General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsMan convicted of sex with girl, 5, to get new trial
CARSON CITY A Las Vegas man sentenced to two consecutive life terms without the possibility of parole after he was convicted of lewdness and having sex with a minor is getting a new trial.
The Nevada Supreme Court on Thursday ruled Jack F. Gilliam did not get a fair trial because of a series of errors committed at his trial.
In a unanimous decision, the court said that while we acknowledge that a defendant is not entitled to a perfect trial ... this trial was so imperfect as to render it unfair.
...
The girl said that beginning in 2006, when she was 5, Gilliam sexually abused her three times a week during four summer seasons when she was out of school and visited him, according to court records.
She said she begged him to stop, but he told her to keep quiet, according to court records.
...
The only evidence against Gilliam was the testimony of the girl. There was no physical evidence.
And the girls brother, who had slept beside her during much of the alleged abuse, did not wake or see any of the sexual misconduct, even when the girl said she screamed or struck Gilliam, according to court records.
full: http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2013/nov/07/man-convicted-sex-minor-get-new-trial/
Did the state high court make the right decision, given that these types of crimes are often witnessless, and the safety of children tends to appeal more to most people than the perp's constitutional right to a fair trial.
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)Absent the actual decision, on what basis could anyone possibly answer that question?
leftstreet
(36,098 posts)It's assault. They can't consent. It's a crime
(The article's fault, not yours)
Barack_America
(28,876 posts)BainsBane
(53,012 posts)When that is far from the case.
Liberal_in_LA
(44,397 posts)BainsBane
(53,012 posts)Perhaps not enough to sustain a legal conviction, but surely they could tell the child had been violated.