Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Sexting as 'Sexual Behavior' Under Rape Shield Laws
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Sexting as 'Sexual Behavior' Under Rape Shield Laws
Do you wish to request the book?
Sexting as 'Sexual Behavior' Under Rape Shield Laws
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Sexting as 'Sexual Behavior' Under Rape Shield Laws
2017
Overview
As part of the proliferation of online communications, there has been a global increase in sexually explicit social media messages and consensual sexting among teenagers and adults of all ages. As a result, these kinds of electronic communications have begun to be used as evidence in a wide variety of court cases, including sexual harassment and discrimination cases. However, courts have only begun to consider whether such communications, particularly sexting communications, should be usable to impeach a sexual assault complainant, or whether these kinds of communications should be protected under rape shield laws as sexual \"conduct\" or \"behavior.\" This article traces the history of rape shield laws in four common law countries: the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, and Australia, and, using the history and purpose of these laws, argues that sexting should be protected under rape shield laws to protect sexual assault victims from unnecessary questioning about evidence that is likely to be embarrassing, prejudicial, and irrelevant to the case.
Publisher
International Journal of Cyber Criminology
Subject
