Attorneys wrap up Naval Academy sexual assault hearing

WASHINGTON A female U.S. Naval Academy student was highly intoxicated on the night last year when she was allegedly sexually assaulted by three midshipmen, a military prosecutor said Tuesday night as he urged an officer to move forward with a court-martial of the men.

But defense attorneys said the woman lied repeatedly about her actions during and after an off-campus party in 2012, and that there was no evidence of a forcible sexual assault.

The woman spent five days testifying during the proceeding, known as an Article 32 hearing. She has said she drank heavily and has no memory of having sex with the midshipmen, but became concerned after hearing gossip shortly after the party that she had had sex with multiple people. The Associated Press generally doesn't name those who authorities say were victims of sexual assault.

Lt. Cmdr. Phil Hammond, a prosecutor, said in his closing argument Tuesday that the woman was "substantially incapacitated" from drinking too much alcohol.

Andrew Weinstein, who is representing Midshipman Tra'ves Bush, said the woman had lied repeatedly. He also said no one at the party saw her passed out or acting as intoxicated as she claimed.

"Blackout is a function of memory," Weinstein said. "It is not an attribute of capacity."

Weinstein said the three former Navy football players — Bush and Midshipmen Eric Graham and Josh Tate — never should have been charged.

"She has no credibility," he said.

Lt. Cmdr. Angela Tang, who is representing Graham, said there was no evidence anyone used force.

"Drunk sex is not sexual assault," she said.

The hearing was wrapping up Tuesday night, a week after it began. Following closing arguments, the presiding investigative officer will review evidence and make a recommendation to the academy's superintendent. Such reviews generally take days or weeks to complete.

Tate, Graham and Bush declined to speak in court Tuesday when asked by the investigative officer. Graham has been charged with abusive sexual contact, while Bush and Tate have been charged with aggravated sexual assault. All three also are charged with making a false statement.

The case has drawn attention as the White House, Congress and the Pentagon have been focusing on the issue of sexual assault after a string of cases in the military this year. President Barack Obama highlighted the importance of the issue at the Naval Academy's graduation ceremony in May.

Earlier Tuesday, an investigator testified that the alleged victim said in an interview that she couldn't remember whether sexual encounters with the men charged in the case were consensual or not.

Speaking from Bahrain by video teleconference, Special Agent Michelle Robinson testified that the woman told her in an interview that she wasn't sure whether she had consented to the encounters.

Robinson also testified that Graham told her he had oral sex with the woman in a car outside the party. Graham made the statement in an interview during the investigation.

View the original article here

Attorneys wrap up Naval Academy sexual assault hearing

WASHINGTON A female U.S. Naval Academy student was highly intoxicated on the night last year when she was allegedly sexually assaulted by three midshipmen, a military prosecutor said Tuesday night as he urged an officer to move forward with a court-martial of the men.

But defense attorneys said the woman lied repeatedly about her actions during and after an off-campus party in 2012, and that there was no evidence of a forcible sexual assault.

The woman spent five days testifying during the proceeding, known as an Article 32 hearing. She has said she drank heavily and has no memory of having sex with the midshipmen, but became concerned after hearing gossip shortly after the party that she had had sex with multiple people. The Associated Press generally doesn't name those who authorities say were victims of sexual assault.

Lt. Cmdr. Phil Hammond, a prosecutor, said in his closing argument Tuesday that the woman was "substantially incapacitated" from drinking too much alcohol.

Andrew Weinstein, who is representing Midshipman Tra'ves Bush, said the woman had lied repeatedly. He also said no one at the party saw her passed out or acting as intoxicated as she claimed.

"Blackout is a function of memory," Weinstein said. "It is not an attribute of capacity."

Weinstein said the three former Navy football players — Bush and Midshipmen Eric Graham and Josh Tate — never should have been charged.

"She has no credibility," he said.

Lt. Cmdr. Angela Tang, who is representing Graham, said there was no evidence anyone used force.

"Drunk sex is not sexual assault," she said.

The hearing was wrapping up Tuesday night, a week after it began. Following closing arguments, the presiding investigative officer will review evidence and make a recommendation to the academy's superintendent. Such reviews generally take days or weeks to complete.

Tate, Graham and Bush declined to speak in court Tuesday when asked by the investigative officer. Graham has been charged with abusive sexual contact, while Bush and Tate have been charged with aggravated sexual assault. All three also are charged with making a false statement.

The case has drawn attention as the White House, Congress and the Pentagon have been focusing on the issue of sexual assault after a string of cases in the military this year. President Barack Obama highlighted the importance of the issue at the Naval Academy's graduation ceremony in May.

Earlier Tuesday, an investigator testified that the alleged victim said in an interview that she couldn't remember whether sexual encounters with the men charged in the case were consensual or not.

Speaking from Bahrain by video teleconference, Special Agent Michelle Robinson testified that the woman told her in an interview that she wasn't sure whether she had consented to the encounters.

Robinson also testified that Graham told her he had oral sex with the woman in a car outside the party. Graham made the statement in an interview during the investigation.

View the original article here

Jodi Arias' attorneys want 2nd jury sequestered

PHOENIX Jodi Arias' lawyers are asking a judge to sequester the jury in her second trial to shield the panel from the intense publicity that enveloped her first trial, which ended with a murder conviction but without a sentence.

Arias was convicted of first-degree murder May 8 in the 2008 stabbing and shooting death of boyfriend Travis Alexander in his suburban Phoenix home. The same jury failed to reach a decision on whether she should get the death penalty, setting the stage for a second penalty phase.

While the judge has yet to set a new trial date, Arias' attorneys filed a motion this week seeking to have the new panel sequestered "to ensure that the jury is not exposed to community and/or media influence."

Play Video

The motion filed Thursday cites thousands of television news shows and newspaper articles about Arias throughout her roughly five-month trial, as well as a recent Lifetime movie about the case that attorneys said attracted 3.1 million viewers.

Arias' lawyers claim the same intense publicity will no doubt come with a second penalty phase and will hinder her ability to get a fair trial.

"This integrity is in the most danger of being compromised when the process is contaminated by outside influences," the attorneys wrote. "Given what took place in the last trial and the propensity for history to repeat itself, it is certainly beyond legitimate dispute that the threat to the integrity of the retrial is severe."

Prosecutors have not yet filed a response.

22 Photos

The motion comes on the heels of several others filed recently. One seeks to have the retrial moved out of the Phoenix metropolitan area because of excessive publicity and to prohibit live television coverage. Another motion filed last month seeks to have the judge compel all jurors eventually seated in the second trial to reveal their Twitter user names so Arias' lawyers can monitor their accounts to be sure they're not communicating about the case.

Under Arizona law, while Arias' murder conviction stands, prosecutors have the option of pursuing a second penalty phase with a new jury in an effort to get a death sentence. If the second jury fails to reach a verdict, the death penalty would be removed as an option, and the judge would sentence Arias to ether spend her entire life behind bars or be eligible for release after 25 years.

Arias, 33, admitted she killed Alexander, but claimed it was self-defense after he attacked her. Prosecutors argued it was premeditated murder carried out in a jealous rage after the victim wanted to end their affair and planned a trip to Mexico with another woman.

View the original article here

Jodi Arias' attorneys want 2nd jury sequestered

PHOENIX Jodi Arias' lawyers are asking a judge to sequester the jury in her second trial to shield the panel from the intense publicity that enveloped her first trial, which ended with a murder conviction but without a sentence.

Arias was convicted of first-degree murder May 8 in the 2008 stabbing and shooting death of boyfriend Travis Alexander in his suburban Phoenix home. The same jury failed to reach a decision on whether she should get the death penalty, setting the stage for a second penalty phase.

While the judge has yet to set a new trial date, Arias' attorneys filed a motion this week seeking to have the new panel sequestered "to ensure that the jury is not exposed to community and/or media influence."

Play Video

The motion filed Thursday cites thousands of television news shows and newspaper articles about Arias throughout her roughly five-month trial, as well as a recent Lifetime movie about the case that attorneys said attracted 3.1 million viewers.

Arias' lawyers claim the same intense publicity will no doubt come with a second penalty phase and will hinder her ability to get a fair trial.

"This integrity is in the most danger of being compromised when the process is contaminated by outside influences," the attorneys wrote. "Given what took place in the last trial and the propensity for history to repeat itself, it is certainly beyond legitimate dispute that the threat to the integrity of the retrial is severe."

Prosecutors have not yet filed a response.

22 Photos

The motion comes on the heels of several others filed recently. One seeks to have the retrial moved out of the Phoenix metropolitan area because of excessive publicity and to prohibit live television coverage. Another motion filed last month seeks to have the judge compel all jurors eventually seated in the second trial to reveal their Twitter user names so Arias' lawyers can monitor their accounts to be sure they're not communicating about the case.

Under Arizona law, while Arias' murder conviction stands, prosecutors have the option of pursuing a second penalty phase with a new jury in an effort to get a death sentence. If the second jury fails to reach a verdict, the death penalty would be removed as an option, and the judge would sentence Arias to ether spend her entire life behind bars or be eligible for release after 25 years.

Arias, 33, admitted she killed Alexander, but claimed it was self-defense after he attacked her. Prosecutors argued it was premeditated murder carried out in a jealous rage after the victim wanted to end their affair and planned a trip to Mexico with another woman.

View the original article here

Jodi Arias' attorneys want 2nd jury sequestered

PHOENIX Jodi Arias' lawyers are asking a judge to sequester the jury in her second trial to shield the panel from the intense publicity that enveloped her first trial, which ended with a murder conviction but without a sentence.

Arias was convicted of first-degree murder May 8 in the 2008 stabbing and shooting death of boyfriend Travis Alexander in his suburban Phoenix home. The same jury failed to reach a decision on whether she should get the death penalty, setting the stage for a second penalty phase.

While the judge has yet to set a new trial date, Arias' attorneys filed a motion this week seeking to have the new panel sequestered "to ensure that the jury is not exposed to community and/or media influence."

Play Video

The motion filed Thursday cites thousands of television news shows and newspaper articles about Arias throughout her roughly five-month trial, as well as a recent Lifetime movie about the case that attorneys said attracted 3.1 million viewers.

Arias' lawyers claim the same intense publicity will no doubt come with a second penalty phase and will hinder her ability to get a fair trial.

"This integrity is in the most danger of being compromised when the process is contaminated by outside influences," the attorneys wrote. "Given what took place in the last trial and the propensity for history to repeat itself, it is certainly beyond legitimate dispute that the threat to the integrity of the retrial is severe."

Prosecutors have not yet filed a response.

22 Photos

The motion comes on the heels of several others filed recently. One seeks to have the retrial moved out of the Phoenix metropolitan area because of excessive publicity and to prohibit live television coverage. Another motion filed last month seeks to have the judge compel all jurors eventually seated in the second trial to reveal their Twitter user names so Arias' lawyers can monitor their accounts to be sure they're not communicating about the case.

Under Arizona law, while Arias' murder conviction stands, prosecutors have the option of pursuing a second penalty phase with a new jury in an effort to get a death sentence. If the second jury fails to reach a verdict, the death penalty would be removed as an option, and the judge would sentence Arias to ether spend her entire life behind bars or be eligible for release after 25 years.

Arias, 33, admitted she killed Alexander, but claimed it was self-defense after he attacked her. Prosecutors argued it was premeditated murder carried out in a jealous rage after the victim wanted to end their affair and planned a trip to Mexico with another woman.

View the original article here