Abstract
Through a close reading of a rape trial, this article discusses the seemingly intractable problem of the disconnect between rape law reform and the resilience of outdated common law practices being used in the courtroom. It is argued that certain requirements (the location of the event; a focus on resistance and the presence of injuries; recent complaint; and the underlying assumption of the untrustworthiness of the complainant) form a ‘rape schema’ which operate to distinguish the ‘true’ from the ‘false’ complaint of rape. Finally, this article turns to the insights of critical theory to think about how concepts of ‘readability’, intentionality and the performance of embodied knowledge by legal subjects might enable us to intervene differently in order to achieve justice for rape victims.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
