Guilty pleas generally must be respected absent some legitimate basis to reject them, but in a disturbing case out of California, a man who might just be innocent has pled guilty and is going to prison for a very long time.
Ex-UFC welterweight and "The Ultimate Fighter 4" cast member Jeremy Jackson, 28, was sentenced to 25 years to life for sexual assault. Jackson pleaded guilty to the charges against the advice of his lawyers following a three-week trial.
According to the Ventura County Star: "Jackson's lawyer, Russell Baker, said he was very disappointed by the way the trial, which lasted more than three weeks, concluded. Baker said he doesn't believe his client committed these crimes. He said the 'crushing weight' of the trial and the accusations were a heavy mental burden on Jackson. 'He just got broken down,' said Baker."
Is an innocent man heading off to spend much, if not all, of the rest of his life in prison? It's not uncommon for a lawyer to believe in his client, but in a startling development, at least one juror, after hearing all the evidence, agrees that Jackson is innocent:
"A female juror in Jackson's trial asked the court if she could make a statement on Jackson's behalf. The prosecutor Thomas Dunlevy objected, saying the juror had no legal authority to do so. The judge said there was no value in allowing the juror to make the statement, reiterating the court's lack of sentencing discretion in this case. She allowed the juror to submit her statement to the court, which the judge read before sentencing Jackson. Outside the courtroom, the female juror said she believes Jackson didn't commit the rape but only pleaded guilty because he was depressed and wanted the trial to end. 'I really felt the defendant was innocent,' she said." See here.
While the guilty plea did not occur during police interrogation, the possible mental strain on the young man could have produced a guilty plea motivated by pressures other than knowledge of his guilt. According to The Innocence Project: "In about 25% of DNA exoneration cases, innocent defendants made incriminating statements, delivered outright confessions or pled guilty. These cases show that confessions are not always prompted by internal knowledge or actual guilt, but are sometimes motivated by external influences." Among the reasons are the threat of a harsh sentence and mental impairment.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
14 comments:
So if the juror would have voted to exonerate, at the very least it's a mistrial for him, isn't it?
It would be interesting if The Innocence Project stepped in and proved this man innocent. He more than likely had no way of proving his innocence. I must ask, was he represented by a public defender or a court-appointed attorney?
Anonymous - ”So if the juror would have voted to exonerate, at the very least it's a mistrial for him, isn't it?”
No. It appears that during the course of the trial, Jackson go t nervous about the outcome, and, going against his lawyers advice, asked to withdraw his “not guilty” plea, and to plead “guilty” instead (essentially throwing himself on the mercy of the court, and reducing his ultimate sentence by doing so). Thus, there would be no mistrial.
What he might be able to do is to seek to reopen his case claiming that he was responding to extreme stress, and that he didn’t understand what was at stake for him (a bit of a long-shot, but others have done this before).
It’s unclear why the one juror decided on his innocence, or if other jurors would have also do likewise, but the evidence (what little is revealed in the news accounts) seemed to have been pretty damning. This wasn’t a “he said/she said” matter, but one in which he was accused of terrorizing the women, and using a weapon, which he had just purchased, in the commission of a forcible rape. Also working against Jackson was the fact that he had sent threatening texts to the women.
But, of course, she could be lying about the circumstances of the alleged rape, and he might have simply been trying to get her to admit to that via those texts, and that he did, in fact, feel that his innocence could not be adequately demonstrated due to his serious miscalculation in sending those texts. This may well be a case of a man “cracking” under severe stress and anxiety. Clearly, his attorney believed the trial to be going better for him than did he.
We are, once again, simply given to little with which to make an informed decision.
Anonymous - ”I must ask, was he represented by a public defender or a court-appointed attorney?”
His attorney, Russell Baker, is a Public Defender
”Baker works through the Public Defender’s Office.”
The juror is most peculiar, but if the case had gotten to the jury and she hadn't changed her mind, perhaps a hung jury at least. We have no idea what the other jurors were thinking.
As for the "evidence," once a guilty verdict is entered, it becomes like a house. The materials not used in building the house don't get discussed as being part of the house. I keep thinking back to the case where the pizza delivery man "rescused" a woman being "raped" when it was all role playing.
We have no idea what happened, but it is a strange one. And it raises some interesting issues about guilty pleas that are the product of an impaired mind.
Archivist - ”We have no idea what happened, but it is a strange one.”
I’ve been mulling over this one a bit, and I keep going back to two cases discussed here previously: One in which a woman accidentally dialed a friend of her boyfriend while engaged in sexual congress with a another man, and claimed rape to try to cover-up, throwing her lover “under the bus” in the process; and, the story of the co-ed who committed suicide after accusing a Notre Dame football player of a sexual assault after one of her breasts was “touched”, in which that player was investigated for possible witness intimidation for texts which he subsequently sent her [which were determined by investigators and the prosecutor to be “non-threatening, but merely challenging her to the effect that she knew she was lying about what happened, and asking her please stop].
Now, this is just pure speculation on my part, and in no way meant to be indicative of the views held by The False Rape Society, it’s proprietor, nor of any one else who visits and/or posts here – this is entirely my own personal suggestion of a plausible, and I believe plausible alternative theory of what might have happened:
What I found very odd is that Jackson’s ex-girlfriend claimed that he forced her to call another man so that this other man (her new boyfriend?) would hear them having sex. I had to ask myself, why would Jackson have wished to have such evidence of a serious crime? That’s when I thought back to the case of the woman who accidentally dialed during sex.
Could it be that Jackson’ ex also accidentally dialed her new boyfriend while engaged in consensual sex with Jackson (lot’s of woman end up having sex with ex’s, especially when that ex was a particularly exciting/thuggish type compared to their current partner), and likewise needed an alibi for what her boyfriend heard going on [we don’t know what he heard, but is all he heard was her having sex…].
If she was making a claim as an alibi, she might well have known that Jackson had recently purchased the gun (he might even have shown it to her), and figured that claiming he used it would enhance her claims believability.
Then, after learning that she had made such a claim against him, it is plausible to believe that Jackson, being a bit of a hot-head, became angry that she had done so, and responded with the threatening texts [ill-advised, but not particularly unusual as a possible response to a perceived outrage].
Again, this is entirely my own personal speculation, presented simply as a possible alternative view as to what might have happened (and how this might be another case of an FRA). It is based on very little knowledge of the actual case, and may not hold up to any serious scrutiny against actual known facts. It is merely intended as food for thought.
May gos help the perverts who put an innocent man, or boy in jail for the rest of his life.
In order for further "Empowerment"; the American gender-Raunch community as a unite whole, has eroded mens basic ability to protect themselves against a now "Culture of false rape accusations".
As of now, if a women or girls has falsely accused 5 other guys of rape, and all turned out to be false...This is now inadmissible evidence!!This phenomena is evidence of a deep perversion that has usurped The American legal system..."Empowered Perverts" are dancing to the tune of their "Empowerment" but there will be long term consequences.
The more time passes, the more I am coming to realise how fortunate / unusual / rare my case is, in that there was no evidence of any kind to support the claims of years of sexual abuse and rape....
.... simply because so many innocent things *can* be re-interpreted after the event by a prosecution attorney...
... to whit the spur of the moment angry comment or text...
"Sticklers for Procedure
Ohio's Supreme Court reverses an acquittal in yet another outrageous sex abuse prosecution.
It would be difficult to cite a more shameful episode in the history of America's criminal justice system than the pedophilia panic of the 1980s and '90s. Police, prosecutors, and social workers all over the country were overcome by hysteria about the supposed proliferation of ritual sex abuse, a fear fed by a new movement of quack, Christian fundamentalist psychologists. Although dozens of convictions have been overturned, we are nowhere near uncovering all the damage wrought by this panic. The case of Nancy Smith and Joseph Allen shows how the same criminal justice system that rushed to convict innocent people can take decades to recognize and correct its mistakes."
http://reason.com/archives/2011/02/14/sticklers-for-procedure
Pierce: in my opinion, yes. I just went on wikipedia to see what his stats are, and some i didn't even know: a switch hitter, is the all-time Major League leader in hits (4,256), games played (3,562), at-bats (14,053) and outs (10,328).[1] He won three World Series rings, three batting titles, one Most Valuable Player Award, two Gold Gloves, the Rookie of the Year Award, and made 17 All-Star appearances at an unequaled five different positions (2B, LF, RF, 3B & 1B).
All of this stuff is virtually insane and almost untouchable.
What he did was stupid, but he bet ON the reds, not against it, which is quite important. I think he should make it based upon what he did. What he did was far less serious than Ciccotte and the rest of the black sox, minus weaver and shoeless joe.
Wrong fucking page, jesus christ.
Congratulations! This is the best thing, Thank you so much for taking the time to share such a nice information.
Sexual Assault Charges
Post a Comment