ALTHOUGH RAPE SHIELD LAWS HAVE BEEN ATTACKED AS A LEGISLATIVE INVASION OF THE PROVINCE OF THE JUDICIARY, A REEVAULATION OF THE CRUMBLING LEGAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL FOUNDATIONS SUPPORTING THE ADMISSIBILITY OF CHASTITY EVIDENCE AT RAPE TRIALS WAS CLEARLY IN ORDER. AS REMINDERS OF ELEMENTARY EVIDENCE PRINCIPLES, RAPE SHIELD LAWS PERFORM A VITAL TASK. IN ESSENCE, RAPE SHIELD LAWS APPLY TO CHASTITY EVIDENCE THE SAME ADMISSIBILITY STANDARDS OF RELEVANCY, MATERIALITY, AND ISSUE CONFUSION BY WHICH OTHER PROFFERED EVIDENCE IS EVALUATED. IN THIS REGARD, KENTUCKY'S RAPE SHIELD LAW POSSESSES THE GENERAL ATTRIBUTES OF ALL RAPE SHIELD LAWS. TWO DEFICIENCIES, HOWEVER, ARE APPARENT IN THE KENTUCKY STATUTE. FIRST, IT EXCLUDES SOME RELEVANT CHASTITY EVIDENCE, THE NEED FOR WHICH OUTWEIGHS ITS TENDENCY TO CONFUSE OR MISLEAD JURORS. SECONDLY, THE LAW MANIFESTS AN UNEQUIVOCAL PREFERENCE FOR RAPE VICTIMS OVER DEFENDANTS. ALTHOUGH A DEFENDANT'S CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO CONFRONTATION CAN BE PRESERVED BY MAKING THE KENTUCKY RAPE SHIELD LAW YIELD IN PARTICULAR SITUATIONS, DEFENDANTS SHOULD NOT BE REQUIRED TO SURRENDER THEIR RIGHTS AS THE PRICE OF PREVIOUS JUDICIAL BIAS AGAINST RAPE VICTIMS. JUDGES HAVE TRADITIONALLY ASSESSED EVIDENCE TO DETERMINE RELEVANCY AND PROBATIVE WORTH. ALTHOUGH THEY HAVE NOT PREVIOUSLY APPLIED THESE STANDARDS TO CHASTITY EVIDENCE, IT SHOULD BE SUFFICIENT FOR LEGISLATURES TO PROVIDE, THROUGH RAPE SHIELD LAWS, A REMINDER THAT SUCH STANDARDS SHOULD APPLY AND SHOULD PROVIDE EXAMPLES TO GUIDE THE JUDICIARY APPLYING THESE STANDARDS. THE LEGISLATURE SHOULD NOT GO SO FAR, HOWEVER, AS TO ENACT A LAW WHICH IS BIASED AGAINST DEFENDANTS. THE KENTUCKY RAPE SHIELD LAW TRANSCENDS THIS BOUNDARY, AND ITS INFIRMITY SHOULD BE CORRECTED. EXTENSIVE NOTES CITE CASE LAW AND REFERENCES. (AUTHOR ABSTRACT MODIFIED--RCB)