Rape is NOT the Victim's Fault

The question is unthinkable given the conditions: “Did you ever have a sexually transmitted disease?” This is one of the first questions to which a rape victim must respond. In what way does her sexual history play any role in her case against a defendant? We have “double jeopardy” to protect people from unfair prosecution, but rape victims are repeatedly put on trial over and over for crimes perpetrated against them. Prosecutors are allowed to judge rape victims in a critical light, aggressively emphasizing many factors related to her personal life, her appearance, or her action just prior to the rape that she endured. These factors are brought out to influence a jury’s perception of the victim creating doubt about whether the crime may not in fact have been the victim’s fault. Did she deserve it? Was she asking for it? There are cases in which rape victims are treated differently due to the lack of understanding and prejudice which can be brought to bear against victims. Prejudice is the act of forming an unreasonable judgment against another. These prejudgments can affect a victim’s emotional status, actually leading some victims to end up asking themselves if the transgression was their fault. Three cases will reveal the complexity of what is at stake.

The first case is based upon the character of Sarah Tobias, portrayed by Jodi Foster in the movie The Accused. Sarah is depicted as a young independent woman who has just ended a relationship with her partner. After the breakup, Sarah goes to a bar called The Mill where her friend works. After a couple of drinks, Sarah is no longer sober. She starts dancing provocatively. The men in the bar surround her, and she is gang-raped. Later at the hospital, Sarah, battered and exhausted, is interrogated. One of the standard questions directed at her inquires as to whether or not she has ever had an STD. During the trial, Sarah is bombarded by more questions about her past. She is portrayed as if she were the guilty one, even though she has been violated in a vicious assault. The defense attorney builds his defense on the possibility that her lifestyle makes her into women who would ask to be raped. He emphasizes how she was drunk and was dressed provocatively on the night in question. He suggests that wearing a mini skirt can translate into an invitation to be raped, that consent comes complicit with attire.