Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 15, No. 1, 1998, page 4
establishing lack of consent is more acute in prosecuting cult-rape. Part ID suggests further
reform in this area.
Part II discusses the Violence Against Women Act. Criminal liability for interstate violation
of protection orders is set forth in IIA, and for interstate domestic violence in IIB. The
VAWA civil remedies are described in IIC. Part IID explores future litigation under VAWA.
Part IIIA discusses the recent antistalking laws. Part IIIB suggests how these laws may
assist cult victims.
The reformed rape laws, the VAWA, and antistalking laws are three recent legislative
enactments that may assist cult victims in obtaining justice against members and leaders of
the victim‟s former cult.
I. Rape
A. The Old and New Laws
In the 1970s, state criminal justice systems began to institute dramatic changes in the
prosecution of rapists and the counseling of rape victims.6 Until the 1970s, most states
required: (1) cautionary instructions to the jury to evaluate the victim‟s testimony “with
special care because of the difficulty of determining its truth” (2) corroboration by those
who had witnessed the event and (3) physical proof of the victim‟s resistance to the attack.
Consequently, these laws made conviction of rape difficult. For example, in New York state,
there was an average of only 18 rape convictions a year.7
By the mid-1980s, nearly all states had enacted new rape laws to make it easier to
prosecute rapists. “Rape” was redefined more broadly to include sexual penetration of any
type, including not only penile vaginal penetration but other types of sexual penetration as
well. Eliminated was the requirement that a witness corroborate the victim‟s testimony.
Most rapes are committed in secluded areas and, therefore, witness corroboration was hard
to provide under the former laws. Also eliminated was the requirement that the victim
physically attack her attacker.8
One of the more important changes in the law was the proliferation of restrictions on the
use of the rape victim‟s prior sexual conduct, called “Rape Shield Laws,” which have been
enacted in some form in every jurisdiction.9 The rape shield laws assist in dispelling the old
myth that if the victim had an active sexual past, then she either deserved to be raped or
enticed the rapist by her clothing, demeanor, and, perhaps, reputation. Unfortunately for
complainants, the rape shield laws are not ironclad. Courts may admit the victim‟s prior
sexual history under certain circumstances. For example, in New York, the rape statutes
provide that evidence of a victim‟s sexual conduct is admissible in a prosecution for rape to
prove the victim‟s prior sexual conduct with the accused.10 In considering whether sexual
history of the complainant should be admitted into evidence, courts must weigh the
evidence to determine if it is a material fact at issue in the case and if it is more probative
than prejudicial. According to prosecutors, rape shield laws provide comfort to many rape
victims because they bar defense counsel from unwarranted inquiries into their pasts.11
Critics argue that the rape shield laws do not go far enough in protecting victims‟ prior
sexual conduct.12
Another important change in the law was the enactment, in some states, of legislation
making the rape of one‟s spouse a crime, known as “Marital Rape.”13 The state laws fall
along a continuum. Some states have made rape of a spouse a crime, but may treat the
crime as a lower grade than the rape of a stranger,14 and may also require extreme
circumstances, such as where the accused is armed with a weapon or causes serious bodily
injury to the victim.15
establishing lack of consent is more acute in prosecuting cult-rape. Part ID suggests further
reform in this area.
Part II discusses the Violence Against Women Act. Criminal liability for interstate violation
of protection orders is set forth in IIA, and for interstate domestic violence in IIB. The
VAWA civil remedies are described in IIC. Part IID explores future litigation under VAWA.
Part IIIA discusses the recent antistalking laws. Part IIIB suggests how these laws may
assist cult victims.
The reformed rape laws, the VAWA, and antistalking laws are three recent legislative
enactments that may assist cult victims in obtaining justice against members and leaders of
the victim‟s former cult.
I. Rape
A. The Old and New Laws
In the 1970s, state criminal justice systems began to institute dramatic changes in the
prosecution of rapists and the counseling of rape victims.6 Until the 1970s, most states
required: (1) cautionary instructions to the jury to evaluate the victim‟s testimony “with
special care because of the difficulty of determining its truth” (2) corroboration by those
who had witnessed the event and (3) physical proof of the victim‟s resistance to the attack.
Consequently, these laws made conviction of rape difficult. For example, in New York state,
there was an average of only 18 rape convictions a year.7
By the mid-1980s, nearly all states had enacted new rape laws to make it easier to
prosecute rapists. “Rape” was redefined more broadly to include sexual penetration of any
type, including not only penile vaginal penetration but other types of sexual penetration as
well. Eliminated was the requirement that a witness corroborate the victim‟s testimony.
Most rapes are committed in secluded areas and, therefore, witness corroboration was hard
to provide under the former laws. Also eliminated was the requirement that the victim
physically attack her attacker.8
One of the more important changes in the law was the proliferation of restrictions on the
use of the rape victim‟s prior sexual conduct, called “Rape Shield Laws,” which have been
enacted in some form in every jurisdiction.9 The rape shield laws assist in dispelling the old
myth that if the victim had an active sexual past, then she either deserved to be raped or
enticed the rapist by her clothing, demeanor, and, perhaps, reputation. Unfortunately for
complainants, the rape shield laws are not ironclad. Courts may admit the victim‟s prior
sexual history under certain circumstances. For example, in New York, the rape statutes
provide that evidence of a victim‟s sexual conduct is admissible in a prosecution for rape to
prove the victim‟s prior sexual conduct with the accused.10 In considering whether sexual
history of the complainant should be admitted into evidence, courts must weigh the
evidence to determine if it is a material fact at issue in the case and if it is more probative
than prejudicial. According to prosecutors, rape shield laws provide comfort to many rape
victims because they bar defense counsel from unwarranted inquiries into their pasts.11
Critics argue that the rape shield laws do not go far enough in protecting victims‟ prior
sexual conduct.12
Another important change in the law was the enactment, in some states, of legislation
making the rape of one‟s spouse a crime, known as “Marital Rape.”13 The state laws fall
along a continuum. Some states have made rape of a spouse a crime, but may treat the
crime as a lower grade than the rape of a stranger,14 and may also require extreme
circumstances, such as where the accused is armed with a weapon or causes serious bodily
injury to the victim.15
