If a woman goes to court to give evidence against?

Question

a man who raped her, should it be taken into account what she was wearing at the time of the alledged attack?

Answer 1

I hate rape cases, I studied a few back in college.
Unfortunatley the victim in these cases is usually scrutanised, from their sexual habits, their past, what they were wearing, how they were acting etc.
the majority of Rapes (statistically) are committed by someone the victim knows.

one case in particular I looked at the defendant had a history of multiple rape cases, etc which was not allowed to be taken into account, where as the victim was interrogated by the barrister into her past, and basically accused her of being promiscuous because a short while before the attack (can't remember off hand if it was hours or days) she had, had sex with her boyfriend on the floor of their house as they had not finished getting their furnature in.

in the end the Defendant walked away because of the way that the girls reputation was dragged through the mud, and then ended up raping more women!

Answer 2

In an ideal world, what someone is wearing should bear no consequence. Unfortunately, women are often defined by the clothing they wear. If a woman who is wearing a long skirt and a polo neck is raped, she is probably seen as giving off no "come hither" signals, whereas, a woman in a mini skirt and a low necked top is seen as broadcasting a sexual come on.

Ultimately, rape is about power and control. A rapist is going to make his assessments of whom to rape based on how vulnerable he believes the victim to be. Mix up revealing clothing into the mix, and it may just give him another reason amongst the other warped beliefs he holds in his perverse view of entitlement to sex without consent, because "she was asking for it."

Unfortunately, the defence will use this "clothing" angle to make the woman look as if she was looking for sex. It's a spurious argument. It shouldn't matter what a woman was wearing, or how many men she's had sex with in the past. Rape is a violation. The perceived "morals" the woman may have about sex, based on her clothing, or her sexual history, do not entitle anyone to rape her.

Answer 3

Sexy clothing can give the impression that a woman is looking for male company. But nothing, absolutely nothing can excuse rape.
So to answer - yes the court will want to know why the man became interested. However, whatever the woman was wearing should have no effect on the punishment handed out.
That's my belief anyway

Answer 4

No. Rape is rape whether the woman is wearing clothing from head to toe, or is naked. It's rape whether she's a minister's wife or a prostitute. She may dress provocatively, but she should not have to worry about what some nutcase is thinking or does. She has as much, if not more, of a right to dress sexily than he does to sit around fantasizing. So, no, in my humble opinion what the woman was wearing at the time of her rape shouldn't have a danged thing to do with it.

Answer 5

NO. Absoloutely not............I hate this cropping up, what the hell has what you are wearing got to do with giving consent to sex??????????

It means nothing, I dont wanna hear people say yeah, but she was asking for it as she was wearing a mini skirt..............so every time I or other women wear a mini skirt we are asking for it are we??????
where does it stop, a pair of jeans, they are slim fitting these days, a v-neck sweater, wearing a pair of high heels ??????

What should be taken into account is whether he has previous, now we would be talking cos at the minute that is kept from the jury.

Answer 6

No. That's sick. Rapists should get the needle, I don't care if the woman was butt naked at the time of the assault. Women dress provocatively sometimes with the hopes of attracting a man they will find equally attractive and desireable, and then going from there! Not so any old scumbag who can't feel good about himself any other way can violate her.

Answer 7

NO !! Even if a woman is naked and dying for it... if she says "NO" we guys should take it as a "NO".
CONSENT is the crucial thing in sex. No such thing as implied consent when it comes to sex.
---
" Philip P " -- You touched the issue of "consent" ! She is 14 and that is going to damn the accused even more. At 14 she has not reached the legal age of consent so the accused is buried even deeper. The defence there has had it ! Total irrelevant whether the knickers 'stated' 'yes' . The law says NO and that i what stands. The only possible defence would be if she looked old enough to say yes.
The only issue there is CONSENT and in your case the case would not even reach consent, I don't think. she is a CHILD... only 14
I rest my case, ASKER !

Answer 8

No means no means no means no means no. How hard is this for people to understand?
Can't steal things from a car because it happens to be unlocked. Can't enter a house just because the door is open.
Can't grab food out of the microwave at work because you happen to be hungry and it's not locked. Can't bully people who can't defend themselves.
It's a matter of self-discipline, self-control, and most of all respect. There is no excuse for preying on others because they think they can get away with it. Should be a no-brainer, but sadly it isn't.
Wish you well.

Answer 9

I'm affraid so... Please read the following:
I appologise if it distresses you but you need to know!
It's an inigma really but thats all to do with the magna carta and rules of justice.
When ever a case is brought to court evidence whether used or not forms part of what is called disclosure, both the prosecution and the defence have access to this "bundle". The clothing would be part of this "bundle"
Imagine this a 14 year old girl makes a complaint of indecency against a grown man ( he fondles her intimately) at a freinds 15th birthday party ( so only adults are there to supervise not a pub club or adult venue)
Her clothing is seized and forensic evidence is obtained, The man is charged goes not guilty and ends up in crown court.
At court the defence ( having asked previously and request granted) produce the girls underwear ( exhibit for the prosecution with forensic evidence). The item is sealed and in a plastic bag, But the defence solicitor and barrister produce an identical pair which are shown to the Police officer who originally siezed the clothing He embarrassed confirms that these are identical to the items that had been siezed. He is ordered by the defence to hold them up to the court, he refuses the judge orders and he has to comply. He does so; Defence asks that he show the court properly, embarassed and looking at the mother of the 14 year old who is now in the well of emotion he has to comply.
The girl a stylish trend setter had been to a party she had worn sheer trousers and did not want to show any visible line so had worn a thong, A thong which a freind had jokingly bought as a present; the thong had an explicit legend printed accross it the legend in tight italic script is barely visible but visible all the same.
"Officer would you oblige us by reading what is printed on the front!"
Coughs looks at the judge begging looks at the prosecution emploring to object, looks at the mother in apology, in a broken voice "Rub gently genie inside!!"
The fact that a child barely out of puberty who had no practical or experimental knowledge of sexuality had worn underwear that she hoped that no one would ever see, she had no intention of admitting he was wearing and no understanding of the possible implications just wanted her clothes to sit right was about to be subjected to this.
The defence barrister Rose to his feet "Is that not a blatant invitation?"

HOW!!!! How could She the barrister a woman put a little girl through this,
To imply that the girl was predatory and out to entrap this man!!!!
HOW she did not show him this item of clothing She was stood with her back to him when he approached from behind and inserted his hand in her waistband, he wasn't blind and the legend wasn't in brail nor was it in raised lettering...
The officer was released from the witness box practically in tears, the mother in the court room unable to warn her daughter was about to explode, The defendant just sat in the dock and SMIRKED.
The next witness was the girl herself, being recalled to court for the third time now as a witness for the defence against her own complaint She was going to have to relive the whole experience again but with that one evil twist

Answer 10

It has no bearing on what the victim was wearing. Rapists are sickos who rape to feel powerful and in control. The defensive will probably try to bring it up but any Judge worth his salt will not even allow him to go that route.