FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2267007112> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2267007112 abstract "Evidence law is not simply a body of “neutral rules” of general application: its doctrines have been developed to reflect particular interests and understandings of the social world in which we live. Nowhere is its partiality more exposed than in the rules governing the use of evidence in the prosecution of rape, which was itself a sex specific crime, where men's power to define and deny allegations of rape historically weighed more heavily than women's word. Science and particularly psychiatry proclaimed truths about women and girls that were used to justify sex specific practices and legal principles in the criminal law governing rape.Women's changed legal and social status has been mirrored in doctrinal shifts in evidence law in the past thirty years in both Australia and Canada, but underneath the surface, the “old” rules to test women's credibility bubble to the surface in new practices and legal doctrines as a broadening group of men, has become vulnerable to rape prosecution. The legislative retreat from the old doctrines, such as recent complaint and the corroboration requirement, has opened up the possibility of prosecuting historic sexual assault cases, and the need to carefully scrutinize women’s evidence has been vigorously reasserted. A woman's word is tested against her actions and their socially ascribed meanings (did she resist vigorously? did she report immediately?), against her history and reputation (has she consented in similar circumstances? has she ever lied?), against the evidence provided by her own body (does the Rape Evidence Kit indicate any tears or bruising consistent with forced intercourse? has she ever been pregnant before?), against her “records” (what did the counsellor say she said about the rape? what did she say about the accused in her diary?), and against her unconscious (could she have imagined the assault? could she be mistaken that it was her stepfather who assaulted her?).Most testimony in court cases, both criminal and civil, relies upon memory, but with the possible exception of challenges to eyewitness testimony, only in the area of sexual assault prosecutions have we seen such an extraordinary effort to undermine the reliability of memory through “science.” The claim that a complainant is suffering from “False Memory Syndrome” [FMS], may coincide with an application of disclosure of a woman’s private counselling records, another recently emerged credibility-testing device. Like the demand for disclosure of women’s records, FMS claims permit the reassertion of obsolete credibility-testing devices; reproduce the same pernicious myths about women; demonize the feminist community and its knowledge; and alienate women from their therapists and counsellors by generating anxiety and distrust. The sex discrimination inherent in disclosure applications and perpetrated through the use of therapeutic records to discredit women is compounded when a FMS label is attached to a complainant: a psychiatric or therapeutic history facilitates the inference that women may falsely allege rape or they may have “fantasized” a rape. Psychiatric definitions of normalcy tend to reinforce sex roles, archetypes of “good” and “bad” women and male standards of mental health such that it is relatively easy to use psychiatric labels and records to portray a “bad” woman who is not worthy of law’s protection.In this case comment I hope to illustrate, using the 1997 decision of the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal in E,mthat the strategy of using the pseudo-science of FMS to discredit women's accounts of sexual violence is reliant on the same old “truths” about women and rape that have long been officially repudiated in law's doctrines. This relatively new strategy has great appeal, in spite of its questionable lineage, since it is cloaked in the objective language of science, echoes our collective disbelief that the ruthless sexual abuse of children by normal, adult men could really be this widespread, and perhaps most importantly, avoids calling women liars. Its subtext is strategic, since women and girls may abandon prosecution when confronted with the high price to their privacy, dignity and sanity exacted by intrusive defense tactics.My comment firsts summarize the facts and ruling in the E decision. I then set the case in the context of some of the feminist literature on FMS discourses, and particularly the one study to examine its use in criminal and civil litigation in Canada. In the next section I situate E against the history of rape law reform by briefly reviewing the rules of evidence that were specific to rape prosecutions. In doing so, I will rely mainly upon the secondary literature in Australia and Canada, since the failure of these reforms to dramatically shift the terrain of rape prosecutions has been amply documented and theorized in both jurisdictions. I will then return to the E case in order to illustrate the many ways in which FMS discourse revives discarded doctrine and discredited myths." @default.
• W2267007112 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2267007112 creator A5007122536 @default.
• W2267007112 date "2002-01-01" @default.
• W2267007112 modified "2023-09-23" @default.
• W2267007112 title "Evidence Law and 'Credibility Testing' of Women: A Comment on the E Case" @default.
• W2267007112 hasPublicationYear "2002" @default.
• W2267007112 type Work @default.
• W2267007112 sameAs 2267007112 @default.
• W2267007112 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W2267007112 crossrefType "posted-content" @default.
• W2267007112 hasAuthorship W2267007112A5007122536 @default.
• W2267007112 hasConcept C121332964 @default.
• W2267007112 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W2267007112 hasConcept C163258240 @default.
• W2267007112 hasConcept C170706310 @default.
• W2267007112 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W2267007112 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W2267007112 hasConcept C2779018085 @default.
• W2267007112 hasConcept C2780224610 @default.
• W2267007112 hasConcept C2780838233 @default.
• W2267007112 hasConcept C48798503 @default.
• W2267007112 hasConcept C62520636 @default.
• W2267007112 hasConcept C73484699 @default.
• W2267007112 hasConceptScore W2267007112C121332964 @default.
• W2267007112 hasConceptScore W2267007112C15744967 @default.
• W2267007112 hasConceptScore W2267007112C163258240 @default.
• W2267007112 hasConceptScore W2267007112C170706310 @default.
• W2267007112 hasConceptScore W2267007112C17744445 @default.
• W2267007112 hasConceptScore W2267007112C199539241 @default.
• W2267007112 hasConceptScore W2267007112C2779018085 @default.
• W2267007112 hasConceptScore W2267007112C2780224610 @default.
• W2267007112 hasConceptScore W2267007112C2780838233 @default.
• W2267007112 hasConceptScore W2267007112C48798503 @default.
• W2267007112 hasConceptScore W2267007112C62520636 @default.
• W2267007112 hasConceptScore W2267007112C73484699 @default.
• W2267007112 hasLocation W22670071121 @default.
• W2267007112 hasOpenAccess W2267007112 @default.
• W2267007112 hasPrimaryLocation W22670071121 @default.
• W2267007112 hasRelatedWork W1482067399 @default.
• W2267007112 hasRelatedWork W1488934218 @default.
• W2267007112 hasRelatedWork W1506900701 @default.
• W2267007112 hasRelatedWork W1543515314 @default.
• W2267007112 hasRelatedWork W1601054256 @default.
• W2267007112 hasRelatedWork W1647785252 @default.
• W2267007112 hasRelatedWork W1848721153 @default.
• W2267007112 hasRelatedWork W2099419060 @default.
• W2267007112 hasRelatedWork W2147603700 @default.
• W2267007112 hasRelatedWork W2887565576 @default.
• W2267007112 hasRelatedWork W2912318553 @default.
• W2267007112 hasRelatedWork W3094232767 @default.
• W2267007112 hasRelatedWork W3123310623 @default.
• W2267007112 hasRelatedWork W3123698537 @default.
• W2267007112 hasRelatedWork W3124497408 @default.
• W2267007112 hasRelatedWork W3125326072 @default.
• W2267007112 hasRelatedWork W3144902327 @default.
• W2267007112 hasRelatedWork W3158123112 @default.
• W2267007112 hasRelatedWork W46512818 @default.
• W2267007112 hasRelatedWork W2602279409 @default.
• W2267007112 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2267007112 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2267007112 magId "2267007112" @default.
• W2267007112 workType "article" @default.