PDA

View Full Version : Man jailed for sex abuse but never indicted sues Oregon officials


Alonzo
03-29-2008, 04:22 AM
BEND -- The state attorney general and several Jefferson County officials and lawyers are facing a $3.5 million lawsuit accusing them of unjustly prosecuting a former Oregon man.

The suit, filed last week in U.S. District Court in Portland, stems from the unusual criminal case against David Lee Simmons, 19, on sex-abuse charges in the central Oregon county.

In 2006, Simmons was sent to jail for 30 days and ordered to register as a sex offender after pleading guilty to felony charges of rape and sodomy.

But upon Simmons' release, it was discovered that he was never indicted -- a fact his lawyer, the district attorney and the judge overlooked during his prosecution and sentencing. The grand jury that heard Simmons' case found there was insufficient evidence against him and marked the indictment "not a true bill."

The fact that nobody seemed to notice the jury's decision, and that Simmons served time, "is just extraordinary," said Margaret Paris, dean of the University of Oregon law school.

The charges stemmed from a relationship Simmons began with a 14-year-old girl when he was 17 and continued after he turned 18 and she turned 15. Her parents complained to authorities, and in September 2006 he was arrested on suspicion of rape and sodomy.

When the grand jury met the next week and declined to indict Simmons, everyone seemed to miss this crucial detail, and his prosecution continued.

That October, he pleaded guilty to one count each of third-degree rape and third-degree sodomy and was sentenced to a month in jail and five years' probation. He also was ordered to register as a sex offender.

At sentencing, Simmons apologized to the girl's family, saying, "I would just like to say that I am sorry and that I know what I did and what I was doing was wrong," according to a court transcript.

Ex-juror spots story

When he was released from jail later that month, a member of the grand jury that reviewed his case noticed a news story about it and contacted the district attorney's office, questioning how Simmons had been prosecuted without being indicted.

That same day, the prosecutor, defense attorney and Jefferson County Circuit Judge George Neilson met to discuss the situation.

"Mr. Simmons, this is an experience I've never had before in 27 years," the judge said. Simmons' defense attorney agreed with the prosecutor's motion to vacate the case, and Neilson ruled it a "legal nullity."

"It will be treated as if it never happened in the sense of the law," the judge said, according to court documents. He added a warning to Simmons that he could face future prosecution.

Shortly after, the Jefferson County prosecutor filed new charges against Simmons: four counts of contributing to the delinquency of a minor and two third-degree sexual abuse counts, all misdemeanors. That trial is scheduled for early June in Jefferson County.

"My thought at the time would be, they would apologize to him and pay him some money," said Laura Graser, a Portland criminal defense lawyer familiar with the case. "I can't believe they're prosecuting him again."

Suit names AG, others

Oregon Attorney General Hardy Myers' office took over the case last summer after the county prosecutor bowed out, and the case has been in litigation since.

Last week, Simmons' lawyer, Steven Richkind of Sandy, filed a federal lawsuit against Myers, Jefferson County District Attorney Peter Deuel and others involved in the case. The suit also names Jefferson County, Sheriff Jack Jones, two state prosecutors, Simmons' two previous defense attorneys and Circuit Judge Gary Thompson, who is presiding over the current misdemeanor trial.

The first hearing on the civil suit is scheduled for May in a Portland federal court

"It seeks two things: One is to stop the state prosecution based on the concepts of 'double jeopardy,' due process and fundamental fairness," Richkind said. The other is $3.5 million in economic and punitive damages for Simmons, who now lives in Copperas Cove, Texas, Richkind said.

Richkind's argument is based on the constitutional protections against being prosecuted twice on the same charges, or "double jeopardy."

Under state law, prosecutors can still file misdemeanor charges if a grand jury fails to indict a person on felony charges, so long as the grand jury doesn't also consider and reject the misdemeanor charges at the same time, said Richard Wolf, a Portland defense attorney who successfully argued a double jeopardy homicide case at the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

But "as far as a judgment being entered and time served," Wolf said, "that would probably prohibit you from prosecuting again."

The state has yet to file a response to the lawsuit, said Stephanie Soden, a spokeswoman for Myers. "The attorney general believes it's a case filed in court, and the merits of the case will be determined by the courts."

But last summer, in an argument to the state Supreme Court countering Simmons' petition to have his case dismissed, the attorney general's office argued that he wasn't being subjected to double jeopardy because his original case was a "legal nullity" and his defense attorney agreed to vacate his conviction.

When the grand jury signed the original indictment "not a true bill," it essentially dismissed the charges, no matter what happened afterward, the state argued.

Paris, a criminal defense attorney before becoming the UO law school dean, said Simmons' case appears to be a unique test of double jeopardy protections. "This young man has been put through jeopardy. I don't know that they can unring that bell.

"This is very, very unusual. It's really an extraordinary and fascinating case."

http://www.oregonlive.com/news/oregonian/index.ssf?/base/news/1206674712256620.xml&coll=7&thispage=3

ViolaLee
03-29-2008, 05:07 AM
That's nuts! Someone needs to fire those prosecutors. Who appointed them? Alberto Gonzales?

Mia
03-29-2008, 07:56 AM
He should never have been charged in the first place. All the states need to get their age-gap provisions in place for statutory rape. It's insane they were legal one day, and then he became a rapist on his 18th birthday :-(.

cronic
03-29-2008, 05:02 PM
He should never have been charged in the first place. All the states need to get their age-gap provisions in place for statutory rape. It's insane they were legal one day, and then he became a rapist on his 18th birthday :-(.


No doubt.. That was a wrongful arrest as far as I'm concerned

this story is alot like mine..

I dated a freshman when i was a senior in high school.. I was 18 the first month into the school year...
She was 15 almost 16.

Sure it was just car dates to the movies and bowling and stuff like that..
( ok parking to )

but it grew into so much more.
We got married.... i was 20 in 1983 when i proposed to her and she was 17...
We waited to she finished high school and when she turned 18.. we made it official

I wonder how this girl really feels?
I wonder if she was even asked?

Alonzo
03-29-2008, 05:09 PM
Cronic, I don't disagree that he shouldn't have been arrested, though I do have a problem with an 18 year old dating a 15 year old. The few people who did that when I was in high school were ridiculed, it wasn't seen as a good or normal thing.

But I don't think the potential positive long term outcomes are the primary concerns, it's the likelihood of negative outcomes. Take Mary Kay Letourneau and the 6th grader she had sex with. Is what she did wrong? Yes. But did it have long term negative consequences for the child? Probably not as the relationship continued and they have now married. But is the potential for harm too great to condone and allow such behavior? Yes.

cronic
03-29-2008, 06:35 PM
Cronic, I don't disagree that he shouldn't have been arrested, though I do have a problem with an 18 year old dating a 15 year old. The few people who did that when I was in high school were ridiculed, it wasn't seen as a good or normal thing.

But I don't think the potential positive long term outcomes are the primary concerns, it's the likelihood of negative outcomes. Take Mary Kay Letourneau and the 6th grader she had sex with. Is what she did wrong? Yes. But did it have long term negative consequences for the child? Probably not as the relationship continued and they have now married. But is the potential for harm too great to condone and allow such behavior? Yes.


I agree with that...
In most cases.. not all
Some situations may actually be alright depending on the people.. the lifestyle them people live and the environment the people are in.

As far as it not being seen as a good or normal thing like you state..
That alone would depend on where one lies his or her hat.

At my rural farm/country school..back in the 80's it seemed to be atleast ok. Not a bad thing anyway.

At my school dances there was a fair amount of students there together with 3 years apart between them.

history actually shows how it was more common the farther back you go in history.

Maybe today it is considered more a bad or abnormal thing to do because of all the wrongs done by people like that school teacher..like a bunch of them...
But thats not a fair comparison at all to these kids...

the age difference between Mary K. Letourneau and that boy was way far from 3 years like these kids.... She was 34 and he was 13.

She met him for the first time in her life when he was ...second grade.

so, I see what your saying, about how things can work out well in the end, but that doesn't mean its condone-able whatsoever for those things to be allowed or nonpunishable, besides just being down rite wrong.

Thats the part I agree with ya on. :thumbsup:

I just think its different in some cases and alot of parents do condone it depending on who the boy or girl may be as well as who their own children are... Sometimes..Age really is just a number..

MY daughter started taking a liking to the neighbor boy when she was 14.. he was 17.. another same case scenario....
they went to school together and I and her mom thought it was ok...
By the time my daughter was 16.. he was trying to ask her out.. ya.. they took it slow.. me.. my wife at the time and that boys mom all kept tabs on it.. Today he is 24.. she is 21.. they live together...

thats an example of 2 kids with a few years between them growing and learning and bonding together.

Do you feel the same way about a 17 yr old and a 14 year old as you do say.. an 18 year old and a 15 year old?

How about a 18 and a 16 year old?

Mia
03-29-2008, 06:57 PM
Girls mature faster than boys - it's normal to date older. I always did. It makes no sense for 14 and 17 to be legal but 15 and 18 not. I see nothing wrong with 15/18 regardless.

In TX there is a (3) year age-gap provision, in some states it is (4) years. Some have not gotten one in place - that's how that GA boy ended up with ten years in prison for consensual sex with his 16 year old girlfriend when he was 18! Seniors date sophomores all the time, it's crazy.

He'll be on the SO registry as a rapist for people to call him pond scum and say he should DIE. :shame:

Osborn F. Enready
03-29-2008, 08:28 PM
Alonzo said:
Cronic, I don't disagree that he shouldn't have been arrested, though I do have a problem with an 18 year old dating a 15 year old.

You have a right to dislike it, no right to interfere unless its YOUR child or YOU.

Alonzo said:
The few people who did that when I was in high school were ridiculed, it wasn't seen as a good or normal thing.

Thats all subjective individual, and cultural bias.

Alonzo said:
But I don't think the potential positive long term outcomes are the primary concerns, it's the likelihood of negative outcomes. Take Mary Kay Letourneau and the 6th grader she had sex with. Is what she did wrong? Yes. But did it have long term negative consequences for the child? Probably not as the relationship continued and they have now married. But is the potential for harm too great to condone and allow such behavior? Yes.

I disagree, entirely.

Mia
03-29-2008, 11:47 PM
A 35 year old woman with a 13 year old boy is hardly comparable to a 15 & 18 year old - that's an entirely different topic.

Cases like that are why there are AOC laws.

Osborn F. Enready
03-29-2008, 11:49 PM
There does not need to be LAWS though, a jury can figure this out.

Mia
03-30-2008, 12:01 AM
I don't understand what you mean - without laws, nothing would go before a jury.

Are you saying we don't need age of consent laws at all? It should be legal for 40 year olds to have sex with 12 year olds?

Osborn F. Enready
03-30-2008, 07:27 PM
Mia said:
I don't understand what you mean - without laws, nothing would go before a jury.

I am talking about SPECIFIC laws such as exist in all forms of law now.

The only law required is the enforcement of individual rights, and the government has the power to do that, its how we were founded, and the role of the jury.

Mia said:
Are you saying we don't need age of consent laws at all? It should be legal for 40 year olds to have sex with 12 year olds?

I am saying that people UNDER majority age don't have much say in things until they are MAJORITY AGE. Recognizing that children don't have full rights until age 18 (dependent on the state) means that there is no law necessary to hold an overage person accountable for taking advantage of an underaged person, and the JURY would find justice based on the facts surrounding the individual case.

There is no need for all the other laws, that simply repeat the OBVIOUS, and create more loopholes to be exploited.

Mia
03-30-2008, 08:13 PM
There are laws necessary in this instance because the ability and right to consent to sex is given earlier than 18 in many states. Not everything is granted at 18. A DL permit, for instance is allowed at 15, a license at 16. Each state has the right to choose an AOC.