Comments on: Anti-Sex Worker Bigotry Makes Its Way Into Rape Trial

By: abyss2hope

abyss2hope — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 15:06:34 +0000

From what I’ve read about this case it sounds like the defense is hoping to separate all the charges into different trials so that the jury in the rape trial won’t be allowed to know about the carjacking and murder. If the context of this sexual assault is removed then defense claims which clearly have no merit may seem plausible to a jury.

By: SunlessNick

SunlessNick — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 14:46:08 +0000

“My DNA was found wherever the hell it was found because we had a consensual sexual encounter earlier that day.” does not rely on “I have this ATM withdrawal as corroborating evidence, because I used the money to pay her.”

No, but they probably think whore-shaming her will make it more believable. I’d like to think they were wrong.

By: preying mantis

preying mantis — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 14:31:26 +0000

“But he might claim that he had consensual sex with the woman earlier in the day (in her role as a prostitute) which explains his DNA on her body- and perhaps even in the vehicle-, but had nothing to do with the later rape/murder.”

You wouldn’t need to include the fact that he paid her for sex to make that defense, though. “My DNA was found wherever the hell it was found because we had a consensual sexual encounter earlier that day.” does not rely on “I have this ATM withdrawal as corroborating evidence, because I used the money to pay her.” to work unless they’re actually trying to enter a literal receipt for unprotected sex into evidence.

Though I do wonder what the defense will field as an explanation for why the driver was unmurderable.

By: SunlessNick

SunlessNick — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 20:56:24 +0000

Here’s to hoping that for once justice and fairness trumps misogyny, and the judge dismisses the motion. This woman has been through far more than enough already.

Here’s to.

By: Femmostroppo Reader – August 18, 2009 — Hoyden About Town

Femmostroppo Reader – August 18, 2009 — Hoyden About Town — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 19:29:15 +0000

[...] Anti-Sex Worker Bigotry Makes Its Way Into Rape Trial [...]

By: evil fizz

evil fizz — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 18:39:58 +0000

That quite clearly makes no sense whatsoever, either as a scenario or a defense. To argue both that Cash is innocent, but also that if he did it, it really wasn’t that bad, is talking out both sides of your mouth and pretty much akin to telling a jury that yeah, they probably should think that he did it.

It doesn’t make much logical sense, but arguing in the alternative is par for the course in legal cases. “I didn’t do it, but if I did, it was justifiable/minimizable/subject to mitigation,” appears in tons of criminal cases.

The problem with exceptions to the rape shield law is that they frequently just serve to open the floodgates on all the things the shield is supposed to prevent. Same day sexual activity, especially if there’s more than one partner allows the defense to imply that the woman is a slut.

(Also, this case is happening outside of Philadelphia. Doylestown is white commuter suburbia, not the city.)

By: Feminist Avatar

Feminist Avatar — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 17:51:10 +0000

But he might claim that he had consensual sex with the woman earlier in the day (in her role as a prostitute) which explains his DNA on her body- and perhaps even in the vehicle-, but had nothing to do with the later rape/murder.

Which is not to say of course that this should trump the rape shield law, but it would be a ‘good’ defense to explain away DNA evidence.