Rape Shield Laws - Research Paper Example

? Rape Shield Laws of Rape Shield Laws Rape shield laws are court rules or statutes which limit the defendant’s counsel ability to introduce the sexual history, past conduct or reputation of the accuser or victim as evidence during a trial relating to rape. Therefore, rape shield laws can prevent the victim from being discredited by the irrelevant information to the defendant’s innocence or guilt. In the United States, each state and the District of Columbia has a rape shield law applying to criminal cases and a few to civil cases (The National Centre for Victims of Crime, 2011). Rape shield laws apply to both state and federal criminal and civil cases except the certain limited circumstances, such as when the accuser’s consent can be illustrated or when the accused and the accuser have a shared history. Also, the defense may be required to prove that such evidence’s exclusion would amount to violation of constitutional rights of the defendants. Most of these laws were adopted in a bid to combat the practice where the victims are discredited through introduction of irrelevant information concerning their reputation, sexual history or chastity. Most of these laws were adopted in the 1970s; the first rape shield law was passed in the state of Michigan in 1974 and since then all states have enacted one. Even though these laws were popular in the US, they were criticized for violating the rights of the defendant to confront the accuser as enshrined in the Sixth Amendment. It has also been criticized for being overly arduous for the defense, as well as violating civil liberties like the freedom of speech (Flowe et al, 2007). So, what do rape shield laws do? Commonly, rape shield laws bar the introduction of reputation and opinion regarding the sexual history of the accuser. Additionally, they prove that evidence about victim’s specific sexual conduct is supposedly irrelevant unless such evidence is direct source of disease, pregnancy, or injury that may be an issue in the case, or has relation to particular sexual conduct with the defendant (The National Centre for Victims of Crime, 2011). Rape shield laws in eleven states have an exception which is known a “catch-all” which allows the judge to permit the introduction of evidence of any nature, even those that are normally barred by rape shield laws, if it is necessary to introduce that evidence in order to protect the accused constitutional rights. Various rape shield laws allow the judge to decide if the evidence in question is relevant or not. If it is relevant, the judge determines whether the evidence’s potential prejudicial impact outweighs its relevance, or not. Rape shield laws are relevant in the criminal justice system as they guard against the introduction of irrelevant evidence of the innocence or guilt of the defendant, but which can potentially prejudice the jury against the accuser or the victim (The National Centre for Victims of Crime, 2011). Flowe et al (2007) explain that rape shield laws are important to the victims as they help in ensuring that the rape victims are treated with respect, dignity, and fairness during criminal trial by making sure that the victim is not subject to a public airing about his or her past conduct, sexual reputation, and any other information which might be irrelevant. More importantly, rape shield laws increase the possibility that victims will report rape cases as they will be more likely to come forward to report. If the sexual history of the victims would have been examined or revealed in court as part of rape trial, it is very likely that victims will not report the rape cases with increasing regularity. However, it should be noted that rape shield laws only guard against the introduction of evidence or irrelevant information during trial, but do not protect the victims from publicity prior to the trial. This may probably deter many victims from reporting rape cases. Rape shield laws have been credited for the decreasing number of rapes committed. This has been attributed to the fact that it increases the chances of the victims to report rape cases and therefore increasing the likelihood of guilty offenders to be convicted. Since studies have shown that serial offenders are the ones who commit most rapes, rape shield laws tend to act as a deterrent measure against offenders committing the crime of rape (The National Centre for Victims of Crime, 2011). It is no doubt that the prosecution of the NBA star Kobe Bryant which was highly publicized has brought the rape shield laws issue into sharp focus not only by the media and legal practitioners, but also the general public. Kobe Bryant was prosecuted for sexual assault and the internet and popular media have responded to the case by focusing attention on the sexual history of the alleged victim (Johnson, 2004). As a result of the negative attention to the alleged victim, the need for strong shield laws which can protect the decision making process of jurors in rape trials has been reaffirmed. The case of Kobe Bryant served to show that rape shield laws have failed to defend victims; it confirmed the previous opinions held by the critics of these laws that they have failed to defend victims in numerous occasions. Through the rape shield cracks that have been created by the legislated exceptions, cases have fallen through systematically. Also, judges have created some exceptions based on the other forms of rape shield laws such as evidentiary purpose that afforded these laws flexibility which at the end failed to protect rape victims (Haddad, 2005). Although rape shield laws are designed to defend and protect rape victims from having their sexual history and reputation being introduced to undermine the credibility of victim’s testimony, Kobe Bryant case showed that these laws have failed. The judge in the case ruled that the sexual activity of the alleged victim 72 hours prior to being examined by the police would be allowable (Johnson, 2004). Chief Judge W. Ruckriegle who presided over the case ruled that all evidence about the sexual conduct of the alleged victim within 72 hours before her physical examination was relevant in order to determine the cause of injuries that had been identified by the nurse, as well as determining the source of bodily fluids found. As such, it is evidently clear that the rape shield laws can be discarded at will by the court thereby defeating the very objective of these laws which is to protect rape victims from having their sexual history introduced to undermine the credibility of the testimony (Johnson, 2004). In Kobe Bryant case, the judge ruled that introducing the victim’s sexual history was relevant thus dealing a damaging blow to the prosecution’s case against Kobe Bryant. Bryant’s lawyers had suggested that the alleged victim had had sex with another man soon after the encounter with the client, thus indicating that she had not been traumatized (Haddad, 2005). However, the alleged victim denied the allegations that she had sex with anyone after her encounter with Bryant. During the case, the defense lawyers argued that rape shield laws had contributed to the violation of their client’s constitutional rights (Haddad, 2005). In conclusion, it is evidently clear from the discussion that rape shield laws seek to prevent the victim from being discredited by the irrelevant information to the defendant’s innocence or guilt. Also, they help in ensuring that the rape victims are treated with respect, dignity, and fairness during criminal trial by making sure that the victim is not subject to a public airing about his or her past conduct, sexual reputation, and any other information which might be irrelevant. Even though they have achieved the intention which they were established for, it is argued that these laws have failed to defend the victims appropriately. The legislated exceptions and the judges have created exceptions that have led to the laws failing to protect the victims as it is seen in the case of Kobe Bryant. Therefore, there is the need for strong shield laws which can protect the decision making process of jurors in rape trials if these laws have to achieve their main intention. References Flowe, H et al. (2007). Rape Shield Laws and Sexual Behavior Evidence: Effects of Consent Level and Women's Sexual History on Rape Allegations. Law & Human Behavior, 31(2), 159-175 Haddad, R. I. (2005). Shield or Sieve? People v. Bryant and the Rape Shield Law in High-Profile Cases. Columbia Journal of Law & Social Problems, 39(2), 185-221. Johnson, K. (2004). Rape Shield Law will be applied in Bryant Case. Retrieved on 7 May, 2012 from http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/11/us/rape-shield-law-will-be-applied-in-bryant case-judge-says.html The National Centre for Victims of Crime. (2011). Rape Shield Laws. Retrieved on 7 May, 2012 from http://www.ncvc.org/ncvc/main.aspx?dbID=DB_FAQ:RapeShieldLaws927 Read More