Feminist Jurisprudence at Its Finest: Rape Shield Laws

Feminist Jurisprudence is a new agenda that seems to be influencing the legal system and substituting for the Constitution in many cases. This phenomenon has brought about "rape shield laws," by which special rights appear to be granted to women. This might not be so bad if we know for certain that 100 per cent of women are honest. Is this, however, a realistic expectation, considering the following statement by Craig Silverman, a former prosecutor in Colorado for 16 years?

"During my time as a prosecutor who made case filing decisions, I was amazed to see all the false rape allegations that were made to the Denver Police Department. It was remarkable and surprising to me. You would have to see it to believe it. Any honest veteran sex assault investigator will tell you that rape is one of the most falsely reported crimes that there is. A command officer in the Denver Police sex assaults unit recently told me he placed the false rape numbers at approximately 45 percent."

Although the originators of rape shield laws may have had the best of intentions, women are often predetermined to not have the criminal or dishonesty gene under this system. Is this a realistic, reasonable and just assumption? Is it fair to women who are true victims of rape and is it in accordance with our American way of justice?

Under rape shield laws, men are usually considered guilty by reason of gender, and evidence pointing to their innocence is often not even allowed into the courtroom. Men's rights are subsequently removed and rendered null and void.

Let's look at a few more specifics that can occur under rape shield laws:

1. Violation of the Fourteenth Amendment

We have all observed in recent high profile cases the protection of the names of women making the charges and the full usage of the names of the defendants, along with the ruination of their reputations The accusers were routinely referred to as "victims," instead of "alleged victims" among the media, who are supposed to adhere to sound and fair reporting guidelines. Shouldn't they know better, and what excuse have they had for doing this?

Wouldn't a more fair method be to either keep secret the name of the accuser and the name of the accused; or, to use both names publicly? Feminists seem to have the attitude that all men are guilty, that all sex performed by them is rape, and that all men are evil. Rape shield laws reflect this mentality, in my opinion.

The Equal Protection Clause, part of the Fourteenth Amendment, provides that "no state shall deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." Might this apply in this circumstance?

2. Infringement of the Rights of Jurors to Hear All Relevant Information

A woman's past, among other factors, is often disallowed under rape shield laws. I ask, what is being "shielded," the truth? Where is there another area of society where a person's past conduct "doesn't matter"?

Does it matter in the job world, and should we pass a law protecting applicants that prevents questionable behavior in the past and a dishonorable reputation at the present from being considered? Jurors have a constitutional right to be aware of everything and in some circumstances rape shield laws prevent this, in contempt of defendants' rights.

I do understand that unscrupulous prosecutors could twist the facts against innocent women and batter them psychologically by bringing up their past. This is also an injustice, and I will fight along side women for their cause when this occurs.

3. Findings "Consistent With Rape" by Medical Personnel

Test results "consistent with rape" are often deceptive and they can many times also be consistent with non-rape or mutual passion. Even though the results don't prove guilt, they are often given great credence under the whole rape shield scenario.

Rape exists and I am on the side of victims when it does. False accusations are also a form of rape, and I'm on the side of those victims when it happens to them. I am therefore on the side of truth and justice, which is the bottom line.