Rape complaints are at their highest since statistics began, whilst the rape conviction rate is at an all-time low. The frequency with which the complainant's previous sexual history is admitted at trial is perceived as a major factor. The government intends to legislate to reduce this, in accordance with either the Scottish or the New South Wales' legislative models. This article analyses the case law, argues that neither proposed model will suffice and advocates that the Canadian legislation should, with adaptations, be enacted in England.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Adler (1992) Rape on Trial. Routledge and Kegan, London.
2.
BreretonD. (1997) How different are Rape Trials?Br. J. Ciminol.37, (3).
3.
HallR. (1985) Ask Any Woman. Falling Wall Press, London.
4.
HeilbronR. (1975) Report of the Advisory Group on the Law of Rape. London, HMSO, Cmnd 6352.
5.
Home Office (1998) Speaking Up for Justice: Report of the Interdepartmental Working Group on the Treatment of Vulnerable or Intimidated Witnesses in the Criminal Justice System. HMSO, London.
6.
McColganA. (1996) Common law and the relevance of sexual history. Ox. J. Legal Studies16, 275.
7.
Scottish Office (1992,) Sexual History and Sexual Character Evidence in Scottish Sexual Offence Trials. HMSO, London.
8.
TemkinJ. (1993) Sexual history evidence — the new ravishment of Section 2. Crim. Law Rev.
9.
Victims'Support (1996) Women, Rape and the Criminal Justice System. London.
