Derek Rodriguez-Contreras, the former University of Virginia graduate student charged with raping two schoolmates in separate off-Grounds incidents last year, will see his first case go to court early in the new year.
His first trial was postponed after the prosecutor made an announcement in Charlottesville Circuit Court on Dec. 5, less than a week before that trial was slated to begin.
"The commonwealth has come into some new information," said prosecutor Susan Baumgartner, as she requested the court push back the trial’s original start date, which had been this past Wednesday.
The lawyer for the 22-year-old Rodriguez-Contreras objected to the delay.
"My client wants to have his day in court," said Anthony Martin. "At this point, we’re not willing to waive speedy trial."
The Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees such a right, which in this case resulted in a Jan. 21 deadline for the case.
That deadline set off a flurry of schedule-checking in the courtroom Dec. 5 as both legal teams flipped through their calendars to find a date amenable to the presiding judge, Claude Worrell. Eventually, after several dates were proposed and rejected, the two sides settled on a two-day trial to take place on Jan. 6 and 7.
The other local trial, based in Albemarle County Circuit Court, is slated to begin one week later, on Jan. 13.
Rodriguez-Contreras, watching on a video feed from Albemarle-Charlottesville Regional Jail, seemed attentive to the most recent proceedings without registering any obvious emotion. A first-generation student hailing from the Bronx borough of New York City and, until recently, pursuing a master’s degree at UVa’s competitive McIntire School of Commerce, Rodriguez-Contreras has indicated through court filings that he considered both incidents consensual.
In the city case, he is alleged to have persisted over various vocalized refusals to pursue sexual activity with another student outside his West Main Street apartment.
The Charlottesville Commonwealth’s Attorney’s Office declared a conflict which allowed Baumgartner, who serves as an Albemarle County assistant commonwealth’s attorney, to be named the special prosecutor in the city case.
One week before the hearing postponing the city trial, the judge oversaw another pretrial hearing in that case. On Nov. 26, Worrell heard that the prosecutor intended to discuss the reasons why the alleged victim waited nine months to report an attack.
"She should be allowed to give an honest answer," said Baumgartner, "which is she came forward after learning of the charges in Albemarle and New York" — the last location the setting of a third sexual assault accusation lodged against Rodriguez-Contreras that was later dismissed.
The lawyer for Rodriguez-Contreras bristled at the notion of mentioning his client’s other cases.
"I can’t think of anything more prejudicial than a jury hearing from another accuser in another case," said Martin. "The other accuser’s testimony is no evidence of my client’s intent."
However, Baumgartner sought the court’s permission to let the jury hear statements that Rodriguez-Contreras allegedly made in the Albemarle County case. In that case, Rodriguez-Contreras is accused of raping and biting another schoolmate.
"Very clear statements on his state of mind," said Baumgartner. "His opinions on what ‘I don’t want to have sex with you’ might really mean."
She said the testimony from other women about "specific acts" would rebut Rodriguez-Contreras’ claims of consensual sex.
Baumgartner got the court to seal her motions, and she declined to discuss them after the motions hearing. Martin blasted what he termed a "blanket automatic trigger of these other accusers being able to testify."
The judge gave no indication about which way he would rule, although he did mention that "bad acts" can be admissible under certain circumstances and that such witnesses can be cross-examined by the defense.
"The court is going to take all of the motions under advisement," Worrell said. "The court may certainly limit some or all of that testimony, but I just don’t know what that testimony might be."
As the motions hearing was concluding, Baumgartner revealed that she possessed another trove of testimony, this time in a third case of sexual assault, this one at a New York City bar. That case, involving less serious allegations, was dismissed earlier this year.
"Does the court wish to see his New York interview now?" Baumgartner asked the judge.
"Maybe when I try the case," Worrell responded.
Source: www.dailyprogress.com
Be First to Comment