NCJ Number
74364
Date Published
1980
Length
5 pages
Annotation
Attempts at reforming Australian substantive and procedural law in favor of rape victims are criticized from a police point of view.
Abstract
According to this article, modern law reformers are frequently bent on the destruction of law and order. With regard to rape issues, police generally believe rape crisis centers are inhibiting factors in rape investigations: complaints are delayed, rape crisis workers talk victims out of reporting a rape, and the centers relay a distinct impression of being antipolice. Procedural law changes intended to better control the police unnecessarily hinder many investigations. The police require a lessening of procedural requirements involving (1) granting the police power to have a suspect medically examined, (2) abolition of the right to silence, (3) revising laws of evidence to make it easier to have evidence admitted in court, (4) admission of the woman's past sexual history as evidence in court, (5) abandonment of the idea that only females should interview females, and (6) giving greater consideration to medical practitioners' evidence. The article argues that several reforms have transferred the determination of guilt from the court to the police and voices skepticism as to whether this was the intent of the lawmakers. Footnotes are included. For related papers, see NCJ 74354.