Today, in a short published opinion, United States v. J.A.S., the Sixth Circuit rejected
a 17-year-old defendant’s challenge to his conviction for sexually assaulting an 8 year old through vaginal penetration.
There was no medical evidence to show an assault, so the
government’s case rested on the testimony of the victim.
The defendant made two arguments: (1) that the court shouldn't have admitted video of a forensic interview of the victim, and (2) that the victim's testimony was insufficient to convict him.
The court quickly dispatched the evidentiary argument. The video, the court
concluded, fell under Rule 801(d)(1)(B)(ii), which allows for admission of
prior consistent statements if offered to rehabilitate a witness after
cross-examine.
The court also upheld the sufficiency of the evidence,
distinguishing decisions from four other circuits that rejected convictions
based solely on victim testimony. The court explained that in each of these
cases the victims’ testimonies were vague about whether actual penetration
occurred. In contrast, the victim in the case at hand testified at a bench trial that the defendant “put his
pee in [her] pee,” that she “felt it” in her, and that it hurt.
No comments:
Post a Comment