Frankly, I Don't Care How Due Process Makes You
Feel
This case is discussed over on PopeHat. What's significant is
that the ruling was a direct result of the prosecutors's choice of the
exact statute and section to charge him under. That section was strictly
limited, requiring the victim to be physically incapacitated (eg. bound and
gagged, unconscious or the like). The victim here was not physically
incapacitated within the meaning of that section. The prosecutor had several
other sections available, including ones for more serious crimes, which did
cover the act in question (in fact, there's a section just for rape of people
who're incapable of giving informed consent, it's section 2 of the same part
that he was charged under section 3 of, so the prosecutor had to have known it
existed). It's not the judge's fault that the prosecutor chose to charge the man
under a section that didn't apply to what he did. The judge acted correctly: the
man was charged with something he didn't do, and the judge found that the state
had failed to prove he did what they'd charged him with. The failure lies with
the prosecutor, who couldn't or wouldn't read the law and charge the man under a
section that applied to what he did.
IMO we do not want to go to a
place where juries or the courts are free to say "You didn't do what you were
accused of, but we think you deserve to go to jail so we're going to find you
guilty anyway.". [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
