arge a man with rape because they are vengeful. According to one court, this rule that requires, in some cases, that the charge be filed no later than three months following the incident, is founded upon the laws of human nature. It is so natural as to be almost inevitable that a female upon whom the crime has been committed will make immediate complaint.(Estrich 54) Under law, a husband was unable to rape his wife. Rape was defined as intercourse with a woman not his wife. A husband could use, as much force or coercion as he pleased against his wife without subjecting himself to any possibility of a charge of rape. This provision, in some circumstances, applied to a couple living as man and wife without actually being married. This idea stems from Hales time when a woman was seen as property of her husband, and women were forbidden to enter into contracts or own property.Even after the force requirement, the corroboration requirement, and the time limit, juries are frequently told that they must be especially suspicious of the woman because her emotional involvement may lead to difficulty in determining the truth. Juries may also be reminded that the man is in a very vulnerable position.Over time, the standard became more relaxed, and by the 1950s, utmost resistance was no longer required. Instead, the court deemed that only reasonable resistance was necessary. Although this new standard made cases of simple rape easier to prove, it still required that the woman prove that her own conduct justified a rape conviction. A womans resistance against a single unarmed attacker must be, high enough to assure that the resistance is unfeigned and to indicate with some degree of certainty that the womans attitude was not one of ambivalence or unconscious compliance and that her complaints do not result from moralistic afterthoughts.(Estrich 38) Because of the resistance requirement, a man was free to ignore the words of a woman, but r...
