Reply #138: I read the article.

[WeRQ4U]

It reaches no conclusion as to why the judge made his determination, only that he based it upon "special circumstances" afforded rape victims. ("with little elaboration")

I'm sure he still made the same legal determination as required by the rules of evidence.

Edit: To add this. The prosecutor seems to believe that the tape shows something different than what she her previous testimony would show. Well, what if this is true? What if her "recollection" is different than what is shown on the tape? Would you still have a problem with the "victim" watching the tape and being impeached, in front of the jury, while this is showing? If so, why? The alleged victim has no more right to be shielded from scrutiny than her alleged attacker... for this very reason.

You've already made a determination of guilt by establishing the credibility of the victim. But you haven't seen the tape, you haven't heard testimony. There is a possibily that she is either 1) not telling the truth or 2) not "remembering" things as accurately as she claims to.

I'm not saying that this is the case, and I would hope that this wouldn't trigger some "woman hater" response, but if this were the case, and the judge made a determination based on something other than established legal precedent, the appeals court may have somethign to say about it.