Question

Identify who you think rape shield laws protect and what a rape shield law does. Do rape shield laws serve a positive purpose? Is valuable testimony excluded from a trial? Should rape shield laws be strengthened? Should they be modified to make exceptions in certain circumstances? If so, under what circumstances should an exception be allowed? How do we balance the interests of the defendant and the victim to a fair trial where their character isn’t dragged through the mud?

Answer 1

1. Identify who you think rape shield laws protect and what a rape shield law does.

Ans: “Rape Shield Laws” are crafted for the protection of the victims of sex crimes in the course of criminal proceedings. Though there is a limited exceptions present here and there, but these laws protect defendants from producing evidence of victims background, past sexual behaviour or reputation.

2. Do rape shield laws serve a positive purpose?

Ans: Yes, definitely .It serves some positive purposes. We can name few.1.It protects the victim from harassment and humiliation.2.the exclusion of irrelevant evidence, 3.the need to keep the jury focus on relevant issues. In the past half century, the law in every state has evolved to prevent defendants in sex cases from smearing the reputations of alleged victims.

Traditionally, a defendant was allowed to present evidence of the victim’s sexual activity to the jury. Defendants painted victims as immoral and unchaste. They mounted character attacks on the theory that the victim’s sexual profile was relevant to the crime—if she was impure, how could she be trusted?

In the late 1970s into the1980s, states began to protect alleged victims of sex crimes. Lawmakers recognized that victims experienced humiliation and embarrassment when they reported rapes and other sex crimes. Ultimately, they had a strong discouragement to report the crimes they suffered.

Policymakers also recognized that the character, morality, and sexual history of a victim are largely irrelevant to a sex crime trial. The rape shield laws they endorsed essentially apply the usual rules of evidence: Evidence that isn’t reasonably related to the charges and that amounts merely to character evidence won’t be produced as a solid proof in at trial proceedings.

3. Should rape shield laws be strengthened?

Ans: Yes, it should. It should be further evolved by effective law enforcement by insuring that victims are not discouraged from co-operating with the police for fear of the trials. Because, though the rape shield laws are prevalent but there is astonishingly little room for discussion whether these laws are rules.

4. Should they be modified to make exceptions in certain circumstances?

Ans; It should be modified to make certain circumstances. Well-intentioned efforts by legislatures to define the instances where evidence of prior sexual conduct is admissible have, in a too-large number of cases, served to prolong litigation, a delay in no one's Interest other than the person charged with sexual assault. While the strong repugnance to the holdings of the older cases readily explains the desire to frame rape shield legislation in terms of relevance, such a definition of the evidentiary concept involved is both redundant of existing rules of evidence and too confined in procedural consequences to achieve the underlying objective of a rape shield law. Rather, a broadly stated privilege undertakes the same objectives, avoids some of the problems inevitable under most statutes in use at present, and creates options which solidify the right of victims of sexual assaults.The process of balancing is the most important part. Over the decades, legislative drafting and redrafting Intermingled with case studies has provided us the reason to fine-tune that balance.