I don’t know about this.
In what critics say could be a “seismic change” in state criminal law, the Texas Senate tentatively approved a bill that would allow jurors in sexual assault cases to hear testimony about similar allegations against a defendant — even if the previous incident did not result in a conviction or even criminal charges.
The bill by Sen. Joan Huffman, R-Houston, would allow the introduction of testimony about allegations of other sexual assaults to be admitted during the guilt or innocence phase of a trial if a judge — outside the presence of the jury — hears the evidence and deems it relevant.
The bill gives “greater resources to prosecutors and victims of sexual assault,” Huffman said Monday. Allowing testimony of similar sex offenses “brings Texas closer in line with federal rules of evidence,” she added.
Sen. Royce West, D-Dallas, opposed the bill, arguing the measure would bring about “more wrongful convictions” because jurors will be afraid to acquit a defendant against whom they have heard multiple allegations. Jurors who are skeptical of the evidence of the case before them could feel compelled to convict “because he (the defendant) must have done something wrong,” West said.
“All of us want to be law and order and the whole nine yards,” West said. “But this is carving new ground in criminal jurisprudence. You ought to think long and hard, ‘is that fair?’ ”
I share Sen. West’s concerns. Maybe if Texas had more robust innocence procedures, and a Court of Criminal Appeals that wasn’t a wholly owned subsidiary of the prosecution, this might be all right. As things actually are, I too expect that we’ll see more wrongful convictions as a result. This needs to be given third and fourth thoughts before it gets enacted. Grtits has more.