No one was disputing that it was her in the tape. She had already testified that she had no recollection of the rape and the taping because she was unconscious. Prior testimony had already focused on how drunk she was prior to the incident.
No one said that the jury couldn't see the evidence. They have now viewed it.
The reasoning from the defense to make the complaining witness view it in court and answer questions was that the defendent had the right to confront his accuser.
"If the government is using this tape, then the defense has every right to ask the complaining witness to view it and to talk about it."
In other words, he wanted to point out specific actions in the tape and say "doesn't that look like you were enjoying it?" What else would he ask her? That was no point in saying "can you confirm that's you?"
However, the defense can still review the tape with jurors and say "doesn't that look like she was enjoying it?" without making her view it too. If she claims to be unconscious and she's not, they should be able to tell. His rights to protect himself against false claims is preserved.
BTW, a second defendent has already pled guilty and a third has fled the country. I think the defense for this defendent was desperate.
BTW, The Rights of Crime Victims and Witnesses act says the privacy and dignity of crime victims should be protected throughout the trial.






Reply With Quote
Bookmarks