Jump to content

Getting an "Insecure Connection" warning for Exisle? No worry

Details in this thread

Evidence excluded from troubling rape trial

Rape Shield Laws

  • Please log in to reply
1 reply to this topic

#1 Rov Judicata

Rov Judicata

    Crassly Irresponsible and Indifferent

  • Islander
  • 15,720 posts

Posted 12 June 2003 - 04:14 PM

No win scenario, here we come!



Prostitution bust can't be mentioned at rape trial

Wednesday, June 11, 2003

Associated Press

HARRISBURG -- The state rape shield law's ban on using a victim's sexual history as evidence extends to an arrest and conviction for prostitution that occurred after the alleged attack, the state Superior Court has ruled.

The nine-judge panel overturned an Allegheny County judge's decision that would have allowed Pittsburgh hotel worker Robert B. Jones to use the woman's prostitution case as evidence in his own pending trial. Jones spent nearly three years in jail waiting for the ruling on the pretrial motion.

A spokesman for the Allegheny County district attorney's office, Mike Manko, declined to comment on the prosecution's successful appeal.

The ruling clarifies the law's reference to "past" sexual history to mean anything that takes place before trial. Previous rulings on the shield law had covered only incidents that occurred prior to the crime.

That puts Pennsylvania law "in line with the trend among other states that have evaluated the same issue," said Villanova Law School Professor Michelle J. Anderson, an expert on rape law.

Jones' attorney, Angela R. Carsia, said she did not believe the ruling would prevent her from proving that the sex was consensual.

"Our defense is that he and she were engaged in sex-for-hire. The agreement (they had) was not met, what she wanted the result to be, so she turned around and cried rape," she said.

Jones, 51, was charged in December 1999 with rape, involuntary deviate sexual intercourse and aggravated assault. He has pleaded innocent.

This is... troubling.

If the man is innocent, than the fact that this woman *did* sell herself is important to his defense.

If the man is guilty, then the revelation that she is a prostitute will likely get him an acquital, unless there's incredibly evidence that he's guilty.

Thoughts? Should the alleged victim's criminal record be brought into the case?

I honestly don't know which way to jump on this one...

Edited by Cait, 21 September 2012 - 04:25 PM.

St. Louis must be destroyed!

Me: "I have a job and five credit cards and am looking into signing a two year lease.  THAT MAKES ME OLD."
Josh: "I don't have a job, I have ONE credit card, I'm stuck in a lease and I'm 28! My mom's basement IS ONE BAD DECISION AWAY!"
~~ Josh, winning the argument.

"Congress . . . shall include every idiot, lunatic, insane person, and person non compos mentis[.]" ~1 U.S.C. 1, selectively quoted for accuracy.

#2 G1223


    The Blunt Object.

  • Dead account
  • 16,164 posts

Posted 12 June 2003 - 05:17 PM

If it were any other act except prostitution or if she had been accused of making fale reports about rape. I see where this is relavent as he is claiming she was hired for sexual favors. This can make previous acts important enough to be evidence.
If you encounter any Trolls. You really must not forget them.
And if you want to save these shores. For Pity sake Don't Trust them.
paraphrased from H. "Breaker" Morant

If you voted for Obama then all the mistakes he makes are your fault and I will point this out to you every time he does mess up.

When the fall is all that remains. It matters a great deal.

All hail the clich's all emcompassing shadow.

My playing well with other's skill has been vastly overrated

Member of the Order of the Knigths of the Woeful Countance.

Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Rape, Shield Laws

0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users