Tillers' Home Page

Evidence Course Home Page



Evidence Course
Professor Peter Tillers
Cardozo School of Law






Propensity & Character in Sexual Misconduct Trials


x



David Defendant is indicted by the State of Blackacre.

Common law rules of evidence apply in Blackacre; Rules such as Federal Evidence Rules 413-415 do not exist in Blackacre.

Davaid is charged with sexually molesting a minor child. It is charged that David committed this crime by forcing Vila Victim, a twelve year old girl, to have intercourse with him on June 1, 2005.

In Blackacre the crime of sexual molestation of a child requires that the perpetrator have touched the child with a "prurient intent and a lustful disposition."

During its case in chief the government offers to prove that David D raped Margie Smith, a seven year old girl, on May 15, 1997.

Does this evidence violate the character evidence rule?

y



DD is charged with raping Vila V. DD does not deny that Vila V was raped but he does deny that he was the culprit.

At the trial the evidence shows that the rapist, whoever he was, forced Vila's acquiescence and submission after saying, "I'll kill your children if you resist."

Evidence: DD forced AA, BB, and CC to have intercourse with him after saying, "I'll kill your children if you don't cooperate."

Does the evidence violate the character evidence rule?

Is DD's m.o. in the case of AA, BB, and CC a "signature"?

Is it a unique signature?

If not, does that matter?





 


Tillers' Home Page


Evidence Course Home Page