Dickens
JenniRen
Yes, it is shocking, I agree.
They are treated as if they are guilty until proved they are telling the truth. I thought these intrusive interrogations were not allowed any more.
I believe generally a defendant's previous convictions for similar crimes to the one being tried, are not allowed to be referenced - in case it prejudices the jury's collective mind?
So I do wonder why the women's previous sexual 'history' is not treated similarly. If the jurisdiction will rest on the facts of the case(s) - then a woman's previous sexual encounters becomes irrelevant.
I can't help thinking that, as with most things in law, business, medicine - you name it - the whole of society has been set up historically to benefit men. Because in spite of reforms etc, we still very much live in a Patriarchy.
Dickens
I believe generally a defendant's previous convictions for similar crimes to the one being tried, are not allowed to be referenced - in case it prejudices the jury's collective mind?
Yes
So I do wonder why the women's previous sexual 'history' is not treated similarly. If the jurisdiction will rest on the facts of the case(s) - then a woman's previous sexual encounters becomes irrelevant.
Very true.
Yes, it still happens but it should not. Women victims are metaphorically put into the dock.