GAZETTE
APRIL 1 9 88
The Cor roborat ion Requirement in relat ion to Sexual
Complainants:
Signi f icance of the 'DNA Test'
by
Ca r o l i ne Fenne l l,
B.C.L., (N.U.I.),
LL.M (Osgoode) B.L.,
Lecturer in Law,
University College, Cork.
Certain categories of witnesses or types of evidence ere
regarded, for policy reasons by our rules of evidence, to be
somehow suspect or unreliable. Corroborative evidence is
therefore required, in relation to such evidence, or the
testimony of such witnesses.
The testimony of complainants of sexual offences is one
such incident where corroboration is required
as a matter of
practica
or at least a warning to the jury is required as to the
danger of ac t i ng on such unco r r obo r a t ed evidence.
1
Hitherto this corroboration requirement has posed a not
inconsiderable obstacle to the prosecution of sexual offences.
The reason for the difficulties addressed. However, the accused
inherent in the application of the will no longer be able to undermine
requirement, lies in the definition of
what constitutes corroboration.
Despite sugges t i ons to the
contrary, corroboration does not
mean merely con f i rma t o ry or
supporting evidence.
2
It has, in
fact, a much narrower, more
technical meaning. This definition
of corroboration stems from the
decision of
R. -v- Baskervil/e
3
to
the e f f ect t hat corroborative
evidence constituted:
". . . independent testimony
which affects the accused by
c onne c t i ng or t end i ng to
connect him with the crime. In
other words, it must be evidence
which implicates him, that is,
which confirms in some material
particular NOT only the evidence
t ha t t he crime has been
committed but also that the
prisoner committed it".
4
Hence in a sexual offence case,
evidence of traces of semen found
in the victim's body, for example,
would not constitute
corroboration
of t he i nc i dent of
sexual
intercourse, as although such
evidence wou ld c on f i rm t he
occurrence of an act of sexual
intercourse, it would not connect
the accused wi th the act, the
subject matter of the alleged
offence. However, recent scientific
developments now enable the
particular accused to be connected
wi th an act of sexual intercourse.
This is a significant advance in this
area of the law, although further
obstacles to prosecution will
remain. If the offence charged is
one of rape, for example, the issue
of consent w i ll have to be
evidence of semen traces, by
alleging intercourse w i th third
parties, while denying that he had
intercourse with the complainant
on the occasion in question. This is
due to the development of what is
termed 'genetic fingerprinting'.
Genetic or DNA fingerprinting
refers to the fact that a sequence
amongst t he genes in each
person's DNA repeatedly occurs
along the length of the string-like
DNA molecules and varies in its
size at each location. All these
copies of the sequence create a
unique pattern in each individual —
a DNA fingerprint. Therefore traces
of hair, skin, blood or semen found
at the scene of the crime, can
connect the particular accused
wi th the incident in question.
5
However, the entire ambit of
prosecution of sexual offences is
not affected. In the context of rape
the accused can still utilise the
corroboration requirement to his
advantage. By pleading consent on
the part of the victim, he effectively
forces corroboration on the issue of
consent. The DNA fingerprint
evidence, in this context, is of far
less effect as it corroborates only
the incident of sexual intercourse
wi th the accused; it does not go to
the issue of consent.
Perhaps it is here then that a case
can be made for a modicum of
reform, in relation to the
co r r obo r a t i on
r equ i r emen t.
Advances in modern science, it
seems, can ameliorate the worst
strictures of the requirement, but
they cannot resolve the issue
entirely. The rationale of the
corroboration requirement in the
context of sexual complainants is
manifestly archaic. Resting, as it
does, on a view of women (who
made up by far the greater portion
of sexual comp l a i nan t s) as
inherently unreliable and hysterical,
perhaps the time is ripe for a
reassessment of t he current
validity of the rule.
58
Traditional
justifications such as that of Hale
6
in the context of rape:
" I t is an accusation easily to be
made and hard to be proved; and
harder to be defended by the
party accused though never so
innocent."
and Wigmore:
7
"The unchaste mentality finds
incidental but direct expression
in the narration of imaginary sex
incidents of which the narrator
is the heroine or the victim. On
the surface the narration is
straightforward and convincing.
The real victim, however, too
often in such cases is the
innocent man; for the respect
and sympathy naturally felt by
any tribunal for a wronged
female helps to give easy credit
to such a plausible tale";
Open: Mon. - Fri. 8.30 a.m. to 9 p.m.
Sat. 9 a.m. to 5.30 p.m.
Existing Clients include 5 Leading City
Practices and 6 Insurance
Companies
75