 |
Today I spoke with the victim’s attorney, Amina Merritt, and also with Sandra Henriquez with the California Coalition Against Sexual Assault.
4/16/12 UPDATE:
Monday afternoon, according to the Sacramento Bee, the judge ordered the release of the 17-year rape accuser being held in juvenile detention. Perhaps he heard the suggestion of friend to the website and HLN, attorney B.J. Bernstein.
When I covered this story last week, she suggested the judge consider some sort of electronic monitor to make sure the teen appear in court to testify.
That is in fact, just what the judge did.
Read more here.
PREVIOUS REPORT BELOW:
Has it come to this?
Locking up a 17 year old alleged rape victim to make sure she shows up to testify against the man charged with raping her?
It has come to this in Sacramento, California. That’s where career criminal Frank William Rackley almost walked when the teen didn’t show up for a preliminary hearing in February.
Prosecutors re-filed the case. To make sure she’d show up next time, a judge signed off on a material witness warrant and this teen is now in juvenile detention.
The DA’s office says it has to take public safety into consideration, the need to prosecute Rackley.
Her lawyer told the Sacramento Bee, “I think it’s outrageous that the DA’s office wants to put a rape victim – a juvenile rape victim – in custody, as if she were the criminal, in a case where she is the victim. ”
I asked Atlanta-based attorney B.J. Bernstein to weigh in on this. Bernstein has been a court-appointed guardian in a child prostitution case. She says in cases like this, where young vulnerable victims often want to disappear, where the accused adult rapists and abusers count on them disappearing, it worked well to have a liaison to help them through the process, as opposed to arresting them. Bernstein added, “Perhaps an ankle monitor would have been a better solution, along with a court guardian to ensure her appearance.”
WATCH a local report. The teen’s attorney explains why her client doesn’t want to testify. Also, the DA’s office explains their side. I was a bit caught off guard when he referred to her reluctance to testify as perhaps the victim’s “inconvenience.” This is clearly about more than that.
Some background: rape is one of the most under-reported crimes and when it is reported, the arrest and conviction rate….well see for yourself.
OUTRAGEOUS!
Instead of locking up the alleged victim, how about locking up the accused rapist until the victim shows up to testify? That would be a more fair and better way protect the public, if that is what the judge is concerned about. She should get a good lawyer and sue.
With a prosecutor like this one, a judge like the one who signed off on the order, and a legal system that treats rape victims like this, then people wonder why everyone doesn’t just “trust the system”? “Victim inconvenience” my ass! This girl is likely scared to death of this man! Let’s force her to sit in a courtroom, looking at the man who violated her, and then HOPE the system works and he is sent to jail forever. If he isn’t convicted, or only gets a short sentence, you KNOW this girl will be stalked and probably killed when he gets out! And people wonder why I don’t trust the system?
I don’t know what is worse. This or the 10 year old in South America who just had a baby. What’s wrong with protective custody? Why even bring this idea up?
I think its awful that she is in jail, clearly there were better options. It would also be awful for the next victim if someone gets away with rape.
If she was subpoenaed to testify and didn’t show up at the preliminary hearing, I guess I could understand the judge’s decision. Regardless to whether the victim wanted to testify or not, if there was a subpoena she was bound by law to show up.
On the other hand, my heart truly goes out to her. What she’s been through already is horrific enough, and now this? By the way, parents of juveniles are generally subpoenaed to bring their kids to court-where are the parents in this story?
She is in the foster system.
If she’s in the foster care system, then her social worker would have received the subpoena on her behalf, and she would have been the legally responsible person for getting her to court. I DO understand why she needed to be there, and I can kinda understand the warrant for her not showing-what I don’t understand at all is why only the child is being held responsible for not showing up when she is in fact a CHILD. It really makes me angry when we hold children to a higher standard than the adults that are paid to protect/defend them.
And, where is her Guardian Ad Litem?!? I know in NC every foster child must have one appointed to work on their behalf, maybe it’s different in Ca?
-By the way, if she was in the foster care system when this happened, at which point was she left alone with the man that ended up raping her?
She is a teenager, she isn’t with an adult all the time- in reference to how was she alone and allowed to be rape. She was actually kidnapped.
We must also be careful to keep the blame soley on criminals, not on someone who may have left her alone.
The blame for the rape lies solely on the shoulders of the person who committed the crime-I agree with you.
The reason I asked the other questions is because it seems like this young girl has been left to deal with this by herself, and has no advocate besides her attorney. A person can’t watch a child 24/7, but the standards for the foster care system are more strict than the standards for regular parents. They do, for the most part, require that a child in foster care be left in the care of a responsible adult at all times (minus walking home from the bus stop, etc).
I’m sorry, but this case just doesn’t make sense to me. I don’t understand why a victim had to be at the preliminary hearing in the first place-or again maybe that varies on a state by state basis. Here in NC my daughter didn’t have to be in court at all until trial, and she was subpoenaed to be there. When he took a plea bargain instead, she opted to attend, but wasn’t forced to be there.
Facing a person that has hurt you, even in court surrounded by deputies, is hard on any victim but even more so when it’s a child. I don’t understand why this poor girl was being forced to see him more than necessary-or why the people that were in charge of her care didn’t ensure that she was present when she was supposed to be. Maybe then this young girl who has been violated to the extreme wouldn’t now be punished for not showing up, when in fact it wasn’t her responsibility as a child to ensure that she was even there.
I see why, rapist looks creepy. I would of hide also.
Not only do I feel bad for this girl, I’m afraid of how many girls will now be afraid to report a rape, for fear of being locked up. This is outrageous!
I don’t know how they can MAKE her testify! In the Sac Bee earlier this week, part of the article stated: “It also pits a Penal Code section that allows for warrants to ensure material witnesses “appear and testify” against the state’s Code of Civil Procedure, which says you can’t “imprison or otherwise confine” sexual assault victims who refuse to testify.”
Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2012/04/05/4392379/sacramento-county-da-locks-up.html#storylink=cpy#storylink=cpy
Even as an adolescent, she has rights. Thank you for sharing this link.
Most DAs would have done what a previous one did on a rape charge in Rackley’s background when the victim refused…just drop the case. In reality that is the only option. For the stats you cited, is there a breakout of how many cases the victim pushed farther vs. ‘Just going to report this and that is all’. The only other way you can get a conviction is with other witnesses, maybe a video surveillance tape….in most cases highly unlikely.
Keith that is not true, many women do not report rape because they are judged by their appearance. Victims in these types of crimes are often humiliated and scrutinized in the judicial system. If you will do some research, the need for victim-witness advocates and the finances to keep these advocates available is under scrutiny itself. Victims do not have as many rights and protection that they deserve.
THE FOSTER CARE SYSTEM IS SOOOO BEYOND SCWERED UP TO BEGIN WITH…BUT NOW THE VICTIM OF RAPE GETS TO BE PUNSISHED FOR BEING AFRAID!!!..RIGHT, GREAT IDEA..THIS POOR GIRL HAS ENOUGH TRUST ISSUSES TO BEING WITH, NOW LETS GO AHEAD AND DAMAGE HER EVEN MORE!!!..NICE GOING TO THE JUDGE, AS WELL AS THE DA OFFICE FOR JUST HURTING HER EVEN MORE!!!!!!…
They are just doing publicly to her what is done to over 90% of victims….treating her (the victims) like the criminal.
I can understand both sides in this situation. Clearly the child in this case has an overwhelming amount of fear in facing her attacker. We cant expect her to want to have to go through a trial and face her attacker on a day to day baais. We cant expect her to want to sit through and listen to the details of the attack. On the other hand, we cant expect prosecutors to do there job to tje upmost
Hmmm, I wonder if they know that is against the Victims Constitutional Rights? How awful to have been raped and then locked up. As if rape is not terrifying enough. Now she will never trust our system to protect her. I thought that you did not have to face your accuser, that it was your choice? A statement and evidence is not enough? I am shocked and embarrassed!!!!
SPEECHLESS!!!
keep up buddy, you people are doing a great job.http://www.batepao.net