Former Contra Costa County sex crimes prosecutor Michael Gressett has been accused of a sex crime in the raping of a colleague. The California lawyer is free on bail after being indicted on the charges, which he denies through counsel. While Deputy District Attorney, Gressett has run three times for district attorney.
Gressett, 52, is accused by a prosecutor in another county. The 30-year-old woman says that she agreed to sleep with Gresset but objected to his demands which, among other things, included a gun put to her head and handcuffs in May 2008.
Gressett was fired after the allegations in July, but insists that these were playful devices and that his political opponents are using the case against him. His lawyers are also attacking the alleged victim as having a troubled history.
What is interesting in the case is that the defense has won a major victory in getting the court to rule that the woman could be questioned in open court in a preliminary hearing. The prosecutors then circumvented the preliminary hearing by going to a grand jury instead — a move denounced by the defense as trying to protect the witness from being confronted on her own history.
What is also interesting is the protection of the woman’s name. There has long been a controversy over why a defendant’s name is made public but not his accuser in a rape case. Some have argued that either both names or neither name should be withheld. Here the alleged victim is a prosecutor who is being protected from being publicly named while the former prosecutor has been named.
If convicted, Gressett may regret one of his chief campaign positions:
Plea-bargaining in this area must be curtailed as these types of crimes present the greatest danger to the safety and well being of our citizens.
I plan to initiate a “real” No Plea-Bargaining Policy, including maximum prosecution of murder, rape, armed robbery and other violent felonies. In order to monitor and ensure the execution of this Policy, I plan to implement my “Justice System Accountability Program” (JSAP) whereby the decisions being made within Contra Costa County’s Prosecutorial and Judicial systems will be publicly accessible via the Internet.
For the full story, click here.
I have a different take on this: What happens between two CONSENTING adults behind closed doors should stay there.
Some people like some kinky stuff and then when the relationship sours for what ever reason, all of a sudden, he sez, she sez and then everybody sez’s a lot.
These are crazy cases and one of the reasons that I never took one. When I found out that 95% of all rape cases are pled out and it started out as consensual sex. It made my stomach turn.
This mans career is over for all intensive purposes. This womans maybe as well.
I do agree that the rape victim should not be named. I guess I am out of the loop when it comes to naming the Defendant. I think that this would be a great ideal and makes a great deal of common sense. That is why it probably won’t happen.
I have a different take on this: What happens between two CONSENTING adults behind closed doors should stay there.
Some people like some kinky stuff and then when the relationship sours for what ever reason, all of a sudden, he sez, she sez and then everybody sez’s a lot.
These are crazy cases and one of the reasons that I never took one. When I found out that 95% of all rape cases are pled out and it started out as consensual sex. It made my stomach turn.
This mans career is over for all intensive purposes. This womans maybe as well.
I do agree that the rape victim should not be named. I guess I am out of the loop when it comes to naming the Defendant. I think that this would be a great ideal and makes a great deal of common sense. That is why it probably won’t happen.
Sorry, forgot to add great post! Can’t wait to see your next post!
AY:
Sometimes “consent” isn’t “consent” when the terms of the deal change dramatically. Handcuffs and guns? I have no problem with the charges for this take-no-prisoners former prosecutor.
mespo,
This is out of the article. “Defense attorneys were angered by the prosecution’s decision to seek a grand jury indictment. They had won a key ruling when a judge said they could question Gressett’s accuser during a public preliminary hearing – a hearing that was superseded by the use of a grand jury.”
Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/10/20/BAOK1A7SS7.DTL#ixzz0UZXmWyUS
Now what were they afraid of coming out in this Preliminary Hearing? Why did they bypass the “Usual” Process? There is something rotting and the methane is getting so, to where I cannot breath.
I agree with you that if she initially consented and then the bastard did not stop when she asked, then he should be convicted. However, some people like kinky stuff. I am not one of them but it is there right so long as they both consent.
AY:
what is that website, a PSA?
Bryon,
The link is to the article. That site/cite forces you to be honest. I cut and pasted and it followed.
Now PSA? Public Service Announcement? I am at a loss….
AY:
the web site is a how to page so to speak, thus the PSA comment.
Did you follow the link that you put up?
Are you saying that had the guy in question been cognizant of superior information this might not be a he said she said? But more of a he did she screamed?
Byron,
the web site is a how to page so to speak, thus the PSA comment.
***************
Is what you are trying to convey is that the link that came with the page is a PSA? Or are you saying that I am making a Public Service Comment?
______________________________
Did you follow the link that you put up?
****************
Yes I did follow the link. It takes you to the San Francisco Gate.
_____________________________
Are you saying that had the guy in question been cognizant of superior information this might not be a he said she said? But more of a he did she screamed?
***********************
I am unsure of how to answer this. It seems more of a Bar Exam question.
Yes,
I’m confused, Byron, the link goes to an article in the San Francisco Chronicle.
sticky…
when did consenual become nonconsenual?
Was a weapon in the bed, on the nightstand, in the room or in the house. Was she restrained? Before or after the gun?
When partner sez stop, process is nonconsenual, but in this senerio, stop could be construed as part of the role play, added to if she were already restrained. That is the whole power thing behind bondage
Im not saying it wasn’t rape, just that it may prove very difficult to prove. Usually with bondage, power there is a clear word used to mean stop, agree to by both parties. This does not seem to be the case.