Quote:
Originally posted by HighOnAcid
You all have made some very valid points. However, a girl's sexual history should not be a big factor in determining her credibility. Personal history of mental illness, false claims, abuse...those are the histories they should be looking at. Not sexual history.
If you follow this logic and the defense is successful at undermining this girl's credibility through her promiscuous past then woudln't that make every porn actress, professional or amatuer succeptable to rape? If a guy rapes a porn actress he can take the defense that she has a "promiscuous past" and her credibility would be horribly under-mined. A precedence has been set and defensive teams across the nation are taking this stance.
That's the reason I don't follow that logic. When a girl says, "no" it's time to stop. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. You stop.
|
Like I said, the only sexual history the judge is going to admit is the sexual history relevant to this specific case. That is, was she fucking other guys immediately before and after Kobe -- if so, maybe they gave her the injuries.
Courts have already established that porn actresses and prostitutes CAN be raped. So sexual promiscuity is not the main focus of what the defense is looking for. And the judge isn't going to allow all of that shit anyway.