http://www.thenewstribune.com/news/loca ... 4090c.html
Very interesting case with appalling facts on both sides. (Defense lawyer is a pretty media-savvy guy, some might say publicity hound, so take with appropriate amount of salt.) Also, in initial news reports the victim was described as being developmentally delayed, but that information has not appeared in more recent coverage and if she is DD she seems to be functioning at a pretty high level.
What do you think of the judge's ruling? Should the jury get to hear this additional information about how the victim solicited sex on the internet (and continued to do so after the alleged rape), showed a false birth certificate, etc.?
[This case was also interesting because prospective jurors were asked whether they'd ever done B&D, group sex, etc. And they say no one wants to serve on juries any more . . . ]
