The Double-Edged Sword of Trauma Talk: Frozen Fright, Paradoxical Resilience, and the Legal Negotiation of Credibility in Rape Cases

Trauma is central to understanding victims’ responses to sexual assault in legal contexts, but its role in credibility assessments remains contested. This study examines how trauma discourse is expressed, negotiated, and interpreted in rape trials. It is based on a qualitative reflexive thematic analysis of 10 rape cases in Sweden, including recorded courtroom interrogations (i.e., complainants’ testimony and cross-examinations) and follow-up interviews with complainants. The results show that references to frozen fright can support credibility by explaining passivity but are often contested as exaggerated or inconsistent. Its limitations in complex cases motivate the concept of paradoxical resilience , capturing seemingly contradictory yet rational survival strategies. This concept may contribute to more nuanced interpretations in legal proceedings.