Twelve female rape victims met Humza Yousaf to discuss the not proven verdict and how handling complaints could improve.
They told the Justice Secretary they felt “left in the dark” after reporting to police and were concerned about Scotland’s not proven verdict.
Yousaf said: “More than one described how being left in the dark about how her case was progressing left her feeling unable to move on with her life.
“Others, however, raised wider concerns about how juries make decisions and the verdicts available.”
It comes after results published this week from the UK’s largest study of juries showed confusion surrounds Scotland’s controversial third verdict.
The study set up 64 mock juries made up of 863 individuals and showed them two finely-balanced trials, one an assault, the other a rape case.
The legal implications of a are the same as with a not guilty verdict, with the accused acquitted and innocent in the eyes of the law.
But only 51 per cent of all jurors felt they “fully understood” the not proven verdict, which is used disproportionately in rape cases.
In 2016-17, only 39 per cent of rape and attempted rape cases resulted in convictions, the lowest rate for any type of crime.
Nearly 30 per cent of acquittals were not proven, compared with 17 per cent for all crimes.
Yousaf said: “I will give serious consideration to the questions posed by the research – including moving from a three-verdict system to a two-verdict system.
“While this is not an area where any change could happen overnight, it is one part of our work to make Scotland’s justice system better for all, including victims of rape and sexual assault.”
The research also confirmed that jurors are still guided in rape cases by myths over how victims react when attacked.
In the “I just froze” campaign, Rape Crisis Scotland aimed to challenge and change common misconceptions that there is a right or wrong way for people to react during or after a rape.
The jury research found “many understood a ‘freeze’ reaction to be common among rape victims while others insisted this was not how they would have reacted”.
The report said: “Discussion focused on the notion the complainer had not suffered extensive injury or had not done enough to physically resist the accused despite having said in evidence she had tried to push the accused off but he was too heavy.”
A Rape Crisis Scotland spokesman said: “There is some evidence that juries can be reluctant to convict in cases of rape and that preconceived notions of how someone should react to being assaulted may impact on their decision making.
“The presence of the not proven verdict has raised fears that this widely misunderstood verdict gives juries an easy way out and contributes to guilty men walking free.”
