| |
Artist's Note (p. vi) |
| |
Acknowledgements (p. vii) |
| |
Table of Cases (p. xv) |
| |
Table of Statutes (p. xvii) |
| |
1. Introduction (p. 1) |
| |
|
1. The Promise and the Reality (p. 1) |
| |
|
2. Explaining the Problem (p. 4) |
| |
|
3. Modes of Statutory Infuence (p. 9) |
| |
|
4. Origins of this Book (p. 11) |
| |
|
5. The Wider Relevance of Our Analysis (p. 14) |
| |
|
6. Terminology (p. 15) |
| |
|
7. Chapter Outline (p. 16) |
| |
2. Theorizing the Problems with Rape Law and Trials (p. 18) |
| |
|
1. Introduction (p. 18) |
| |
|
2. New Knowledges (p. 19) |
| |
|
3. The Patriarchal, Masculine Logic of the Law (p. 23) |
| |
|
4. The Translation to Practice Problem(p. 26) |
| |
|
|
The ‘intentions’ of progressive reforms don’t control the practices of the law (p. 27) |
| |
|
|
Inconsistent implementation or uptake by practitioners (p. 28) |
| |
|
|
The trial as a whole is ‘resistant’ to change (p. 29) |
| |
|
5. Rape Myths (p. 32) |
| |
|
|
What do we mean by ‘rape myths’? (p. 33) |
| |
|
|
What does the literature from trials and mock juror studies tell us? (p. 34) |
| |
|
|
Solutions? (p. 36) |
| |
3. The Australian Rape Law Reform Project Since the 1970s (p. 38) |
| |
|
1. Introduction (p. 38) |
| |
|
|
The architecture of rape law reform (p. 38) |
| |
|
|
Drivers of change (p. 39) |
| |
|
|
Modes of statutory infuence (p. 42) |
| |
|
2. Infuential Events (p. 44) |
| |
|
|
The Michigan Criminal Sexual Conduct Act 1974 (p. 44) |
| |
|
|
The Sydney Rape Crisis Collective (1974) (p. 45) |
| |
|
|
The Royal Commission on Human Relationships (1977) (p. 45) |
| |
|
|
The Women’s Electoral Lobby (WEL) Draf Bill (1977) (p. 46) |
| |
|
|
National Conference on Rape Law Reform (1980) (p. 47) |
| |
|
3. Reforms to Substantive Criminal Law (p. 49) |
| |
|
|
Gender neutrality and broadening sexual penetration (p. 49) |
| |
|
|
A crime of violence (p. 50) |
| |
|
|
Towards a ‘modern’ concept of consent and non-consent? (p. 51) |
| |
|
|
|
Marital immunity (p. 52) |
| |
|
|
|
‘Vitiated’ consent (or statutory indicators of non-consent) (p. 52) |
| |
|
|
|
Legislating a positive conception of consent (p. 55) |
| |
|
|
The fault element for rape (p. 57) |
| |
|
4. Procedural Reforms (p. 59) |
| |
|
|
General measures (p. 59) |
| |
|
|
|
Closed courts during a complainant’s evidence (p. 60) |
| |
|
|
|
Alternative arrangements for giving evidence (p. 60) |
| |
|
|
|
Support person (p. 60) |
| |
|
|
|
Protection of complainant anonymity (p. 60) |
| |
|
|
Specifc measures (p. 61) |
| |
|
|
|
Prohibition on personal cross-examination by the accused (p. 61) |
| |
|
|
|
‘Re-use’ of complainant’s evidence at retrial (p. 61) |
| |
|
|
Considering procedural reform (p. 61) |
| |
|
5. Reforming Evidence Rules (p. 62) |
| |
|
|
Restrictions on sexual experience evidence (p. 63) |
| |
|
|
Counselling communications privilege (p. 65) |
| |
|
|
Improper questions (p. 66) |
| |
|
|
From warnings that evoked rape myths to jury directions that ‘correct’ them (p. 67) |
| |
|
|
|
Corroboration (p. 68) |
| |
|
|
|
‘Delay’ (p. 68) |
| |
|
|
|
Diferences in accounts (p. 68) |
| |
|
|
|
Recent expansion of jury directions (p. 69) |
| |
|
6. Conclusion (p. 71) |
| |
4. Windows to Rape Trial Practice |
| |
|
1. Introduction (p. 75) |
| |
|
2. Barriers to ‘Open Justice’ (p. 76) |
| |
|
3. Finding the Way ‘in’ to Trials (p. 78) |
| |
|
|
Observation and transcript studies (p. 79) |
| |
|
4. Research Design (p. 83) |
| |
|
|
The Victorian trials(p. 83) |
| |
|
|
The NSW trials (p. 85) |
| |
|
|
Limitations of transcripts and our samples (p. 86) |
| |
|
|
Ethics approval and confdentiality measures (p. 88) |
| |
|
|
Coding and qualitative analysis (p. 90) |
| |
|
|
Use of transcript extracts in this book (p. 91) |
| |
|
|
Other data sources (p. 92) |
| |
|
5. Conclusion (p. 93) |
| |
5. Special Measures for Rape Trials |
| |
|
(p. ) |
| |
|
(p. ) |
| |
|
(p. ) |
| |
|
(p. ) |
| |
6. Framing the Crown Case: The Influence of 'Real Rape' Attributes |
| |
|
(p. ) |
| |
|
(p. ) |
| |
|
(p. ) |
| |
|
(p. ) |
| |
|
(p. ) |
| |
|
(p. ) |
| |
7. Cross-Examination: 'Genuine' Victims, 'Lying' Complainants, and the Resilience of Rape Myths |
| |
|
(p. ) |
| |
|
(p. ) |
| |
|
(p. ) |
| |
|
(p. ) |
| |
8. Intoxication Evidence |
| |
|
(p. ) |
| |
|
(p. ) |
| |
|
(p. ) |
| |
|
(p. ) |
| |
|
(p. ) |
| |
|
(p. ) |
| |
9. Judicial Influences on Rape Trials |
| |
|
(p. ) |
| |
|
(p. ) |
| |
|
(p. ) |
| |
|
(p. ) |
| |
|
(p. ) |
| |
|
(p. ) |
| |
10. Conclusion (p. 236) |
| |
|
1. Responsibility for the Status Quo (p. 236) |
| |
|
2. What Else Can Be Done? (p. 247) |
| |
Index (p. 257) |