Is it a criminal offense for a defendent to introduce inadmissable evidence in a criminal case?

Question

Consider a criminal trial by jury. If the defendant attempts to introduce inadmissible evidence, is there any penalty preventing them from doing so? For example, under Rape Shield laws, an accuser's past sexual history is not considered admissible - so what actually happens if the defence attempts to introduce such evidence anyway in an attempt to influence the jury?Considering US and Australian law.

Answer 1

I can only speak to U.S. law. There is no penalty if one attempts to introduce inadmissible evidence for the defendant themselves. An attorney such as the prosecutor attempting to bring up the defendant's past sexual history would likely result in a bench conference and the jury would be instructed to ignore the question and the court reporter would strike the strike the question from the record. If it were a gross violation such as a prosecutor yelling over the judge that the defendant had done 'x' sexual deeds and yelled obscene things, the prosecutor would likely be held in contempt of court and/or there would be a mistrial. This process basically follows for most inadmissible evidence. There might be instances where inadmissible evidence includes tampered evidence in which an attorney would likely be charged with presenting false evidence or evidence tampering.

I hope this answers your question!