Originally posted by sirrahbed
The HUGE difference here is that SHE is the victim and HE is the accused on trial. Rape is a crime. So, his morality IS significant while hers as a victim should be irrelevant. She is not on trial here.

Again - I am not arguing her innocence - I am arguing the fact that the rape shield is in place to keep a VICTIM from being treated as equal to the criminal - exactly what is happening in the Kobe Bryant trial. The arguments you are making above are supporting the very problem I am arguing. The victim must not be treated to the same standards as the accused.
But it's not been proven that he even IS a criminal. He's only been accused. Innocent until proven guilty.

The accused have rights also, as they should until their guilt is proven. That's a great right we all have in this country.

Like I said before, I'm very glad that I don't have the responsibility of deciding who's being truthful in this case. What a huge weight to carry.