Referring to it as “archaic” and “outdated,” the Washington State Supreme Court has abolished the so-called lustful disposition doctrine, saying it can no longer be relied on to justify admitting collateral evidence in sexual assault cases.

For nearly 100 years, prosecutors in the state could admit evidence of prior, uncharged acts by the defendant against the same victim under the doctrine. Now, the high court has said the “inaccurate” term reinforces myths about sexual assault and victim blaming.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]