Source:
kxmbOMAHA, Neb. (AP) Prosecutors in Omaha, Nebraska, aren't pursuing a new trial in a sexual assault case where the judge banned the use of the words "rape" and "victim." Pamir Safi was accused of sexually assaulting a woman he met at a bar. His first two trials ended in mistrials.
In the first trial, the judge restricted language that could be used in testimony, saying he did so to protect Safi's constitutional right to a fair trial.
His accuser says the ban had a significant effect on her testimony.
The judge declared a mistrial the second time around during jury selection, citing news coverage of the case and public protests on behalf of the alleged victim.
Read more:
http://www.kxmb.com/News/194910.asp
Some more on the case from the summer:
Among the words and phrases Cheuvront barred were: rape, victim, assailant and sex-assault kit.
Safi has been accused of raping Bowen in 2004 while she was too drunk to consent to sex.
The judge said the publicity surrounding the case would have made it too difficult for jurors to reach an impartial verdict. He pointed to rallies, including one on Monday in front of the Lancaster County Courthouse, that lead to his decision to call a mistrial. Cheuvront wrote in his judgement that the inescapable conclusion from the petition promoting the rally was meant to intimidate the court and interfere with the selection of a fair and impartial jury.
Bowen said she was fighting for her right to free speech. The judge wanted her to sign an order banning her from using the banned terms.
"Silencing rape victims is something that has been done too long," Bown said. "I urge the state to try this case again. I highly, highly urge the state to try this again. I want a fair trial, and if I have to wait another six months or another year, that's fine. I'll deal with that."
http://www.ketv.com/news/13670904/detail.htmlYet a Nebraska district judge, Jeffre Cheuvront, suddenly finds himself in a war of words with attorneys on both sides of a sexual assault trial. More worrisome, he appears to be at war with language itself, and his paradoxical answer is to ban it: Last fall, Cheuvront granted a motion by defense attorneys barring the use of the words rape, sexual assault, victim, assailant, and sexual assault kit from the trial of Pamir Safi—accused of raping Tory Bowen in October 2004.
Safi's first trial resulted in a hung jury last November when jurors deadlocked 7-5. Responding to Cheuvront's initial language ban—which will be in force again when Safi is retried in July—prosecutors upped the ante last month by seeking to have words like sex and intercourse barred from the courtroom as well. The judge denied that motion, evidently on the theory that there would be no words left to describe the sex act at all. The result is that the defense and the prosecution are both left to use the same word—sex—to describe either forcible sexual assault, or benign consensual intercourse. As for the jurors, they'll just have to read the witnesses' eyebrows to sort out the difference.
Bowen met Safi at a Lincoln bar on Oct. 30, 2004. It is undisputed that they shared some drinks, and witnesses saw them leaving together. Bowen claims not to have left willingly and has no memory of the rest of that night. She claims to have woken up naked the next morning with Safi atop her, "having sexual intercourse with her." When she asked him to stop, he did.
Bowen testified for 13 hours at Safi's first trial last October, all without using the words rape or sexual assault. She claims, not unreasonably, that describing what happened to her as sex is almost an assault in itself. "This makes women sick, especially the women who have gone through this," Bowen told the Omaha World-Herald. "They know the difference between sex and rape."
----
Wendy Murphy teaches at the New England School of Law and has spent years studying the relationship between language and the courts. She describes Judge Cheuvront's order as part of a growing trend on the part of the defense bar to scrub the language of trial courts, one that has "really blossomed after the Kobe Bryant trial." The big shifts she's noticing: Whereas defense attorneys once made motions to limit the use of the word victim in trials, there is an uptick in efforts to get rid of the word rape. Moreover, she points out, these strategies used to be directed toward prosecutors, but they are now being directed toward witnesses as well.
http://www.slate.com/id/2168758/Is this judge from the 19th century? And it's frightening that this is apparently happening in other courts. In this Bush/fundie America women's rights are going backwards! And they have the temerity to complain about "activist judges"!
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
