DA locks up alleged sex assault victim

[DCal430]

A 17-year-old Sacramento girl has been locked up for more than a week now for her failure to appear in court against a swastika-adorned defendant with a 20-year criminal history who is accused of three counts of raping and sexually assaulting her.

Sacramento County prosecutors sought the material-witness warrant on the alleged rape victim, and two Superior Court judges have since ordered her detained to ensure her presence as a witness in a trial scheduled to begin April 23.

The girl is being held in juvenile hall in lieu of $50,000 bail. She is scheduled for a hearing Friday in front of Judge Lawrence G. Brown to determine if she will remain in custody. She is entitled to a court hearing every 10 days.

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2012/04/05/4392379/sacramento-county-da-locks-up.html#storylink=cpy

So what do you think, seems kind of extreme to me to lock up a rape victim and force her to testify.

 

[TechBoyJK]

Extreme, but is the case stemming on her testimony? That's a tough situation, especially if she testifies it's a guarantee the guy gets locked up (and bad if she doesnt and he walks).

 

[highland145]

Have to agree with you. If she testifies against him then who's going to protect her afterwards? No one, unfortunately, and she'll get wacked.

 

[Vic Vega]

...

 

[highland145]

Is the bad guy in custody?

I imagine the bad guy has some bad friends so I don't think it's going to matter to the girl.

 

[AznAnarchy99]

Extreme but I saw this in an episode of Law and Order: SVU.

 

[Vic Vega]

...

 

[highland145]

Just curious if she's being held there for safety reasons.

Thought about that but for $50K bail, she can get out. Seems strange to me but it is Cali. Maybe MotionMan can explain it.

 

[Vic Vega]

...

 

[Gooberlx2]

Doesn't look like she gave the DA any choice.

"Based upon (her) extensive runaway history, and the fact she has specifically told me she would not come to court to testify in this matter, I believe that (she) will not appear and testify … unless security is required," Van Stralen said in his affidavit.

especially when:

"It's the last thing we ever want to do," Assistant District Attorney Albert Locher said Wednesday. "You never want to have a victim or a witness in custody. But you have to balance protecting the community. When you look at (Rackley's) background – multiple victims already – it's important that we try to prevent another victim from being harmed."

According to the DA's court papers, Rackley is a parolee who has six felony convictions dating back to 1992 – three for robbery, one for stalking, one for stolen property and one for felony evasion.

He also was arrested and charged twice in December 1996 on suspicion of rape. Those cases were dismissed. The DA's papers said the alleged victim in one of them didn't show up for trial. No information was available on why the other case was dismissed.

I'd say the DA's duty to the community outweighs this girl's traumatic circumstance, unfortunately.

 

[DCal430]

My family actually has some related experience in this area. 10 years ago my 4 year old cousin witness something, and the DA told him if he didn't give the testimony they wanted they would make sure he never sees his family again, that he never sees his friends again, and that he would never go outside again. He is 14 now, but is still traumatized by what the DA did to him. He will never trust the police or DA. This was the Sacramento County DA too.

 

[Bazake]

My experience here is also totally based on Law & Order SVU, but don't they have a hard enough time getting rape victims to come forward?

I know it says that she ran away and missed some court dates, but she's not REQUIRED to testify ... is she?

 

[OlafSicky]

It looks like they think she is lying

 

[Gooberlx2]

but she's not REQUIRED to testify ... is she?

She is if she's subpoenaed as a material witness. Which she was and didn't appear, a couple times, and so a warrant was issued.

It looks like they think she is lying

How do you figure? I don't get that impression from anything in the article.

 

[eLiu]

Extreme but I saw this in an episode of Law and Order: SVU.

Came here to post this.

 

[Lifted]

but she's not REQUIRED to testify ... is she?

I think she can be forced to testify, but it can be something like...

> Prosecutor: Did defendant do such n such?
> Witness: I can't recall.
> Prosecutor: Did you not tell police he did such n such?
> Witness: I can't recall.

Not much they can do about that. A chance they have to take if they want to force somebody to appear.

 

[shortylickens]

So what do you think, seems kind of extreme to me to lock up a rape victim and force her to testify.

Whats worse is allowing rapists to run free.

 

[sourceninja]

My family actually has some related experience in this area. 10 years ago my 4 year old cousin witness something, and the DA told him if he didn't give the testimony they wanted they would make sure he never sees his family again, that he never sees his friends again, and that he would never go outside again. He is 14 now, but is still traumatized by what the DA did to him. He will never trust the police or DA. This was the Sacramento County DA too.

On the up side, he learned the truth at a young age. The police are there to put people in jail. They don't' like you, you are just a crime waiting to be committed in their eyes. Don't talk to them, don't help them, and stay the hell out of their way.

 

[DrPizza]

I think she can be forced to testify, but it can be something like...

> Prosecutor: Did defendant do such n such?
> Witness: I can't recall.
> Prosecutor: Did you not tell police he did such n such?
> Witness: I can't recall.

Not much they can do about that. A chance they have to take if they want to force somebody to appear.

Don't forget, there's a reasonably intelligent judge there who is going to determine that she's lying & threaten her with contempt if she doesn't testify.

 

[tommo123]

Don't forget, there's a reasonably intelligent judge there who is going to determine that she's lying & threaten her with contempt if she doesn't testify.

wonder what would happen if she said in court that the DA threatened her with jail time if she didn't say it was the defendant that raped her?

if they're allowed to pressure (assumed) victims like that and go to those extremes to do it, who knows what else they do. they just want their quota of people thrown in jail.

don't trust cops, lawyers, judges or anyone to do with the law.

 

[0roo0roo]

even more effed up story
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-admits-lied-raping-11.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

 

[Wreckem]

wonder what would happen if she said in court that the DA threatened her with jail time if she didn't say it was the defendant that raped her?

if they're allowed to pressure (assumed) victims like that and go to those extremes to do it, who knows what else they do. they just want their quota of people thrown in jail.

don't trust cops, lawyers, judges or anyone to do with the law.

Going to jail is the legal consequence of not abiding by a subpoena, unless you get is quashed which isn't going happen here. If she said that, the judge would declare a mistrial and would likely hold her in contempt of court.

And in reality, its not the DA threatening jail time. Subpoenas are issued by the court. If you don't abide by them the COURT throws you in jail.

You are also alleging the DA is instructing a witness on what to testify to. This isnt the case, they are just trying to get her to show up and testify, testify to what she has already told police. If she doesn't testify, there are two issues.

1. Hearsay
2. Confrontation clause

 

[sixone]

I'd say the DA's duty to the community outweighs this girl's traumatic circumstance, unfortunately.

Absolutely.

I was on a jury in a murder trial, and one of the witnesses didn't want to testify. The prosecutor basically threatened to charge her with perjury, right there in front of us. The judge "reminded" her that he would hold her in contempt if she didn't answer the questions.

And rightly so. While I appreciate her fear of retaliation, she still has a duty to tell the truth, and help get a bad guy where he belongs.

 

[Bazake]

She is if she's subpoenaed as a material witness. Which she was and didn't appear, a couple times, and so a warrant was issued.

Agreed, but I thought rape was different than other crimes, and it's actually mentioned at the bottom of the article.

" ... against the state's Code of Civil Procedure, which says you can't "imprison or otherwise confine" sexual assault victims who refuse to testify."

 

[tommo123]

Going to jail is the legal consequence of not abiding by a subpoena, unless you get is quashed which isn't going happen here. If she said that, the judge would declare a mistrial and would likely hold her in contempt of court.

And in reality, its not the DA threatening jail time. Subpoenas are issued by the court. If you don't abide by them the COURT throws you in jail.

You are also alleging the DA is instructing a witness on what to testify to. This isnt the case, they are just trying to get her to show up and testify, testify to what she has already told police. If she doesn't testify, there are two issues.

1. Hearsay
2. Confrontation clause

i'm thinking that the person being pressured would do/say anything not to turn up. as far as the judge holding them in contempt, wouldn't they have to prove they're lying? or is it a case of "you've said something bad about the guy i play golf with" - jail!

if someone doesn't want to testify because they're torn apart emotionally, i don't think it's right to force them to be even more traumatised via reliving the event while facing their attacker and being accused of being a liar by the defence. it may allow the attacker to go free, but that's for the victims conscience to bare.