« Better Red than Liberty | Main | The Ministry of Logic »

December 20, 2005

Woman convicted of filing false police report on rape is sentenced

[Update: The O has their story up on the sentencing. The O reporter says that the city attorney's office didn't seek a specific sentence. Since I was sitting in the back perhaps I heard wrong..but I could have sworn that they said something about community service and restitution.

One commentor here noted that the judge was blaming the young woman for the conviction. I don't think so. I think he's blaming the defense attorney.]

The wheels of justice move ever so slowly.

In the case of the Oregon woman convicted of filing a false police report in regard to an alleged rape, they crawl.

Given that the original incident happened in early 2004..its taken a long time to get here..and its far from over. An appeal of the conviction has been filed.

The young woman was sentenced today in Beaverton Municipal Court. I attended her sentencing.

Municipal Court is a strange animal. The majority of folks get less than a minute with the judge. Most don't have attorneys present and some are there to have counsel assigned. Some plead a case on a parole violation or a fine...still getting just a moment in front of the judge before they're sent over to the clerk to fill out paperwork. Perry Mason it ain't.

The young woman's case was different. The defense attorney and the young woman appeared along with the city attorney before the judge, who was Peter Ackerman. Ackerman is the same judge that heard the case against the young woman. I sat in the back (regretfully) and was unable to hear some of the proceedings.

The city attorney had sent sentencing recommendations to both the judge and the defense. From what I could hear, Ackerman is requiring a "presentencing investigation", in which the woman is interviewed. There was no explanation in court as to what this investigation means or how it applies to the sentencing. Despite the defense attorney's request, it appears this investigation will take place even though the case is on appeal.

Ackerman also sentenced the woman to community service and (I believe) monetary restitution to cover the court's costs. I couldn't hear this part entirely. The defense attorney requested that the judge stay the community service/restitution sentence pending appeal. The judge acquiesed.

Prior to sentencing, Ackerman also indicated his anger toward the media coverage of this case. He noted that he had received "threats". He also chided the defense attorney for not providing a defense "expert" on rape to talk about the young woman's reaction to her rape.

Ackerman seems to be hinging his decision based in large part on the woman's reactions after the rape.

I remain skeptical about this conviction.

I interviewed the police department public information officer about this case late last week. He too seemed frustrated with the media coverage, believing that the Oregonian story was unbalanced and didn't provide the judge's statements at the time of the conviction. He also couldn't answer my specific questions regarding the nature of the conflicting statements and how the judge reached "reasonable doubt", due to the appeal. He further expressed surprise that the judge's decision hadn't been released in writing.

I've been working hard to not make a rush judgement on this. An attorney friend of mine cautioned me early on: "A judge heard both sides of this and didn't believe her". But the more I find out, the more questions I have about how this decision was reached.

I'm still waiting to hear the appeal date. I plan to attend provided my schedule allows.

Posted by Carla at December 20, 2005 12:29 AM