Jun 8, 2016

"This case is not about sexual assault, it is about a con."





"This case is about what Jason Daniels did to two women when he was a Sergeant at the Sheriff's office," is what Deputy District Attorney Brie Bennett said to the jurors in the Jason Daniel's case this morning during her opening statement.

Ms. Bennett said that there would be a number of witnesses besides the two alleged victims which would include investigators and Department of Justice.

"I expect you will hear about Jane Doe #1 and 2," said Ms. Bennett. "I don't think either will deny they have used drugs; I don't think either will deny that they have had run ins with the law" and referred to the fact that they both had "a troubled past."

"I just ask you to listen to them with an open mind and without a bias," said Ms. Bennett. "I expect when you hear from these victims; these vulnerable women; you will believe them."

Ms. Bennett summarized the alleged incidents and recounted what both alleged victims said in their testimony and at the preliminary hearing. Details in links below.

Ms. Julia Fox, one of Daniels ' attorneys, gave the opening statement for the defense. She raised questions about the alleged victim's testimonies, the timing of the complaint and whether their claims were reasonable.

"No good deed goes unpunished," said Ms. Fox. "This case is not about sexual assault, it is about a con. It's about a con by two seasoned convicts and Jason Daniels is caught in the crosshairs."

"Jason Daniels fell prey to two cunning survivors," said Ms. Fox.

Ms. Fox said that when Daniels was at the location where he encountered Jane Doe #1 after answering a call, "he tells dispatch where he is, tells other officers where he is." Ms. Fox said that Daniels did not cuff either Jane Doe #1 or her friend Ruby and he did a lawful search before giving them a courtesy ride and found nothing on them. The ride was for their safety. The search for his safety.

Recounting Jane Doe 1 and 2's testimonies, Ms. Fox said, "Clearly their stories diverged, that's why he is here." She said Daniels had denied the allegations "vehemently." That in a pre text meeting with Jane Doe #1, he walked away and wrote a memo about what happened at that pre text meeting right after to alert his superiors.

She asked the jurors if it was "reasonable" that someone who had just been assaulted would get into a car with the man who attacked her. She mentioned inconsistencies in Jane Doe 2's version of what happened, in three different interviews, "two under oath." Ms. Fox said Jane Doe #2 filed a civil suit against Daniels and would not give a deposition and then the case was dismissed.

Ms. Fox said that the defense will put EPD Officer Ryan McElroy on the stand and he will testify that he had an interaction with Jane Doe #1, after the allegations against Daniels had come out, and Jane Doe #1 gave him a false name and when he found oout who she was, she said something to the effect of "I've gotten cops fired before, don't be next."

Ms. Fox said that Jane Doe #2 came forth after details were "plastered in the press" about Jane Doe #1 and Daniels. She also tried to raise question about why it took the DA's office "almost a year" to file charges.

Previous posts: (includes details from the preliminary hearing):

http://johnchiv.blogspot.com/2015/04/sexual-penetration-by-foreign-object.html?m=1
http://johnchiv.blogspot.com/2015/03/jane-doe-1-gives-graphic-testimony-of.html
http://johnchiv.blogspot.com/2015/04/sexual-penetration-by-foreign-object.html
http://johnchiv.blogspot.com/2015/04/jury-trial-for-jason-daniels-charged.html
http://johnchiv.blogspot.com/2015/03/witness-shows-up-jason-daniels.html
http://johnchiv.blogspot.com/2015/03/material-witness-against-former.html
http://johnchiv.blogspot.com/2015/03/case-management-conference-held-today.html

2 comments:

  1. Once again blame the victim.......this guy was in uniform on the job. Was wasn't he charged under color of authority? Why is he being protected?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Maybe you should re read the definition of color of authority. No such claim has been made by the defense or the defendant.

      Delete