It seems we're in an era where every time we read the news there is a new case of sexual assault. While the #metoo campaign flooded my social media newsfeed and The Silence Breakers came forward, I stayed quiet. Not because I haven't been a victim. Just like one in six women (at least) in Australia, I too have been sexually assaulted. I stayed quiet because I was serving on a jury of a child sexual assault case and could not show a conflict of interest. And while my heart welled for those breaking their silence, I was haunted as I watched the system eventually fail those women.

When my jury service ended, we set a man free. A man, who in my mind is guilty of more than 25 counts of child sexual assault. A man, who I believe preyed on young girls over a period of 40 years. Who had crept into their bedrooms at night to touch them. Who had fostered young girls, and then groomed them to accept his ongoing assaults. Who had taken nieces truck-driving and then had sexual intercourse with them night after night. A man who would tell them to stay quiet or risk ruining the family. A man who had stuck a deodorant can in a 13-year-old's vagina and then later forced her to have anal sex. And after nine weeks of jury service, I felt devastated. I, along with the 11 other jurors and the judicial system, let those victims down in the worst way possible. We were a hung jury, and he walked free.

Illustration: Dionne Gain

The judicial system of NSW elects a jury as judges of the facts. Twelve people, who are representatives of the state in which we live. A combination of genders, ages, backgrounds, religions and life experiences. What became clear over the three weeks of deliberation that followed a six-week trial is that the general public does not have the ability to do its job properly. As a population, we do not have the emotional intelligence to understand the psychology of victims and how their responses vary. Many of my fellow jurors found the girls and women unreliable. They could not fathom how the victims continued to place themselves in harm's way. Girls between 10 and 16 years of age at the time of their assault, many of whom had been abused over a number of years, by a man who was either their uncle or foster father. That lack of empathy among so many on the jury undermined the facts of the case and left room for doubt.

Sitting around that table, I realised just how broken the system and society is when it comes to sexual assault. When you hear statements such as, "two fingers in a vagina wasn't sexual assault in my day" or "maybe they enjoyed it" you realise we are fighting a battle that cannot be won. People like that, are never going to understand sexual assault and it's impossible to convict a man with a jury that holds that mindset. It took every part of me not to commit a crime of my own in that deliberation room.