Read the opinion here.
Subscribe to Closing Arguments
Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.
OLYMPIA, Wash. — The “lustful disposition” doctrine — which has been used to admit evidence of prior, uncharged acts by a defendant against the same victim — isn’t a “permissible purpose for admitting evidence” the Washington Supreme Court ruled in a sexual assault case. The term “lustful disposition” is “archaic and reinforces outdated rape myths and misconceptions of sexual violence,” the court wrote.
Read the opinion here.
Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.
