how do i not expect it to happen?

false accusations of rape are a fraction of unprosecuted rapes, nor are they usually anywhere close to as damaging.

the accused already have the protection of the legal system. it's the victims who are being shorted.

So police should make an exception with rape and allow accusations to pass onto court without any examination? Yeah worked really well in Salem.

not what i said...i outline my actual suggestions upthread. you could try there first.

I DID read it. I agree that clothing should not be open to cross-examination. However a persons past should definately be open to investigation. If the accuser has a history of fraud charges that directly conflicts with her reliability of a witness.

The fact that previous accusations are in most states not admissable sent my uncle to prison for 3 years.
He dumped and threw-out his live-in g/f. (She refused to hold a job, or do anything to support herself, or pay rent...etc.) She said he raped her as a way of getting revenge. All of the people involved in the case on the cops side of things knew she had sent atleast 2 other guys to the big house for petty bs revenge, but they could not bring this info to anyones attention due to a shield law.
I myself suffered several years thorugh HS due to my ex g/fs bestfriend telling everyone i beat up my g/f and raped her. Everyone believed it, despite the fact she had no marks, told people it was bs, etc.
So i would tend to agree that the accusation is more than enough to destroy someones rep.
So, while on the one hand i agree that things need to change, i would be very hesitant to give the prosecution a free hand.
Personally, i would like to see rape trials handled according to an inquiring model, rather than the adversarial model, but that would mean an entirely seperate legal system, so i don't think that would really be practical.