Sexual History Evidence - Beware the Backlash

Defends the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 ss.41-43 and asserts that replacing these provisions with something akin to the previous Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1976 s.2 would be a retrograde step and should be vigorously resisted. Examines: (1) the historical position in the light of the House of Lords' decision in DPP v Morgan (William Anthony) and details the failings of the discretionary regime governing the admission of sexual history evidence under s.2 of the 1976 Act; (2) s.41 of the 1999 Act and the creation of a rule of exclusion with exceptions set out by specific categories; (3) s.41 in comparison with other "categories" legislation, considering whether s.41 provides potentially greater protection to defendants than other similar statutes; (4) Professor Birch's proposals in respect of the Law Commission's scheme contained in the Criminal Justice Bill 2002, the relevance of evidence of a previous sexual relationship with the accused or of the complainant's sexual past; (5) whether the Sexual Offences (Procedure and Evidence) (Scotland) Act 2002 offers a credible alternative to s.41 of the 1999 Act; and (6) prospective developments in the wake of the House of Lords decision in R. v A (Complainant's Sexual History), taking into account proposals in the Sexual Offences Bill 2003. Includes consideration of the approaches taken in Scotland, Canada, the United States and New South Wales.