Charge: Sexual Assault
Result: Two years deferred adjudication probation
Summary: The client faced a very serious charge of Sexual Assault. First of all, he was accused of rape, and also statutory rape – because the girl was underage, regardless of the outcome of the first charge, he would be automatically guilty of Sexual Assault for the second. The girl also claimed that the sex was not consensual. The client was charged with two different cases in which he could be found guilty by the State and forced to register as a sex offender for the rest of his life.
The case started with our client being interviewed by the detective before he had even retained our service. During this interview, our 19-year old client admitted to several incredibly damaging things, including that he had engaged in sexual contact with the girl.
However, through the full investigation of talking to people who were around that night, talking to people who knew the victim, and learning of inconsistencies in her statements and what could logically be possible, it came to light that there were a number of other problems with the client. We had to walk a very fine line in never wanting to blame the victim – to never say that it’s not sexual assault. The problem is that it was very clear that it was consensual and that she initiated contact. Through our investigation, we learned that earlier that evening, she had been taking a number of drugs including pills and marijuana, and that throughout the evening she had repeatedly called our client, even going so far as driving to his house. She wanted to go back to his bedroom, and then initiated a lot of sexual contact. The issue was whether she at any point said “no” or revoked her consent. Based on some of her statements, and some of the questions that arose when she later tried to report it, it became clear that she was more upset about a breakup than an actual sexual assault. Although she claimed that she had said no, there was about a six month gap between when the sex occurred and when she made the police report. Furthermore, there were other significant inconsistencies within in her reports.
While this might prevent the case from being filed as a rape, there was still the issue of Statutory rape because of the age difference. Based on our 19-year old client’s own young age, as well as the fact that our client and the complainant had gone to school together, and that he had virtually no idea that it was a 4 year age difference, the case was ultimately resolved with the charges being reduced to “unlawful restraint.” Our client avoided sex offender registration and was put on 2 years of deferred adjudication probation, allowing him the potential to have the case completely removed from his record.
Charge: Indecent Exposure
Result: Not Guilty
Summary: While the client was in the drive-up lane at a local bank, two tellers thought they saw him expose his genitals. They were absolutely mistaken, and a case like this is the classic reason as to why we have jury trials. Through co-counsel’s dogged investigation, which involved measuring the angles and tint from the teller window, we argued, and the jury agreed, that they could not have been able to see his genitals as he was seated in the car. The client was acquitted and the arrest was permanently removed from his record. |
