Last year I wrote about Judge Jeffre Cheuvront who banned the use of the term’s “rape” and “sexual assualt” during a criminal trial in which the defendant was accused of, ironically enough, sexual assault. As it turns out, this is not an isolated case as KansasCity.com is reporting that this is a growing trend, most recently in the case of Tory Bowen.

It’s the only way Tory Bowen knows to honestly describe what happened to her.

She was raped.

But a judge prohibited her from uttering the word “rape” in front of a jury. The term “sexual assault” also was taboo, and Bowen could not refer to herself as a victim or use the word “assailant” to describe the man who allegedly raped her.

The defendant’s presumption of innocence and right to a fair trial trumps Bowen’s right of free speech, said the Lincoln, Neb., judge who issued the order.

Those who defend the accused say the determination of whether what happened was rape or consensual sex is up to juries, not witnesses.

“They shouldn’t be able to use the word ‘rape’ as if it is a fact that has been established,” said Jack King, director of public affairs and communications for the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. “These are loaded words.”

But Bowen says there is nothing fair about allowing the defense to describe what happened as sex and forcing the victim to describe it in the same words, especially when jurors are not told that an order limiting speech is in place.

While the judge may have noted the importance of a fair trial, what he was actually doing was tipping the scales of justice in favor of the assailant accused. The crime that the defendant was charged with is first degree sexual assault, however due to an overly ambitious judge, the accuser will never be able to tell the jury that sexual assault actually occurred. This in and of itself could cause the jury to be impartial as they will never here the accuser state for the record that she was raped, or even sexually assaulted.

Although the defendant may indeed be innocent of the charges against him, however the charge against him is sexual assault and that term should be allowed in a courtroom.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Appellate Court