Where does victim blaming end and valid defemse begin?

sexmag

https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/news/calls-for-legal-reform-in-rape-trials-after-court-hears-details-of-17yearolds-thong-37511224.html

In this particular case the defence used arguments regarding the plaintiffs clothing and whether the clothes she was wearing would suggest she may have been consenting to sex with someone by wearing it.

As a defence I find it obsurd, in my own experience my partner wears nothing but thongs unless under certain female required circumstance and she hardly is looking for the ride everyday with me.

I feel that the argument was used as the defense would be familiar with a particular culture of victim blaming and wanted to use it to their advantage but where does it go too far and become vicitm blaming by the defense?

Peregrinus

I agree that the argument is an appalling and offensive one, and utterly without merit.

The thing is, when you're on trial and your liberty is at stake, you do need the freedom to put whatever defence you can to the jury; silencing a defendant is a very dangerous thing to do.

As the article itself makes clear, in the UK they have judicial guidelines on this, the result of which is (a) defendants are free to put arguments of this kind to the jury, but (b) the judge must direct the jury properly about the issues, and the irrelevance of this argument. And I note that this is the kind of approach that the Rape Crisis Centre CEO, quoted in the article, favours.

My guess would be that, where defendant's lawyers know that an argument of this kind will be addressed in these terms by the judge in his address to the jury, they are more likely to advise their clients not to advance such arguments, unless they really have nothing else to fall back on.

holyhead

I guess first things first and the accused was found not guilty. Therefore the court believes they had consensual sex. In order for the accused's barrister to prove his case he needs to bring up any angle which he/she believes supports the accused's contention that the sex was consensual. I would be surprised if the clothing argument swung a jury. It shouldn't but the barrister was only doing his job. Again I'm looking at this as an outsider and if it was my sister I would have a less forensic view of it.

sexmag

sexmag wrote: »

https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/news/calls-for-legal-reform-in-rape-trials-after-court-hears-details-of-17yearolds-thong-37511224.html

In this particular case the defence used arguments regarding the plaintiffs clothing and whether the clothes she was wearing would suggest she may have been consenting to sex with someone by wearing it.

As a defence I find it obsurd, in my own experience my partner wears nothing but thongs unless under certain female required circumstance and she hardly is looking for the ride everyday with me.

I feel that the argument was used as the defense would be familiar with a particular culture of victim blaming and wanted to use it to their advantage but where does it go too far and become vicitm blaming by the defense?

....with you :pac: