Posted on 05/02/2015 3:45:20 PM PDT by cripplecreek
JACKSON, MI – Concerned he would have to send an innocent man to prison, a Jackson County judge on Friday set aside a jury's guilty verdict in a criminal sexual conduct case.
The rare decision, a first in Circuit Judge John McBain's 13 years on the bench, means Gregory Patterson, 50, is not guilty of three counts of first-degree criminal sexual conduct, felonies that would have sent him to prison for a minimum of 25 years.
A jury convicted Patterson of the offenses at the close of a March trial, but McBain granted a motion made by defense lawyer George Lyons, prompting Patterson's supporters to stand and applaud. "Thank you," Patterson told the judge.
Lyons argued the verdict constituted a miscarriage of justice and McBain had the authority and the "responsibility" to make it right.
"I think the worst thing a judge could ever face is the prospect you sent an innocent man to prison, especially on charges like this," McBain told a reporter Friday, May 1. "That weighed heavily on my mind."
There were "major problems," including witness credibility and lacking physical evidence, with the prosecutors' case, McBain said, and the jurors' verdict surprised him.
"If I had tried this case as a bench trial, I would have absolutely found him not guilty."
Prosecutor Jerry Jarzynka said he "respectfully disagrees" with the judge and his office will appeal the ruling.
The now 15-year-old daughter of Patterson's former girlfriend testified Patterson sexually assaulted her multiple times in 2012 while he was living with her mother on Francis Street in Jackson.
Prosecutors presented DNA evidence of Patterson's semen on a pair of shorts the girl frequently wore.
Lyons, however, said the amount of semen was "microscopic" and investigators found it on the outside of her clothing, a fact that made it possible the fluid was transferred from the sheets on her mother's bed.
The girl testified she often, even daily, watched TV in the bed her mother and Patterson shared.
There was no blood or semen in her underwear or any other physical evidence to support her contention she was "violently" raped, Lyons told the judge. Other DNA strands were found, but were not tested to see if they matched the DNA or vaginal secretions of the girl's mother.
Furthermore, she was inconsistent about the number of assaults and testified she did not like Patterson. She admitted to lying in the past to remove men from her mother's life so her parents could be together, Lyons said.
"Nothing about this case pointed to this man's guilt," Lyons said and called the verdict a "failing of the system."
Assistant Prosecutor Jerrold Schrotenboer, the county's chief appellate attorney, conceded the girl admitted to a history of falsehoods, but he said she never said she did so to rid herself of her mother's boyfriends. "She instead testified that she wanted her mother and father together but did not even know her father," Schrotenboer wrote in brief contained in the court record.
Representatives from the crime laboratory testified the semen would have had to be wet for it to be transferred, he wrote. The jury had the right to reject this claim and a "ludicrous mayonnaise demonstration."
A doctor testified there are often no physical findings of sexual assault and the girl would have healed by the time an examination took place, Schrotenboer wrote.
In court, Schrotenboer quoted McBain's response to a similar motion in an unrelated case. "If judges were to start overruling the verdicts of jurors, why have jurors?" McBain earlier said.
"For the most part," juries do their job well, McBain, a former prosecutor, told a reporter Friday, but "protection is there for a defendant if the judge has a deep feeling of a real injustice that is about to occur."
Lyons was respectful of the immensity of his request.
He said in nearly 20 years of defense work, he had not filed a motion like this one. They are not often granted because judges have to be careful not to invade the jury's province, Lyons said. "It is an extraordinary decision and extraordinary relief."
McBain said he was additionally concerned with the jury, which was entirely white.
Patterson was attendant, polite and lacking a guilty demeanor, McBain said. He raised his own children, he has no serious criminal history, and there had been no allegations previously made against him.
Opinions are like buttholes. —
Oh, I thought you said “Obamas”
McBain is our local hanging judge and no defendant ever wants a case in his courtroom because he hands down a lot of maximum sentences.
While the accused could have gotten and likely won on appeal, how long is he supposed to sit in prison waiting for it to happen.
There is only one of those.
We are told all about DNA. But truthfully, who really understands it? We simply take the word of the scientific community.
A scientist could come up with PAP (physical air particles) and tell us that people leave particles in the air that proves they were at the scene. Within a few years people would be convicted on PAP evidence. No scientist wants to be outdone and seem to be out of touch.
Kinda like the EPA telling us of greater and greater dangers posed by smaller and smaller detectable amounts of toxic substances.
I was hoping Judge Ito would have done this in the OJ trial AND thrown every member of the jury in jail for contempt of court.
I think its a one way street.
A jury can’t be forced to convict and a judge can’t convict a man found innocent by a jury.
In PA, the standard is that the evidentiary finding of the jury has to be so bad as to be "shocking to the conscience." I believe in some states there is a requirement that before taking this step the trail judge must review and weigh all evidence in a light most favorable to the prosecution.
Those are both MUCH higher standards than "if this were a bench trial I would have acquitted."
The fact that he failed to recuse himself even though his wife perjured herself in claiming not to know Mark Fuhrman was a signal that he had no intention of allowing a fair trial from the very beginning.
It used to be in old Britain that judges could “direct a verdict of conviction”, basically order a jury to find a defendant guilty. Eventually this caused a revolt, of sorts, where juries refused to find guilt where they thought there was none.
So a new principle was enshrined, that a judge could throw out a juries conviction, but not their acquittal.
Well, there’s mankind’s laws... and then there is God’s laws. What was this fellow Patterson doing shacking up with this girl’s Mom anyway? This judge may have let him off the hook but some day he will face the Great Judge.... Exodus 20:14 Thou shalt not commit adultery.
How are judicial set-asides illegal?
Race matters. It should not, but it does. Look at Baltimore.
Good Lord. Don’t get me started on this one. Well, I guess you already have.
oh I see... is he able to declare a mistrial?
Thank God for that.
Casey Anthony. If the judge had the power to reverse a not guilty verdict, that was the case that should have required it.
just reading through and i’m impressed. Too many people here lose all sense of proportion and are unable to utter the words you did.
I’m glad it was overturned. It’s painfully clear our justice system is more about winning than justice. Winning is a path to higher jobs. It’s something that needs to change. Prosecutors have a clear conflict with every case they take. Justice for the defendant vs the fruits of victory.
just reading through and i’m impressed. Too many people here lose all sense of proportion and are unable to utter the words you did.
I’m glad it was overturned. It’s painfully clear our justice system is more about winning than justice. Winning is a path to higher jobs. It’s something that needs to change. Prosecutors have a clear conflict with every case they take. Justice for the defendant vs the fruits of victory.
Seriousness of the charge vs. facts?
Having served on a couple juries, I can attest that the jurors are not always rational and many are run by their emotions instead of their brains. The same jury that might let an obviously guilty perp, who assaulted and almost killed a man, go; might also be prone to wrongly convict a man charged with raping a young girl.
I've also seen what happens when a judge and prosecutor work together to railroad someone - having a judge willing to do this, especially with the judge's reputation, tells me that the jury got it really wrong.
That, and the fact that our justice system is based on the premise that it's better to let 100 guilty folks go than it is to falsely convict one innocent should mean something once folks clear the air of emotions.
totally agree and you are correct. That was the standard in VA where I Prosecuted. And that should be the standard.
Good points.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.