors and their families – I came to know of a mother who was quoted £22,000 for her daughter’s trial transcripts.

This injustice is why I reached out to my MP hoping that together we could change this law, ensuring that victims get the justice they deserve. It’s why Baroness Brinton laid an amendment to the Victims Bill that would allow all victims of crime to obtain the sentencing remarks and judge’s summing up, free of charge.

But as I watched from the gallery on Wednesday, this hope was shattered. 

Rishi Sunak said he was ‘extremely sorry’ to hear about my case and offered his ‘sympathies’, but then refused to commit to the amendment. Instead, he said he’s looking at options to ‘reduce the costs’.

I wish I could say I was surprised by the Prime Minister’s answer. But his response reflected what has become a familiar answer by now – warm but empty words, repeated time and again by representatives of this Government.

Words totally devoid of real action, made clear each time the amendment is discussed in the Commons and the Lords.

The Justice Secretary nodded along to Sunak’s remarks, but again, I knew his actions were hollow.

Am I the only victim of crime who feels triggered every time the Government acknowledges the systemic failures that we endure in the criminal justice system? Where empty promises are made in the effort to secure votes. 

What also felt like a broken record was Mr Sunak’s boasting about the Government’s new pilot scheme, offered like a consolation prize. Under this scheme, only victims of rape and serious sexual assault who have secured a conviction will be able to access part of the transcripts from the trial that is part of their story.

But what about those victims who never see a conviction? Anyone who has watched at least one news report on conviction rates for rape and serious sexual assault cases knows the dire state of affairs in our country right now.

In the past four years, conviction rates have been shockingly low while Crown Court backlogs remain at an all-time high.

Not to mention those who don’t report. Because, let’s face it, it can seem like a waste of time and many are rightfully scared of diving into the bottomless well of victimisation and added trauma that all complainants endure when facing the criminal justice system.

All of this means the pilot will benefit only a very small group of individuals. In my opinion, while leaving out the victims who need it the most – those who are left in the dark, without the much-needed answers as to why their perpetrator got away.

Another aspect of the Government’s response that fell flat was the Prime Minister’s assertion that ‘we already offer a free service to families of homicide victims’. If that’s the case, why has domestic abuse campaigner David Challen’s request for his family member’s case been refused?

So no, Mr Prime Minister, I do not accept your sympathies to me and my family. I do not accept the series of meaningless ‘after shock’ commitments to improving victims’ access to transcripts, with no real substance or change.

Most of all, I do not accept yours or anyone else’s excuse that the issue is cost-related.

If costs are the issue – and I can see why the taxpayer might be concerned – I ask the Prime Minister to do the maths and compare it to the costs that victims pay while waiting years for therapy with the NHS or the cost of benefits for those who are not fit to work. But most of all, the weight that every single victim of crime carries when they are robbed of their right to heal and move on.

Instead, I will keep urging the Government to support Baroness Brinton’s amendment that will get the job done instead of adding to the trauma of victims.

The amendment is set to be debated in the House of Lords on Tuesday. This will be the chance for politicians from all parties and none – including the Conservatives and Labour – to ensure the Government finally matches their warm words with real action.

I hope I can finally be surprised by their response.

UKTV Play offers links to information and support for domestic abuse on their website here. Juliana’s story features in next week’s episode of Red Flag on W, available Wednesday 24 April at 10pm and catch up on UKTV Play.

Do you have a story you’d like to share? Get in touch by emailing James.Besanvalle@metro.co.uk. 

Share your views in the comments below.