Australia: Prior false complaints cannot be admitted in NSW rape trial, court rules

Submitted by Mastodon on Sat, 2020-10-24 05:57

Article here. Excerpt:

'A jury in a NSW rape trial cannot be told about a complainant's alleged history of making false complaints and any change to the law would need to be made by Parliament, the Court of Criminal Appeal has said.

In a decision on Friday, a five-judge bench of the court said NSW laws protecting sexual assault complainants from being cross-examined about their sexual history also stopped evidence of prior false complaints being admitted in court.

Chief Justice Tom Bathurst said parliamentary speeches "make it clear that the purpose of the statutory prohibition is to prevent embarrassing and humiliating cross-examination about past sexual activities which it was believed was a deterrent in reporting sexual offences".

But a long line of cases ruled it also extended to alleged false complaints, and "any change to the law in this area is a matter for the legislature not for the courts", he said.'

Like0 Dislike0

Comments

It appears that the mere embarassment of a serial false rape accuser is more important than the liberty of an innocent man.

Remember this the next time anyone asks you to step up, and defend, save or serve the community.

This is a clear statement to men and boys that they will be treated like animals in our legal sytstem, and that while the community demands that men sacrific themselves for others on a daily basis, it will throw men under the bus for the most trivial of reasons.

Like3 Dislike0
Submitted by rabel111 on Tue, 2020-10-27 00:00

I agree wholeheartedly, rabel.

Don't defend a nation that won't lift a finger to defend you!

It is also rather obvious who the privileged class is when women's emotional well-being is considered more important than a men's actual well-being. It's yet another way that "male privilege" is demonstrably false.

Like2 Dislike0
Submitted by xtrnl on Tue, 2020-10-27 19:19