Abstract: Recent statistics reveal alarming flaws in the Criminal Justice System’s (CJS) handling of rape cases, undermining the pursuit of justice for complainants seeking legal redress. This paper takes a novel approach to exploring police rape stereotype use in interviews with rape complainants; utilising critical discourse analysis and conversation analysis and discursive psychology to understand and critique the balance of power within an interview, and how this might impact attrition and prosecution decisions. Ten police interviews with rape complainants were analysed with several suspect discursive constructions present throughout, including the interviewer constructing the suspect as misunderstanding, the complainant as miscommunicating non-consent, or agentless and passive talk. A significant and original finding was the way constructions interacted with the spectrum of stranger to partner rapes. In stranger rape cases passive language often obscured the suspect and emphasised complainant behavior. Acquaintance rapes frequently involved misunderstandings centred on visible distress and mixed signals. Partner rapes highlighted issues around consent and coercion, with officers often ignorant of coercive control and domestic abuse. These findings align with Operation Bluestone Soteria (OSB), thus the recommendations align with those made by OSB’s Pillar One.