In Washington, Victims of Rape Can Be Cross-Examined by Their Rapists
Rapists, take note: Want to beat the rap and inflict even more psychological damage on your victim while you're at it? Be your own attorney!
While that might not sound like the best recommendation, what with representing one's self in court typically associated with psychopaths whose defenses tend to go down in flames, it unfortunately seems to be sage advice for sexual assailants, as Alex Dibranco reports on the Women Rights blog.
Why? Consider a recent case out of Washington. As The Seattle Times reported last week, a man accused of child rape had charges against him thrown out after the alleged victim in the case, now 21, refused to let him cross-examine her on the stand; rather than testify, she spent three hours threatening to jump off the roof of the King County Courthouse. (The man still faces charges with respect to other alleged victims.)
Given that most rape victims are already hesitant to report their crimes, it's not hard to see why allowing a man to personally cross-examine a woman he stands accused of victimizing is incredibly problematic. But it's not the first time courts in Washington have empowered accused rapists to do just that.
In 2008, according to the Times, another Washington woman was herself asked to submit to a cross-examination from her accused rapist. She complied. "For two days," the woman told the paper, "she endured 'outrageous' accusations and questions from [the defendant], who claimed she had hired him to kill her husband." The defendant hung himself in his jail cell before the trial was completed.
"Ask yourself why they want to represent themselves?" the woman says. "If they wanted to prove they were innocent, they would depend on a good lawyer. But they want to interfere with the process, put their victim through it again and assert their authority."
Of course, even those accused of horrible crimes are entitled to a defense. And just because someone is accused of being a rapist doesn't make it so. But victims also have rights, and asking them to relive the trauma of a sexual assault via a cross-examination by the perpetrator sure seems to be a violation of them.
Thankfully, there have been efforts to address the situation. Last year, a bill was introduced that would appear to protect defendants' and victims' rights alike by allowing the former to question the latter via closed-circuit television or through a surrogate attorney. And while the bill stalled in the state legislature, a similar proposal is expected to be reintroduced in the next legislative session -- and recent events ought to persuade previously skeptical politicians.
Photo Credit: Zach H.
Charles Davis
has covered Congress and criminal justice issues for public radio and Inter Press Service.
COMMENTS (7)