In Younger , the prosecutrix had made prior inconsistent statements to her attending physician concerning her recent sexual history. 109 N.C. App. In other words, where the probative value of the proffered evidence in challenging the witness' credibility is high, and the degree of prejudice present by virtue of reference to previous sexual activity is low, the proffered evidence is relevant and therefore defendant has a right to use the evidence for at least impeachment purposes. Here, the proffered evidence fails this balancing test. Defendant here introduced no evidence that the victim's prior accusations were false.
Defendant alleges no prior inconsistent statements.
Moreover, defendant makes no allegation that the proffered evidence would be relevant to show that someone other than defendant committed the assault. 106 N.C. App. Consequently, we agree with the trial court that the proffered evidence here is irrelevant and therefore inadmissible for any purpose under Rule 412. Defendant's only contention is that the proffered evidence is relevant to the witness' credibility merely because it would show that the witness had some of the requisite information that she would need to have in order to lie if she so desired. Defendant's contention is contrary to Rule 412 and unsupported by the law of this jurisdiction.