LAW OF EVIDENCE examine critically the rules regarding sexual history Essay

LAW OF EVIDENCE examine critically the rules regarding sexual history of the complainant in relation to prosecutions for sexual offence in the light of the cou - Essay Example Although this new definition did improve the old version in that it included marital rape , male rape & anal intercourse previously classified as buggery, it still does not include forced oral sex and penetration by objects which may be no less traumatic than â€Å"connentional rape†. Furthermore, this defintion shows that a woman cannot be guilty of rape. The Scottish Executive (2000) explored this issue in its discussion of the law on sexual history evidence. The report’s authors noted the following commonplace beliefs that are often deployed in legal reasoning and indeed were evident in debates on section 41. (1) ï€  Someone who has had sex with persons A and B is more likely to have sex with person C. (2) ï€  Someone who is ‘sexually promiscuous’ has less right than someone who is not to choose who they have sex with. (3) ï€  Someone who is ‘sexually promiscuous’ is generally less trustworthy, and therefore less likely to be telling the truth. (4) ï€  Women had a tendency to ‘lead men on’ and are therefore to blame if men fail to resist their physical impulses. This is an adaptation of a table that appears in Kelly (2002). (5) ï€  When women say ‘no’ they do not always mean it. (6) ï€  False allegations of rape and sexual assault are more common than fals e allegations of other crimes. The Scottish Executive report concluded that all these statements not only have no foundation in fact, they are also â€Å"both illogical and at odds with any system of morality which places a value on the individual’s right to self-determination† (Scottish Executive, 2000, p.6). It considered that the frequency with which these ideas are â€Å"constantly reiterated† amounts to a form of prejudice that can result in the complainant being treated with a lack of respect and in the worst cases being publicly humiliated. Alongside, and