Reply With Quote
nonconsensual sex is assault pure and simple. not sure how promiscuity relates to cases of forcible assault.
at any rate, the traditional tactic of presenting the accuser as a to the jury has little conceivable bearing on a case of violent assault and rape, except as a cheap way to get the accused rapist off.
rape shield laws are pervasive, nearly universal in the US. why were they adopted?
was the legal system cowed by y feminists?
Last edited by Winehole23; 07-27-2015 at 12:09 PM.
nonconsensual sex is assault pure and simple. not sure how promiscuity relates to cases of forcible assault.
seems not germane to the question how often the victim said yes in the past if she says no now and gets raped.
Yes, absolutely. Rape Shield Laws rose to prominence in the 70s - is that just a coincidence?
Do you dispute rape crimes are treated differently than other felonies?
Rape is assault yes.
It's also one of the few crimes where rules of evidence and cons utional protections are abrogated.
I can tell you don't see how promiscuity relates to rape.
It doesn't. Or it shouldn't.
Why is a witnesses past conviction for fraud germane to his credibility as a witness?
Probably not. Dunno. As gross simplifications go that seems roughly accurate. Not sure that's tantamount to the legal system being cowed so much as seeing the broader interests of justice being served, but i know we'll not agree on this.
Nope.
There is a relationship between terpitude and deception/recidivism sure but you begging the question about a similar link here isn't an argument, counselor crayola.
promiscuity isn't fraud.
Clearly not relevant to the crime charged, right?Dershowitz argued that the trial court had uncons utionally barred admission of evidence that would have acquitted Tyson: allegations that his accuser, a nineteen-year-old woman, had previously falsely accused another man of rape to avoid angering her father about her sexual activity. Because such evidence related to the victim's past sexual history, it was ruled inadmissible.
It's funny the legal standard that I see used in court decisions I read over and over again is that it's not enough that there is a similarity or difference but instead how such a difference or similarity would cause a different or the same result is key. I see judges rule against simply laying out the simple difference/similar again and again.
Good job, crayola. Maybe sometime soon we will see a complete argument.
Judges have the discretion to allow or disallow evidence, for better and for worse.
why an accuser's promiscuity per se should be fair game in rape cases, as you've suggested, still isn't clear.
The 6th amendment isn't discretionary
If there's a question about consent, how readily she does or does not consent to sex is something the jury should know.
So you're ok with the inability to pry into an accuser's prior false accusations in rape cases? Why's that?
The notion that the previous case speaks to the "nature of the accuser" demonstrates quite clearly how it is prejudicial. At best you have a conflict between what you claim and an impartial jury. Perhaps if you could substantiate how in that particular case the differences would have made meaningful difference. All you do is beg the question. You of course are speaking from a position of gross ignorance to the facts of any of the cases.
I just see you being vicariously threatened really.
I don't buy it, but I can see why you argue for it -- easier for you to paint the accuser as a and get the jury to ignore evidence of rape.
No surprise there.
You still haven't answered the question: are you ok with excluding evidence of an accuser's prior false accusations?
no, but in the case you cited it sounded like the judge had the discretion to admit it, so i don't see what the problem is other than you didn't like the result.
So you agree that rape isn't treated like other crimes, and you're ok with depriving defendants of their cons utional right to put on a full defense. Noted.
That a ruling is "discretionary" doesn't mean that it's cons utional.
Bull .
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
