We conclude that the trial court erroneously admitted testimony of uncharged, alleged prior sexual acts against persons other than the complainants of the underlying crimes... The remedy for these egregious errors is a new trial.
It is an abuse of judicial discretion to permit untested allegations of nothing more than bad behavior that destroys a defendant's character but sheds no light on their credibility as related to the criminal charges lodged against them.
Dissenting Judge Madeline Singas said that the majority was 'whitewashing the facts to conform to a he-said/she-said narrative'... She said that this continued a 'disturbing trend of overturning juries' guilty verdicts in cases involving sexual violence.'
The majority's determination perpetuates outdated notions of sexual violence and allows predators to escape accountability... 'The majority's determination perpetuates outdated notions of sexual violence and allows predators to escape accountability,' she argued.
[
add
]
[
|
|
...
]