Rape trauma syndrome – Time to open the floodgates?

References 

1. http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/documents/cons-290306-justice-rape-victims?view=Binary.
2. Hackman J. Henson v State: Rape trauma syndrome used by the defendant as well as the Victim, 19Am J Trial Advoc 453, at 454.
3. Pittman Roger K, Orr Scott O. Psychophysiologic testing for post-traumatic stress disorder. 21 Bull Am Acad Psychiatry & L. 1993;37:39

4. Some doctors dispute this classification, a debate beyond the scope of this paper but nonetheless recognised.
5. Burgess AW. Rape trauma syndrom. 1 Behav Sci & L. 1983;97:109
6. Temkin J. Rape and the legal process, 2nd edition. p. 3.
7. Feagan C. Rape trauma syndrome testimony as scientific evidence: evolving beyond State v Taylor, 61 UMKC L Rev 145, 151–52.
8. Regina v Knight. 1 WLR 230; 1966.

9. Exceeding the speed limit remains one of the offences where corroboration is still required.
10. Regina v Redpath. 46 Cr App R 319 (CA); 1962.
11. Regina v Keast. [1998] Crim LR 748, CA. Some behaviour might be considered part of the res gestae and admissible in any event, see Regina v Townsend, unreported, CA 23 October 2003.
12. Stefan, S. The Protection Racket: Rape Trauma Syndrome, Psychiatric Labeling 2nd Law. Northwestern University Law Review 88, 1271–1345 (op cit. p. 1327).
13. State v Allewalt 308 MD 89. p. 741.
14. State v Allewalt 308 MD 89. p. 751.

15. There is no discussion of the wider problems in section 41 as this is outside the scope of this paper.
16. Henson v State, 535 N.E. 2d 1189 (Ind. 1989).
17. Henson, 535 N.E. 2d 1189. p. 1191.