3 years ago, an 8 yr old girl was raped

[SoCalDem]

My friend just finished a 3 week stint on a jury for the trial. That little girl (now 11) testified.. she had to sit there and describe in detail what happened, and was even asked to draw a picture of what his penis looked like..

My friend (a 62 yr old grandfather) was very uncomfortable watching her have to relive this, but said she was very composed, considering the circumstances.

The defendant was a "family member", and no one in his own family testified on his behalf.

He spoke English, but used a translator (which made it difficult for the jury) ...

The judge admonished the jury daily for the last week because it was 9-3 from the beginning and stayed that way.

They finally were released yesterday, as a hung-jury..and now it will have to be retried.

The reason the 3 held out?

They could not be sure that "the girl wasn't making it all up"..

the kicker?

the guy was led in each day by deputies because he was in jail for an additional charge of molestation that had not come to trial yet.

:cry: for that brave little girl who had the guts at 8 yrs of age to defy him & tell ...and has been through the wringer for 3 years so far..with no resolution... and has to do it all over again.

[hlthe2b]

1. Just curious... what gender (and age group) were the three hold outs?

[SoCalDem]

4. He didn't say, and we didn't press him on it

He was just GLAD to be OFF that jury.. He was the foreman & said he NEVER wanted to do that again

[lunatica]

2. That's terrible!

I have no words.

And they're supposed to vet the jury. This sounds like they didn't do a very good job of it.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

3. draw his penis ? the judge allowed that? wtf?

doesn't he and the jury and everyone else know what a goddamned penis looks like :wtf: :grr: :wtf:

[LAGC]

5. These trials are unfortunate.

In cases where there is merit to the charge, its always tough on the victims to have to testify.

But unfortunately, there have been too many cases where children have been coached by over-zealous investigators or other family members with an agenda to try to frame innocent defendants.

Until we come up with a better way to know whose telling the truth and whose not, unfortunately its the best system we got.

[lunatica]

6. Did you read this sentence in the OP?

The defendant was a "family member", and no one in his own family testified on his behalf.

[LAGC]

9. That doesn't necessarily mean anything.

When accusations like this come up, it can seriously pit most family members at odds with the accused.

Its understandable that most of them would believe the girl. Indeed, I would expect no less!

However, I'm thinking there must have been something to her testimony that made those 3 jurors doubt. Most cases are pretty open and shut, its pretty rare for juries to not believe a witness of a sexual assault, especially one so young.

The fact that he was in jail for another charge of molestation would seem to indicate his guilt, but juries are specifically instructed to only weigh evidence from the instant case at hand, and not weigh outside circumstantial factors. Like it or not, that is the way the system works.

[seabeyond]

20. or it could be they had forefront in mind... to many kids are coached to accuse raped

and reality they werent.

since they didnt see it happen, they cant be sure

:shrug:

[LeFleur1]

7. I Thought

Children could testify in the judges chambers and the testimony would be given to the jury?
This is a travesty beyond all. First the little girl had to suffer pain and humiliation because some jerk couldn't or wouldn't control himself. THEN she has to go public and relive the whole hideous ordeal.
Do these people think rapists are going to rape in front of an audience?

[SoCalDem]

8. Maybe because she's now 11, it made a difference

:shrug:

My friend said she was very composed..of course the case has been going on for THREE YEARS now:grr:

He also said that her Mom & Dad, grandmother & 2 aunts were with her every day, so she has support.

[BlueIris]

10. No words.

That is so, so awful.

[rucky]

11. I'm about ready to give up on humanity.

And face the irony of wanting unjust people wiped from the earth.

[stray cat]

12. after seeing a false accusation first hand to cover up parental abuse

I am more sympathetic to innocent until proven guilty. The guy is likely guilty from the sounds of it - but how many guilty do we have to let free to avoid convicting an innocent?

Anyone can be accused and even convicted. Remember the McMartin case just for one example. http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/mcmartin/mcmartinaccount.html

[ThomCat]

13. You have to wonder how much evidence it would ever take

to convince those three jurors. :cry:

Would any evidence Ever be enough to convince them? Do they believe that strongly that for some reason girls lie about having been raped and cannot ever be believed?

:wtf:

I hope that girl gets justice. And I hope she gets peace and healing too.

[SoCalDem]

14. The thing that gets me is this

The FIRST thing an abuser says to his victim (if he plans to not just use her & kill her) is this.."Don't tell because NO ONE will believe you".

This little girl told, and he was proved correct.. (legally, that is)

There will be another trial and another jury, so eventually he may pay..or maybe his other trial will turn out differently:shrug:"

[ThomCat]

17. In the meantime, what cost is she paying for all of this?

What is this trial doing to her?

What is the next one going to do to her?

How emotionally scared is she going to be? Are those three members of the jury going to be the least bit concerned all the harm they are causing her by being so stubbornly sure that she's probably a liar?

What is most fucked up is, the stronger she has been, and more composed she managed to be during the trial, the more they probably held it against her. Because she probably didn't seem distraught and emotional enough for them to believe that she had been through a traumatic emotional attack. So even though she is told to be as calm and as strong as she can, they'll punish her for it.

How much do you want to bet that's at the heart of it. "I didn't see enough tears. I don't believe her. She doesn't act like a kid who was raped." As if they'd know.

[seabeyond]

21. most rapes are not reported. the ones reported, most are not prosecuted. those prosecuted,

most dont see convictions. i dont know if most of the convictions see jail time. would be interesting to know. very small percentage of rapist do time

that says something

[SoCalDem]

23. yep.. if there's no video, people often do not believe little girls & women

A decent person might have a hard time believing that anything like that could really happen.

The victim often just wants it over and done with, and does not report it..

I was raped at 18, and did not report it because I was drunk and did not want anyone to know it had happened..I only told my friend who was with me at that party. I was drinking underage and where I was not supposed to be (Ft Riley, Ks), so I said nothing.. My guess is that he had done it before and would again, but at 18, I only thought of myself:(

[seabeyond]

24. yup. nt

[Motown_Johnny]

15. no physical evidence? just her word against his?

[SoCalDem]

16. I was not at the trial.. Don't know the details

I would assume that since it;s been going on for 3 years, there must have been evidence or the DA would not have continued this long, or have plans to retry it

[seabeyond]

22. damn, she didnt have video of it. he must be innocent. nt

[Upton]

18. If there is no physical evidence

how can anyone be sure she's not making it up, or more likely being coached? Just going by what I've read, I have to side with the 3 jurors.

[SoCalDem]

19. there must have been evidence, or a DA would not have carried this forward for 3 years

our court system in Riverside county is a very busy place.. they don't prosecute , unless they have a strong case. Like I said in other replies I was not there, and I believe in the sanctity of the jury deliberations, so I did not press him for gruesome details, other than what he volunteered.

If the 3 who would not budge were confident within their own judgment, that's their right to resist . The next jury will be different people, same evidence, and time will tell how it all turns out.

[rug]

25. Incorrect. The defendant was not proven guilty. So the presumption of his innocence remains.

I haven't heard a thing about this case so I can't make any other comment one way or another. Other than that the presumption of innocence, which is in actuality a bedrock rule of evidence, means he is not guilty until - and unless - proven so beyond the reasonable doubt of all 12 jurors. i wouldn't have it any other way.

[SoCalDem]

26. never said they found him guilty..the next trial will proceed..probably after the case

that he is currently being held for. The DA has been on this for 3 yrs, so there must be a reason.. time will tell..and a different jury will decide.. his consequences are yet to be determined, but he is still in custody on a different case, so life goes on..

[Obamanaut]

30. I don't think presumption of innocence means an accused is not guilty.

A person can rob a store, and he is guilty as soon as the robbery is begun. However, in the legal system he needs to be proven guilty under that presumption of innocence - but regardless of the outcome, he is in fact guilty.

[seabeyond]

31. true that. he doesnt get to be innocent until the court says guilt.... in that sense. nt

[rug]

33. Not guilty is a verdict after trial. We are all presumed to be innocent.

In evidence, a presumption is simply a fact that need not be proven. It is of course rebuttable. Unless it is, the presumption remains.

It also applies to the event itself. the prosecutor must prove, first, that a crime occurred and second, that it was the defendant who did the crime.

That's why I say the headline of the OP is incorrect. If a jury is hung, not even the fact of the rape has yet been proven.

In those jurisdictions that allow potential jurors to be queried individually, a classic defense question is to ask the jurors that if they had to vote right now, would they vote guilty or not guilty? Most people would say I can't, I haven't heard any evidence yet. Sounds reasonable and open-minded but under the law it's wrong.

Under the presumption of innocence, having heard nothing at all, and nothing having been proven, the only correct answer under the law must be not guilty.

Outside the legal system, there are all sorts of ways to satisfy oneself of "facts". Sometimes we even get it right.

[Obamanaut]

34. And yet, he can still be guilty but not proven so. nt

[rug]

35. Only if you consider guilt a matter of opinion or morals.

Without a verdict, one shouldn't judge.

[Obamanaut]

36. A person who robs a store or commits a murder is guilty of robbery

or murder regardless of whether or not he is ever found out or goes to trial. That has nothing to do with opinion or morals. A store was robbed or a person is dead - someone did it. That someone is guilty.

[CraftyGal]

27. These cases are so difficult....

I was involved as a friend of a victim several years ago...It was in the '90s. She was a beautiful, loving and trusting 6 year old who lived with her Dad. I met them when I pregnant with my second child, my daughter was 18 months old. I had moved in with a friend. I later discovered that a friend from my Parents in Crisis group lived down the hall from us. I had just moved in when about 2 weeks later I went into labour. I was kept in the hospital for 2 weeks, then I was let out and went back in after 10 days. This time I gave birth by c-section. During this time my daughter stayed with the couple down the hall. I thought things were okay although my roommate was mad that I wouldn't let my daughter stay with her...I had my reasons. there was a scary time when my daughter was brought into the ER for a head injury that required stitches.

So when my friend, D. needed a babysitter as he was going back to work, I suggested this lady. I had no idea that the husband had been wanted on charges of child molestation. So I went along with life, dealing with some issues of my own and getting counseling. So imagine my shock when, after moving to live with my daughter and new baby boy, the police come knocking on my door to talk to me. I remember the day clearly as I was getting ready to host my daughter's 2nd birthday party that day, which happened to fall on her birthday. I was baking her cake when the knocked. The people upstairs were and still are friends of the couple. I was informed that my daughter's name had been given to the officer by D and that his daughter C had named the couple, B and M; specifically B as her abuser.

I remember the day clearly, they had brought a social worker in that specifically deals with these issues. I was trying to potty train her and it wasn't going well, so i was still changing diapers, I thought it was due to me having a baby that she had regressed some. This is what I had been told so I wasn't worried. i also know this is about the age where they become more aware of their bodies, so again I had no concerns. Then the worker remarked that this behavior was because she had been abused sexually although they couldn't lay charges as she was non-verbal at the time. Now you can't get her to STOP talking...lol.

So he was charged and then more charges were laid all in all 8 charges of sexual assault on a minor <http://www.interpol.int/Public/Children/SexualAbuse/NationalLaws/csaCanada.pdf|Canadian Law). So we waited for the preliminary hearing. D asked me to attend and sit in the courtroom as none of the parents were allowed to be in there as they had all been subpoenaed to testify as well. So I sat through 2 days of testimony, making sure the children had someone that they could look at other than him. I was shocked that there wasn't a court counselor or someone their for the kids. he was lucky that he was whisked away both times because by the second day I wanted to kill him myself. It was also during that second day that I also found out the wife had been involved in the molestation as well, yet she had not been charged with a crime.[br />
The hardest thing for me ws going to the group and having to tell them everything I had heard, safety of all the children in the group. We had family events as well that the children attended.

Fast forward a year later, the judge found him guilty of only one of the eight charges. He got 2 yrs less a day. on an aside, he was attacked in prison and will never be able to walk or anything else again. They had to move as well as he is not allowed within a 100m of children.

CraftyGal

[Odin2005]

28. I could not be on that jury, I would emotionally snap.

:cry:

[SoCalDem]

29. He said that 2 days into deliberations, one woman did quit

and they had to start over with an alternate. She could not sleep and was crying all the time, so her doctor sent a note & got her excused.

[JerseygirlCT]

32. That's horrible. nt