THE RAPE SHIELD LAW The sack carapace Law that limits the bloodless plague of a victims introductory sexual history as an exertion to undermine the credibleness of the victims testimony supports Charles Nessons view of verdicts. It supports Nessons views in the good sense that verdicts be not about the try but earlier by the even outt. Furthermore the Rape vindication Law promotes macrocosm impudence in verdicts because the public oddly foul up victims, be encouraged to report corrupt incidents. Public confidence in verdicts is promoted a result of the Rape Shield Laws. Prior to this law, some courts certified evidence of the victims sexual traffic with men other than the defendant to testimony of general reputation. Witnesses could be asked if the victim is known to be immoral in the community. Others allowed cross-examination and even direct evidence, relating to specific unchaste acts. Also when a char took a stand, the defense advocate could cross-examine her about the details of her bygone relations with other men. In some States too, evidence of bypast specific acts must be available, not only for the conclusion of being considered by the board in deciding the cant and credibility of the victims testimony, but for the objective of inferring the probability of consent and discrediting her testimony.
A defendant would surely be that privilege however it is clumsy and discourage women from reporting strip cases. Susan Estrich (The Shield Law 291) likewise informs us that a defendants standoff of a womans sexual history would be relevant in gravel his state of mind at the time of the intercourse, whether he believed that she was pit to his advances. In this case one might enunciate that the prejudice of the evidence of a womans sexual history exceeded its very(prenominal) probative value. However, with the prior appall law, the... If you want to get a full essay, order it on our website:
Ordercustompaper.comIf you want to get a full essay, wisit our page: write my paper
No comments:
Post a Comment