A man is at a hotel staying the night as he is out of town on business. While at the hotel bar an attractive woman begins talking to him and the man asks her to come up to his room later that evening, if she would like to do so. Some time later that evening, there is a knock on the man's door and the attractive woman is standing in the doorway and enters the man's room.

Sometime later, the woman leaves the room and makes contact with the local police and reports that she was raped by the man. A sexual assault exam and evidence kit was taken from her the next day. The man was questioned, detained, and evidence collected from him and the room. Evidence from the room and victim showed that they did indeed have sexual intercourse and a DNA test showed his DNA in the victim's rape kit. The man admitted that he and the woman had indeed had sexual intercourse, however, he claimed that it was consensual. The victim said she said "no."

The victim then hires a famous "victim's civil attorney" within days of the incident and files a multi-million dollar civil suit against the man (apparently, he was some famous athlete or movie star). Her civil attorney claims on national television that her client was brutally raped, terrorized, and assaulted.

The police investigation found that within a three-day span surrounding the alleged rape at the hotel, the victim had also apparently had sexual intercourse with at least three (3) other men, including two men within hours of the alleged rape at the hotel. Evidence from the rape kit, however, found DNA evidence of semen on the victim's panties from at least one other man who was not the man at the hotel. It was also shown, through statements obtained by the man's criminal attorney, that the victim had been very excited to meet the man and go to his room, that she had been treated for at least two prior suicide attempts, thus the defense attorneys bringing questioning the mental state of the victim.

Considering the "Rape Shield Laws" that were outlined in the chapter, please discuss when would it be allowed to bring up or question a rape victim's "sexual history?" Would this be a case that this information could or should be allowed to be presented? What legal reasoning would support it, if so?