In camera inspections of privileged records in sexual assault trials: balancing defendants' rights and state interests under Massachusetts's Bishop Test
A sexual assault trial requires a court to balance evidentiary privileges enacted by a state legislature against a criminal defendant's constitutional trial rights. State legislatures enact various privileges which either limit or prohibit the discovery of confidential communications in crimina...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | American journal of law & medicine 1995-03, Vol.21 (1), p.131-164 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | A sexual assault trial requires a court to balance evidentiary privileges enacted by a state legislature against a criminal defendant's constitutional trial rights. State legislatures enact various privileges which either limit or prohibit the discovery of confidential communications in criminal trials. Such statutes reflect a firmly based legislative effort to protect citizens’ private and personal confidences from unwarranted public scrutiny. When a defendant charged with sexual assault seeks to compel discovery of the victim's privileged medical, psychiatric, or counseling records, a conflict inevitably arises. States and victims assert that courts must respect statutory assurances of confidentiality; defendants assert that their constitutional right to a fair trial and their right to confront the witnesses and evidence against them mandates disclosure. Resolution of this pressing conflict requires a careful balancing of both the state's and defendant's interests on a case by case basis. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0098-8588 2375-835X |
DOI: | 10.1017/S0098858800010236 |