Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Add Reply
Pumpkin Seed; Another Man's DNA. "Rape" accuser lied.
Topic Started: Feb 21 2009, 04:13 PM (581 Views)
Tidbits

This is oral argument from the Eighth Circuit. 2/10/9.

Accuser said "rape." And said rapist ejaculated. And said she did not have sex with anyone else. Grand Jury asked and was told "DNA was present, and sent for testing." Tests later showed it was not the defendant's DNA. It was another man. Her explanation for her motive to lie was that it was a married man (man #2), but it was another, (man #3).

Evidence withheld from jury to "protect the victim's reputation."

This is the appeal after conviction.

And yes, this is the Pumpkin Seed case. Really. 08-2399

ftp://8cc-www.ca8.uscourts.gov/OAaudio/2009/2/082399.mp3


Edited by Tidbits, Feb 21 2009, 04:13 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tidbits

http://www.rapidcityjournal.com/articles/2008/05/22/news/local/doc4834719f08d15244413952.prt

Quote:
 
Wounded Knee rapist sentenced to nearly 17 years

By Heidi Bell Gease, Journal staff

A man convicted of rape continued Wednesday to deny the charges against him, even as a federal judge sentenced him to spend nearly 17 years in prison.

Jason Pumpkin Seed, 20, Wounded Knee, was convicted of aggravated sexual abuse after a jury trial here in March. On Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Andrew Bogue ordered Pumpkin Seed to 200 months in federal custody. Pumpkin Seed will spend the rest of his life under federal supervision.

"I just want to say that it's kind of hard for me to go through this," Pumpkin Seed told Bogue. "I didn't do what (the victim) said I did."

But the jury believed otherwise, after hearing testimony from the victim, three boys who prosecutors say interrupted the rape, and Pumpkin Seed himself. Law enforcement officers and medical personnel also testified.

Pumpkin Seed claimed that he and the victim were having "calm, consensual" foreplay when the boys showed up. But Assistant U.S. Attorney Carolyn Olson said his story didn't coincide with testimony about the victim's injuries, grass-stained clothing and disheveled state after the incident, or with the boys' testimony about what they observed.

Olson asked Bogue to sentence Pumpkin Seed to 210 months for the rape, which happened Sept. 29, 2006, outside a home in Wounded Knee.

"This was a violent rape. It caused much trauma to the victim" including the fact that she continues to live in the small community where the assault happened, Olson said. "To me there's a lack of remorse."

Defense attorney George Grassby asked for a sentence of 188 months, noting that Pumpkin Seed has no prior criminal history.

"We are remorseful for the trouble that fateful night has caused," he said.

Previously, Grassby told Bogue that evidence that the victim lied to authorities -- which Grassby was not allowed to present to the jury -- may have led to a different verdict.

As part of the sentence, Bogue ordered that Pumpkin Seed be allowed to enter a 500-hour drug- and alcohol-treatment program while in prison.

"That's what got him into trouble in the first place, I think," he said.

Both sides are allowed to appeal the sentence.



Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Baldo
Member Avatar

DNA testing can't be, I will use this and exclude that. Unfortunately we saw that in the Duke Frame/Hoax.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
chatham
Member Avatar

Tidbits
Feb 21 2009, 04:13 PM
This is oral argument from the Eighth Circuit. 2/10/9.

Accuser said "rape." And said rapist ejaculated. And said she did not have sex with anyone else. Grand Jury asked and was told "DNA was present, and sent for testing." Tests later showed it was not the defendant's DNA. It was another man. Her explanation for her motive to lie was that it was a married man (man #2), but it was another, (man #3).

Evidence withheld from jury to "protect the victim's reputation."

This is the appeal after conviction.

And yes, this is the Pumpkin Seed case. Really. 08-2399

ftp://8cc-www.ca8.uscourts.gov/OAaudio/2009/2/082399.mp3


I am sure I am missing something here. When a victim lies, why does their reputation need to be protected?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
sdsgo

Thanks for the tape Tidbits.
Edited by sdsgo, Feb 21 2009, 11:19 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Quasimodo

Quote:
 
Grand Jury asked and was told "DNA was present,


I wonder if the Grand Jury actually asking a question (and about DNA yet) is part of the "Duke" effect?

Are Grand Jurors now more aware of their responsibilities and less willing to accept at face value whatever "facts" are told them about a case by prosecutors?

If so, maybe that's one positive thing to come out of all this.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jewelcove

Quote:
 
Evidence withheld from jury to "protect the victim's reputation."


Excuse me but what about the reputation of the guy that was convicted of a crime he didn't commit! (A crime that's considered VERY BAD.) What about his loss of freedom. His loss of faith in the justice system?

What about Lying to the police! Did she lie on the witness stand too?
Edited by jewelcove, Feb 22 2009, 11:02 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
« Previous Topic · DUKE LACROSSE - Liestoppers · Next Topic »
Add Reply