State v. Kalamarski

(dissenting)—I respectfully dissent from my learned brothers. The complainant's prior sexual activity with Mr. Kalamarski presented a difficult evidentiary and constitutional problem. Although the newly enacted law3 has a noble purpose,4 we must keep in mind that the *792law affecting criminal defendants is approached not from the standpoint of the victim, but from that of the accused. The court's ruling that Mr. Kalamarski could not cross-examine the complainant, Ms. Ortiz, regarding prior consensual sexual activity between them was a denial of Mr. Kalamarski's right to confront an adverse…