Recently I had a Federal judge reject my attempts to keep a client on death row from being executed. I was appointed to represent the defendant after he had lost his trial; lost his appeal in state court; and lost his attempt to convince the trial judge to find his case constitutionally flawed pursuant to a “writ of habeas corpus.” I was appointed, as Federal law provides, to represent him in relation to his final “appeals” to Federal court.
After I was appointed to represent him I asked the judge to let me have investigators and the funds to thoroughly review his case. Eventually the court agreed to let me do this. The evidence of guilt was overwhelming but the investigation revealed that the trial attorneys had failed to put on hardly any evidence in the phase of the trial in which the jury is supposed to hear all the evidence relevant to the question of whether he should live or die. The Supreme Court has made it increasingly clear over the years that it is unconstitutional in this day and age to execute someone unless the jury is provided a complete overview of the defendant’s life. The good, the bad and the ugly. Yet this clearly did not happen in this case. Easy answer right? Just retry the defendant on the question of whether he should be executed. Wrong!
The problem is I did not find out all of this information until it is too late. The law provides that if an allegation is made that the trial lawyers failed to do something it has to be raised in the first state writ of habeas corpus. If it wasn’t raised then it may never be considered again. Why wasn’t the evidence presented in the first state writ of habeas corpus? The defendant had a lawyer didn’t he? Yes, but one that worse than having no lawyer at all. The trial court appointed a lawyer who had just graduated from law school and had no experience in death penalty litigation. It appears she simply had no idea what she was supposed to do because she raised no meaningful issues in the state writ of habeas corpus. Well, in that case the courts should just allow the defendant another chance to file a state writ of habeas corpus right? Wrong again. The courts are afraid that if the failures or inadequacies of state habeas counsel could result in “do overs” the death penalties appeals really would never come to an end. So if state habeas counsel drops the ball, to bad, so sad,” for the defendant.
Consider the upshot of all this for a moment. The defendant is guilty. As a practical matter the only question is whether he should spend the rest of his life in prison or be executed. The Supreme Court says no automatic death penalty. The jury must here all relevant evidence about the defendant before it can make such a momentous decision. The court appoints the defendant a lawyer who fails to put even a fraction of all the relevant evidence before the jury. The first appeals lawyer can’t do anything about it, even if he knew about it, because the law says in the first appeal the lawyer can only talk about things that were before the court at trial and the whole point is the trial lawyer did not place any of this information before the court. The court then appoints an inexperienced lawyer who has no idea what she is supposed to do to prepare and file a state habeas petition. She does no investigation and thus makes no mention of the failure of the first attorneys to present any of this evidence. Then the courts appoint the defendant a new attorney and tell that attorney that he is limited to carrying forward the frivolous claims of the first habeas attorney. When he informs the court of all the important evidence the jury never heard, the court then responds, “the defendant failed to raise these issues in the first habeas corpus and thus cannot raise them now.” Really? The nearly retarded defendant with a fourth grade education on death row? He didn’t do anything but sit in his cell. The courts initially failed to appoint competent attorneys for the defendant. The attorneys that the court assigned to the defendant failed him and the public, who would like to believe that before people are executed, the jury that imposed the death sentence was making an informed decision. In reality, the courts are far more responsible for the failure of this evidence to presented to the jury than the defendant himself. In fairness to the judges the law provides for this “Catch 22,” but sometimes the law promotes more injustice than justice.
By: Broden & Mickelsen
Posts Tagged ‘Allegation’
Some Bizarre Death Penalty Laws
November 25th, 2009Divorce Laws: Making A Clean Break Easy
October 12th, 2009Divorce is a painful and extremely difficult process. Knowing how divorce laws function and understanding the court’s role in a divorce can help to make this transition smoother and easier, however.
Divorce laws govern the dissolution of a marriage. Every country has its own laws regarding divorce and, in fact, divorce laws can vary from state to state or province to province within a nation. Knowing your jurisdiction’s divorce laws can keep a bad situation from becoming worse, and save you future turmoil.
In the United States, divorce laws, in general, provide two basic forms of divorce: fault based and no-fault based. However, even in some jurisdictions whose divorce laws do not require a party to claim fault of their partner, a court may still take into account the behavior of the parties when dividing property, debts, evaluating custody, and support.
Fault-based divorces can be contested and may involve allegations of collusion of the parties, connivance, or provocation by the other party.
In a no-fault divorce, the dissolution of a marriage does not require an allegation or proof of fault of either party. Forty-nine states have adopted no-fault divorce laws, with grounds for divorce including incompatibility, irreconcilable differences, and irremediable breakdown of the marriage. New York is the sole exception divorce laws there still require a proof of fault.
About 95 percent of divorces in the US are “uncontested,” because the two parties are able to work out an arrangement concerning property, debt, children and support issues. When the parties can agree and present the court with a fair and equitable agreement, approval of the divorce is almost guaranteed. If the parties can’t work out their differences, divorce laws govern the fair and equitable disposition of these issues.
Divorce laws generally recognize two types of property during property division proceedings – marital property and separate property. Marital property consists of property that the spouses acquire individually or jointly during the course of marriage. Under divorce laws, separate property constitutes any property that one spouse purchased and possessed prior to the marriage and that did not substantially change in value during the course of the marriage because of the efforts of one or both spouses. Under modern divorce laws, separate property is returned to its original owner, while marital property is divided according to negotiated settlement and what the court deems equitable.
In cases involving children, divorce laws attempt to ensure the matter does not spill over into the family court system. In many jurisdictions, divorce laws require divorcing parents to submit a parenting plan spelling out each party’s rights and responsibilities.
Divorce laws also provide for the establishment of alimony, often depending on the length of the marriage and other factors. Spousal support is becoming less common, however, as more women are entering the workforce and earning their own income.
By: Elijah James
Rape Laws in India
September 4th, 2009
THE RAPE LAWS IN INDIA, revisiting the concepts .
Is ‘Rape’ merely a word described in section 375 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, to be interpreted stricto senso? Or is it a psychological phenomenon to be understood and dealt with, with more empathy and less legality? What is the scope of this word and its narrow definition according to law and what is the impact of this definition on the judgments meted out to the hapless victims of this excruciating mental agony? This project aims to study the lacunas in the present definition and scope of the phenomenon called Rape.
The word ‘Rape’ is derived from the Latin term ‘Rapio’, which means ‘to seize’. Thus, rape literally means a forcible seizure and that is the essential characteristic feature of the offence. In common parlance, it means intercourse without her consent by force, fear or fraud. In other words, rape is violation with violence of the private person of a woman.
Though the law is said to grant justice to the innocent, the same is sadly not true in case of rape victims. Justice prides herself on being blind to everything but the truth – yet as far as rape is concerned, the facts paint a different picture. Rape laws in India are extremely antiquated. Although the laws outline the crime in clear terms, the courts are filled with people who favor the accused and challenge the veracity of the victim’s allegation.
The Supreme Court has opined in Maharashtra v Madhukar Narayan Mardikar , that
“..even a woman with easy virtue is entitled to privacy and no one can invade her privacy as and when he likes. So also, it is not open to any and every person to violate her person as and when he wishes. Therefore, merely because she is a woman of easy virtue, her evidence cannot be thrown overboard.”
Rape laws in India are antiquated; Instances where justice has failed the victim because of interpretation of law, assessment of evidence, long delays at the trial and harsh and humiliating cross-examination of the victim are reported with alarming frequency. This report deal with the incumbencies in the existing laws relating to rape in India and certain recent developments in this field.
Rape is a weapon that distorts a woman’s sexuality, restricts her freedom of movement and violates her human rights. It leaves a woman feeling exposed, humiliated and traumatised. A rapist not only violates the victim’s privacy and personal integrity, but also causes serious physical and psychological damage. The law must take a fresh look at itself and take positive steps to make it more difficult for an accused to get judicial reprieve. . What is sad about rape in India is the lack of seriousness with which the crime is often treated.Statistics from 2000 showed that on average a woman is raped every hour in India
As observed by Justice Arjit Pasayat:
“While a murderer destroys the physical frame of the victim, a rapist degrades and defiles the soul of a helpless female.”
Sexual harassment is nothing less than the showcasing of male dominance. Given an opportunity, such men (those committing sexual harassement) would try fulfilling their desire.
Rape
Rape means an unlawful intercourse done by a man with a woman without her valid consent. (Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code)
A man is said to commit “rape” if he has sexual intercourse with a woman under circumstances falling under any of the six following descriptions :-
Against her will.
Without her consent.
With her consent, when her consent has been obtained by putting her or any person in whom she is interested in fear of death or of hurt.
With her consent, when the man knows that he is not her husband, and that her consent is given because she believes that he is another man to whom she is or believes herself to be lawfully married.
With her consent, when, at the time of giving such consent, by reason of unsoundness of mind or intoxication or the administration by him personally or through another of any stupefying or unwholesome substance, she is unable to understand the nature and consequences of that to which she gives consent.
With or without her consent, when she is under sixteen years of age.
Explanation : Penetration is sufficient to constitute the sexual intercourse necessary to the offence of rape.
Exception : Sexual intercourse by a man with his own wife, the wife not being under fifteen years of age, is not rape.
Impediments to Justice:
Rape is defined in India as intentional, unlawful sexual intercourse with a woman without her consent. The essential elements of this definition under Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code are ‘sexual intercourse with a woman’ and the absence of consent. This definition therefore does not include acts of forced oral sex, or sodomy, or penetration by foreign objects; instead those actions are criminalized under Section 354 of the IPC, which deals with ‘criminal assault on a woman with intent to outrage her modesty’ and Section 377 IPC, covering ‘carnal intercourse against the order of nature’.
The definition leaves a few questions unanswered. For instance, what about sexual intercourse by a man with his wife, and without her consent, where the wife is over 16 years of age? Judicial interpretation has also meant that sexual intercourse in a custodial situation (police station, public hospital, remand homes, and jails) is deemed an offence, without going into the question of consent. Also, anal or oral penetration and penetration with objects do not fall within the ambit of section 375.
It also does not recognize other forms of sexual assaults, like protracted sexual assault by relatives, marital rape etc. as aggravated forms of rape. This causes grave injustice to many victims. In many cases of child rape, the child has been penetrated through fingers or by objects or been force to perform oral or anal sex; yet this is not considered rape by the Courts.
Also, if the victim is a minor, the onus is on the accused to prove his innocence. But if the victim is a major, it is up to her to prove her charge. Therefore, the defence finds it worthwhile to prove that the victim is a major. Another problem is that unless the woman is examined medically within 24 hours, it becomes difficult forensically to prove that rape has occurred. Very often, unable to prove penetration, judges find themselves trying “rape” cases under more watered down sections: ‘outraging the modesty of a woman’, for instance, carrying much lighter punishment.
Adding to this is Section. 155(4) of the Evidence Act (Repealed), which allows the victim to be questioned of her past sexual history which the defense uses to humiliate the victim in the Courtroom. At the same time, section 54 stated: “In criminal proceedings (including rape) the fact that the accused person has a bad character is irrelevant, unless evidence has been given (by him) that he has a good character, in which case it becomes relevant.”
Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) only considers forced peno-vaginal penetration to be rape. Penetration with any other object, be it life-threatening (a knife, an iron rod, etc), though more physically harmful is not rape. The penis is accorded a privileged position in comparison with other objects that can be inserted, because of the primacy put on the virginity of women. The rupture of a woman’s hymen — the ultimate symbol of her sexual purity — must be avoided at all costs. “Sexual intercourse by a man with his own wife, the wife not being under 15 years of age, is not rape,” according to this section. In other words, forced sex within marriage is outside the scope of the offence of rape.
The manner in which some courts have interpreted the law or assessed the evidence has often proved to be an obstacle also. In spite of Supreme Court judgments to the contrary, lower court judges often insist on evidence of physical resistance or marks of injuries to hold that a woman has not consented. A woman’s evidence without corroboration is not considered sufficient.
Therefore rape laws in order to be of great deterrence, must have a cooperative victim, professional investigation, diligent prosecution; and an expeditious trial. For otherwise it shall not be the law, that fails, but the applicants, the process and application
Earlier Developments
Several difficulties with the rape law were highlighted through some insensitive treatment by the judiciary
· The Mathura rape case is illustrative.( TukaRam v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1979 SC 185In March 1972, a 16-year-old tribal girl was raped by two policemen in the compound of Desai Ganj police chowky in Chandrapur district of Maharashtra. Her relatives, who had come to register a complaint, were patiently waiting outside even as this heinous act was being perpetrated in the police station. When her relatives and the crowd threatened to burn the police chowky down, the two guilty policemen, Ganpat and Tukaram, reluctantly agreed to file a panchnama. At the Sessions Court, Mathura was accused of being a “liar” and that since she was “habituated to sexual intercourse”, her consent was given. The Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court set aside the judgment holding that that passive submission due to fear induced by serious threats could not be construed as willing sexual intercourse. However, the decision of the Supreme Court remains a blot on its record to this day. The rationale for acquittal was that Mathura had not raised an alarm and there were no visible marks of injury on her body. The judgment did not distinguish between consent and forcible submission
The Mathura rape case galvanised the women’s movement into asking for reforms of the criminal law that dealt with rape. In 1983, the government passed the Criminal Law Amendment Act. It amended Section 376 IPC and enhances the punishment of rape it also provides enhanced punishment of minimum of 10 years of imprisonment for police officers or staff of jail, the remand homes or other places of custody established by law. The Act further inserts a new Section 114-A IEA, by raising a presumption as to absence of consent in cases of custodial rape, rape on pregnant women and gang rape at least partially, removed the infirmity from the evidence of a victim of rape that was hitherto unjustly attached to her testimony without taking note of the fact that in India, unlike the occident a disclosure of the girls identity, rehabilitation in society for all times to come and unless her story was painfully true she would not have taken such a grave risk merely to malign the accused.The Act also provides for trial in camera. It also inserts a new section in the IPC Sec 228(A), which makes disclosure of the identity of the victims in These amendments were not enough to stem the rise in the number of cases of sexual violence against women. One crucial defect in the law was the definition of rape under Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which took into account only penile-vaginal penetration. Other physical and mental injuries were left to be dealt with under Sections 354 and 509 of the IPC as `outraging the modesty of a woman’.
Although the amendment had only partly accepted the demands of the campaign, the enactment was an indication of some measure of success. However, the inadequacy of these measures became clear in the Suman Rani case.[In spite of the rigorous punishment brought in through the amendment in cases of custodial rape, the Supreme Court reduced the sentence to five years on grounds that the woman was of ‘questionable character’ and ‘easy virtue’ with ‘lewd’ and ‘lascivious behaviour’. The court also dismissed a review petition filed by women’s groups. The Suman Rani case was no exception; the judiciary was routinely awarding less than the minimum sentence in rape trials despite the statutory mandate laid down by the amendment. In Mohd.Habib v. State, the Delhi High Court allowed a rapist to go scot-free merely because there were no marks of injury on his penis, which the High Court presumed was indicative of consent.
· In Mohd.Habib Vs State, the Delhi High Court allowed a rapist to go scot-free merely because there were no marks of injury on his penis- which the High Court presumed was a indication of no resistance. The most important facts such as the age of the victim (being seven years) and that she had suffered a ruptured hymen and the bite marks on her body were not considered by the High Court. Even the eye- witnesses who witnessed this ghastly act, could not sway the High Court’s judgment.
· In another instance of conscience stirring cases, Sakina- a poor sixteen year old girl from Kerala, who was lured to Ernakulam with the promise of finding her a good job, where she was sold and forced into prostitution. There for eighteen long months she was held captive and raped by clients. Finally she was rescued by the police- acting on a complaint filed by her neighbour.With the help of her parents and an Advocate, Sakina filed a suit in the High Court- giving the names of the upper echelons of the bureaucracy and society of Kerala.The suit was squashed by the High Court, while observing that ‘ it is improbable to believe that a man who desired sex on payment would go to a reluctant woman; and that the version of the victim was not so sacrosanct as to be taken for granted.’
· Whereas, in State of Punjab Vs. Gurmit Singh, the Supreme Court has advised the lower judiciary, that even if the victim girl is shown to be habituated to sex, the Court should not describe her to be of loose character.
· The Supreme Court has in the case of State of Maharashtra Vs. Madhukar N. Mardikar, held that "the unchastity of a woman does not make her open to any and every person to violate her person as and when he wishes. She is entitled to protect her person if there is an attempt to violate her person against her wish. She is equally entitled to the protection of law. Therefore merely because she is of easy virtue, her evidence cannot be thrown overboard."
In Chairman, Railway Board Vs. Chandrima Das, a practicing Advocate of the Calcutta High Court filed a petition under Article.226 of the Constitution of India against the various railway authorities of the eastern railway claiming compensation for the victim (Smt. Hanufa Khatoon)- a Bangladesh national- who was raped at the Howrah Station, by the railway security men. The High Court awarded Rs.10 lacs as compensation.
The Supreme Court also held that the relief can be granted to the victim for two reasons- firstly, on the ground of domestic jurisprudence based on the Constitutional provisions; and secondly, on the ground of Human Rights Jurisprudence based on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948 which has international recognition as the ‘Moral Code of Conduct’- adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nation.
In view of the above, the Supreme Court has laid down the following guidelines for the trial of rape cases:
1.The complaints of sexual assault cases should be provided with legal representation. Such a person should be well acquainted.
2. Legal assistance should be provided at the police Station, since the victim may be in a distressed state.
3. The police should be under a duty to inform the victim of her right to a counsel before being interrogated.
4. A list of lawyers willing to act in these cases should be kept at the police station.
5. Advocates shall be appointed by the Court on an application by the police at the earliest, but in order that the victim is not questioned without one, the Advocate shall be authorized to act at the police Station before leave of the Court is sought or obtained.
6. In all rape trials, anonymity of the victim must be maintained
7. It is necessary to setup Criminal Injuries Compensation Board with regard to the Directive Principles contained under Article. 38(1) of the Constitution of India. As some victims also incur Substantial losses.
8. Compensation for the victims shall be awarded by the Court on the conviction of the offender and by the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board- whether or not a conviction has taken place. The Board will take into account pain, suffering, shock as well as loss of earnings due to pregnancy and child birth if this accrued as a result of rape.
Recent Developments
In 1997, Sakshi, an organisation involved in issues on women and children, approached the Supreme Court through a writ petition asking for directions concerning the definition of rape in the IPC. Although the Supreme Court did not interpret the provisions of Section 375 IPC to include all forms of penetration such as penile/vaginal penetration, penile/oral penetration, penile/anal penetration, finger/vagina penetration, finger/anal penetration, and object/vaginal penetration within its ambit. Instead, the judges sought refuge behind the strict interpretation of penal statutes and the doctrine of state decisis - a view that any alteration [in this case, of the definition of rape] would result in chaos and confusion, it directed the Law Commission of India to respond to the issues raised in the petition. The Law Commission, under the chairmanship of Justice P. Jeevan Reddy, responded by saying that the 156th Law Commission Report had dealt with these issues. The Supreme Court, however, agreed with Sakshi that the 156th Report did not deal with the precise issues raised in the writ petition. In August 1999, it directed the Law Commission to look into these issues afresh. (Sakshi v. Union of India)
After detailed consultations with the organisations, the Law Commission released its 172nd Report on the Review of Rape Laws, in 2000. The Law Commission recommended changing the focus from rape to `sexual assault’, the definition of which goes beyond penile penetration to include penetration by any part of the body and objects, taking into account cunnilingus and fellatio.
The report recommended the deletion of Section 155(4) of the Indian Evidence Act, which would prevent a victim of rape from being cross-examined about her `general immoral character’ and sexual history. It suggested graded sentences, with higher punishment for rape committed by the relatives and persons in `trust or authority’, public servants, and superintendents, management and staff of hospitals. It introduced a new Section 376(E), which would include sexual harassment at the workplace.
The commission recommended shifting the burden of proof of consent to the accused. It suggested specific provisions that would deal with the medical examination of the victim as well as the accused by a registered medical practitioner. It said that girls who are victims of rape should be questioned only by a female police officer, in the absence of whom a qualified woman from a recognised social organisation should do the questioning. The commission suggested that the law relating to sexual assault be made gender neutral, that is, men and women can be charged with the rape of men, women and children. This meant that for the first time the sexual assault of minor boys was made prosecutable under the law. It asked for Section 377 of the IPC to be dropped, thus decriminalising sodomy.
However, the recommendations did not take into account marital rape. It raised the age of consent of the wife from 15 to 16 years, after which the woman is not protected from rape by the husband. It also continues to provide a window for Judges to reduce the sentence in case of convictions below the minimum sentence specified, as suggested by the commission which states: “Any number of situations may arise, which the Commission cannot foresee th Based on the Law Commission’s recommendations, the government enacted an amendment in the winter session of Parliament in 2002, which deleted Section 155(4) and inserted a proviso to Section 146 of the Indian Evidence Act, which means that a victim of rape can no longer be questioned about her past sexual conduct and her `general immoral character’..
Criminal Law Amendment Bill of 2005
The Bill, drafted by Ms Kirti Singh advocate and legal convener of AIDWA, is based on 172nd report of the Law Commission to amend the laws relating to sexual assault in Section 375, 376, 354 and 509 IPC and the relevant sections of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 and the Indian Evidence Act 1872. The recommendations are based on the national consultation on the issue organized by the national commission for women
· The major changes sought to be brought about through this amendment are substitution of existing section 375 of the IPC with the following:
“375.Sexual Assault: Sexual assault means –
(a) The introduction (to any extent) by a man of his penis, into the vagina (which term shall include the labia majora), the anus or urethra or mouth of any woman or child–
(b) the introduction to any extent by a man of an object or a part of the body (other than the penis) into the vagina(which term shall include the labia majora) or anus or urethra of a woman
(c) the introduction to any extent by a person of an object or a part of the body (other than the penis) into the vagina(which term shall include the labia majora) or anus or urethra of a child.
(d) manipulating any part of the body of a child so as to cause penetration of the vagina (which term shall include labia majora) anus or the urethra of the offender by any part of the child’s body;”
Similarly, Amendment, 2005 brought forth many changes in rape laws, especially related to detailed procedure of examination of victim and accused both by inserting new sections: 164-A, 174 (1A), (b), and 53-A (a) CrPC, and made it clear that in addition to physical examination, it also shall include the examination of blood, blood stains, semen, swabs in case of sexual offences, sputum and sweat, hair samples and finger nail clippings by the use of modern and scientific techniques including DNA profiling and such other tests which the RMP thinks necessary in a particular case. Section 174 (1A), (b), CrPC inserted to make mandatory inquiry by the Judicial Magistrate in cases of custodial rape and murder cases.
By: Harshvardhan Singh Rathore
