Privacy Disappears at a Trial About Rape

[Keith Bee]

Source: New York Times

Possible rape victims have long been afforded an extra layer of protection from public scrutiny. The news media typically withhold their names, and law enforcement authorities are careful not to release information like tape recordings or public documents that may reveal their identities. The concern is that victims might be afraid to come forward for fear that their identities, and intimate details of their lives, could be shared publicly.

But when rape cases go to trial, that shroud of protection disappears in the courtroom, especially when the accuser faces the suspect from the witness stand.

The continuing rape trial of two New York police officers in Manhattan has underscored how the examining of sexual assault accusations can sometimes lead to uncomfortable, embarrassing moments: Testimony has included discussion about the woman’s sexual history, her familiarization with different kinds of sex and the DNA found in her bed that came from men other than the accused. A close-up photograph of the woman’s cervix has been studied over and over again, the testimony sometimes sounding like a lesson in gynecology.

Courtroom reactions have included cringing, laughing or blushing like a fifth grader in reproductive health class. For some in the gallery, it has raised the prickly issue of when and if laughter is appropriate during a serious trial.

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/09/nyregion/notebook-no-privacy-in-rape-trial-of-2-officers.html

---

"...when and if laughter is appropriate..." At a rape trial, let me go way out on a limb and guess "No." :puke:

[Shining Jack]

1. Disgusting.

:(

[Sherman A1]

2. I disagree with your assessment

It would have to improve by several magnitudes to reach the level of disgusting.

There is a special place for these people and something from Dante comes to mind.

Simply beyond absurd.

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[cpwm17]

4. What's worse than having a rape victim exposed to the public:

being falsely accused of rape and having that exposed to the public. That does destroy ones reputation.

In the US we are supposed to be presumed innocent unless proven guilty. Right now in the case of rape that presumption does not apply.

To make it fair both the accused and the alleged victim in the case of rape need to be shielded from public exposure.

Jurors are instructed to not show any reaction to any evidence in the court. The judge should remove anyone in the court that is unreasonably disruptive.

[No Elephants]

11. Who's to say which is worse? You have one opinion. A rape victim who has to

be raped again (metaphorically) and very publicly in a courtroom may have a very different opinion.

In any event, it isn't as though any of the humiliation a woman goes through in court ends false accusations of rape. Never has and probably never will.

No reason the ccourtroom can't be closed for some portions of a rape trial.

[Democat]

5. The accuser should be sheltered, but not the accused?

Who thinks that's fair? What about innocent until proven guilty? If one's indentity is being protected, then why not the other as well?

[No Elephants]

12. Straw man much?

[harmonicon]

24. straw man?

I take it that you don't know anyone who's been falsely accused of rape. It's absolutely devastating on many levels.

[No Elephants]

29. I take it you don't understand what "straw man" means.

[harmonicon]

32. My dictionary agrees with my understood meaning:

a person compared to a straw image; a sham.
• a sham argument set up to be defeated.

[Solly Mack]

6. Yikes

Damn. Double damn.

[chrisa]

7. We are a collectively mentally ill society that hates women

We are an extremely sick society that still hates women, and this goes all of the way up to the judicial system.

None of this ever happens at trials where men are raped, I would imagine. The defensive wants to play on the jury's prejudices using "slut shaming" as a tactic, and dehumanize the rape victim.

[LisaL]

10. The same thing would happen at any rape trial.

There are exceptions to "rape shield laws" such as if DNA is found from someone else other than the accused, it is allowed at trial.
So if the man accused another man of rape, DNA evidence would come in as well.

[No Elephants]

13. What makes you assume a man's history would not be part of the trial of his rapist?

[chrisa]

18. It would not be weighed as heavily, imo.

Female sexuality in America is still looked down upon for some reason. This biases the jury, which makes it an effective tool to use by defense attorneys. It isn't right.

[defendandprotect]

34. Agree that it is still a patriarchy at war on women --

and as long as males take some relief and comfort in that war --

as long as they think they benefit in some even small ways from that war

on women -- they it will go on and we will go down.

This is a bird with one wing which won't be in the air much longer!

[raccoon]

8. And yet some people think women bring false charges of rape just for the heck of it. nt

[Keith Bee]

19. That really pisses me off

Yes, there are some cases (not a lot) where women make false rape accusations. But any person who thinks that women do it as a goddamn PRANK needs a shrink. Pronto.

[WatsonT]

23. Some do, that is undeniable

Not just for the heck of it though. Revenge, or mental illness is more likely.

Or possibly honest confusion.

Anyone who says it happens in a majority of cases is lying or at best misinformed. But that doesn't mean it never occurs.

[LisaL]

9. Other then closing the trial to the public, what exactly do you think

can be done to protect privacy? The accused has a right to defend himself. If there is DNA but none from the accused, don't you think jury needs to hear about that?

[No Elephants]

14. Why do you exclude closing the trial, or at least parts of it, to the public?

That's like saying, "Other than treating patients, what can a doctor do?"

Any sound publlic policy reason media and the public routinely have to see photos of a rape victim's cervix (or rectum)? Or, for that matter, photos of an accvused's privates?

[LisaL]

15. Isn't right to the "open trial" in the constitution?

[No Elephants]

16. Which provision do you have in mind? And whose right?

The accused has a right to confront witnesses, but presence of media and/or the general public is not required for that.

[bemildred]

17. We ought to stop treating sex as a taboo.

If you can't talk about it without tittering, you can't think about it without tittering either.

[BlueIris]

20. Awful as always. Will this society ever try to eliminate rape? nt

[Lance_Boyle]

21. Privacy disappears in courtrooms, period.

There is nothing so different about a rape trial that the right of the accused to face the accuser in court should be any less valid.

[CreekDog]

25. someone's sexual history is relevant to a rape?

Wtf.

[Lance_Boyle]

26. If not, the judge will strike it from the record and instruct the jury to disregard it.

This is how court works.

[CreekDog]

27. but what if she refuses to answer regarding her sexual activity

what should happen to her?

[Lance_Boyle]

28. contempt of court. n/t

[CreekDog]

30. do you think someone's sexual activity is relevant to a rape case?

and i'm speaking specifically of activity with other men.

i think women should refuse to answer those questions --they aren't being accused of a crime.

[Lance_Boyle]

31. Depends on the case.

If people are asked a question under oath in court they are expected to answer that question, or to be found in contempt of court. Seeking to make different rules for certain types of cases (or for certain genders of accusers or accused) is antithetical to American justice.

[CreekDog]

35. You mention a useful tactic --I'll force you to reveal personal secrets unrelated to the rape

and even unrelated to the accused rapist.

because if the defense attorney can get the judge to go along, it can be asked.

and any woman, or man, who fears having to reveal other things may refuse to testify at all and the prosecution will evaporate.

it is a tactic. a tactic you show no concern for whatsoever. in your statements, it's clear to you that if a judge does it, it is right.

nice little world you live in, where it was right to imprison Martin Luther King, Jr., right to imprison escaped slaves, right to throw away the key for black men who took a loaf of bread in Mississippi, etc.

[Heywood J]

22. The judge should have closed the courtroom at certain points.

When in-depth discussion of her sexual habits and photos of the woman's cervix happen, that would be a good time. It does no public service to have reporters there for such moments.

During cross-examination of a nurse testifying for the prosecution, one of Officer Moreno’s lawyers asked about a parallel between a Venus’ flytrap and a woman’s genitalia.

What relevance could this possibly have?

[defendandprotect]

33. kr

[Odin2005]

36. This is why most rapists get away with their crimes.

Fuck a rapist's right to a "public" trial.