Judge Bans Use of “Rape” in Court Room
Just to clarify the title: an American judge has ordered a woman who claims she was raped by the suspect in a criminal case from using the word ‘rape’ to describe what happened (according) to her. The judge argues that the word is highly inflammatory and can, as such, make a big emotional impression on the jury, which may influence the jury’s views.
When the prosecutor argued that the woman’s right of freedom of speech should be considered more important than anything else, the judge said that in a trial, the freedom of speech should not be considered more important than the defendant’s right to be held innocent until proven guilty… and his right to a fair trial.
Although I understand it that people may have strong feelings about this issue, I think that the decision of the judge is correct. If America had a system in which judges decided, and not juries (amateurs in other words), the situation might have been different. But, as it is, the precautions are, if not necessary, then at least understandable.
I have to totally disagree, sorry. What’s next? Witnesses not being able to say that someone "murdered" their son in front of them? Child victims not being able to say they were abused, or molested? The defendent is being allowed to say it was consensual, and she isn’t being allowed to say she was raped, or even "sexually assaulted".
Rape is an emotionally charged word because it is a terrible crime. It has a meaning; non-consensual sex. An accuser should be allowed to use words that appropriately describe what they claim has happened to them, and the defendent should be equally free to defend themselves saying what THEY think happened.
Are we a free people, a nation of laws based on the Constitution of the United States, or are we a nation of serfs who owe our allegance to jurists in black robes? It does not speak well of a free republic when judges ignore the Constitution to create their own personal version of the law.