Changes to section 2 of sexual offences act 1976

Medicine, Science and the Law

Volumn 39, Issue 3, 1999, Pages 198-208

  Baird, Vera ^a,b  

^a Tooks Court Chambers   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CANADA; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; LEGAL ASPECT; MALE; RAPE; REVIEW; SEXUAL BEHAVIOR; THEORETICAL MODEL; UNITED KINGDOM;

CANADA; ENGLAND; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MODELS, THEORETICAL; RAPE; SEXUAL BEHAVIOR; TRUTH DISCLOSURE;

EID: 0033161575     PISSN: 00258024     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/002580249903900303     Document Type: Article

References (10)

1. Adler (1992) Rape on Trial. Routledge and Kegan, London.
2. Brereton D. (1997) How different are Rape Trials? Br. J. Ciminol. 37, (3).
3. Hall R. (1985) Ask Any Woman. Falling Wall Press, London.
4. Heilbron R. (1975) Report of the Advisory Group on the Law of Rape. London, HMSO, Cmnd 6352.
5. Home Office (1998) Speaking Up for Justice: Report of the Interdepartmental Working Group on the Treatment of Vulnerable or Intimidated Witnesses in the Criminal Justice System. HMSO, London.
6. McColgan A. (1996) Common law and the relevance of sexual history. Ox. J. Legal Studies 16, 275.
7. Scottish Office (1992) Sexual History and Sexual Character Evidence in Scottish Sexual Offence Trials. HMSO, London.
8. Temkin J. (1993) Sexual history evidence - the new ravishment of Section 2. Crim. Law Rev.
9. Victims' Support (1996) Women, Rape and the Criminal Justice System. London.
10. Wellings (1995)