An Assessment of Rape Reform: Victim and Case Treatment under Michigan's Model
| Date | 01 January 1991 |
| Published date | 01 January 1991 |
| DOI | 10.1177/026975809100100405 |
| Author | Susan Caringella-Macdonald |
International Review
of
Victimology,
1991,
Vol.
1,
pp.
347-361
0269-7580/91
$10
©
1991
A B Academic Publishers-Printed
in
Great Britain
AN
ASSESSMENT
OF
RAPE
REFORM:
VICTIM
AND
CASE
TREATMENT
UNDER
MICHIGAN'S
MODEL
SUSAN CARINGELLA-MACDONALD
Criminal Justice Program, Western Michigan University, USA
ABSTRACT
This examination of Michigan's model rape reform law focuses on the comparability
between the treatment of sexual and other violent assaults. Discriminate function and
correlation analyses were conducted to discern similarities and/or differences
in
the
handling of assaults
in
a jurisdiction operating under the model reform code. Research
results indicated that implementation achieved reform desires to rid unique requirements
and practices
in
sexual assault case prosecutions
in
some areas, but that continued
differential treatment persisted in· other areas. The successes as well
as
failures
in
accomplishing reform goals are discussed. Conclusions emphasize the continual need for
victim services and advocacy.
INTRODUCTION
In
1975
Michigan enacted exemplary rape reform legislation. Vir-
tually all states across the United States have modified their rape statutes
in some fashion following Michigan's lead (Field and Bienen, 1980).
Perhaps the most salient reform objective has been to facilitate com-
parability in the treatment of rape and other violent crimes
in
order to
abate the 'double victimization' (Holmstrom & Burgess, 1978) of rape
victims.
The extensive burdens traditional rape laws placed upon victims
contributed to double victimization
by
putting victims, rather than
assailants, on 'trial' (Bohmer and Blumberg, 1975; Landau, 1974;
LeGrand, 1973; Robin, 1977; Shapo, 1975; Sasko and Sesek, 1975;
Washburn, 1975). Victim advocates have criticised traditional forcible
rape statutes, and called for rape to be viewed
as
a violent crime, like any
other, in order to achieve greater fairness for rape victims (Bendor, 1976;
Brownmiller, 1975; Gager and Schur, 1976; Klemmack and Klemmack,
1976). The specific critiques, changes sought, and changes enacted
concern the issues of corroboration, resistance, consent, and evidence of
past sexual activity.
Corroboration requirements impose the general rule that convictions
cannot be sustained on the sole basis of victim testimony. Resistance
standards, which require the utmost resistance throughout the duration of
the sexual attack, have been relied upon to demonstrate force, and
To continue reading
Request your trial