This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

D was charged with engaging in sexual penetration with T.F. while she was so intoxicated as to be incapacitated or unaware that a sexual act was occurring. D asserts that T.F. had been fully aware of the sexual intercourse and had consented to it. D argued that T.F. was falsely accusing him of sexual assault. D proffered testimony of four witnesses who (according to D's offer of proof) were prepared to say that T.F. had accused men of sexually assaulting her on two previous occasions, only to later concede that these accusations were false. The judge refused admission. The judge concluded that D must show either (1) that T.F. had 'made [an] official concession that the charges were false by, for example, testifying under oath … that they were false or conceding their falsity in a deposition or [in an] answer to an interrogatory'; or (2) that T.F.'s prior accusations 'had been adjudicated false by a court or other neutral tribunal.' At trial, T.F. denied accusing these other men of sexual assault. D was convicted and appealed.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.