By Catherine McKnight and Antoinnette Borbon
On Friday, January 18, 2013, the further jury trial for People v. Sonne continued. Thaddeus Sonne is being charged on a count of rape by force, pertaining to an incident that occurred in downtown Davis on the night of August 16, 2012.
Deputy Public Defender Dan Hutchinson presented a case that raises more questions about whether a jury can reasonably come to a verdict that this was rape by force, or if this really was a consensual matter between two intoxicated young adults.
The defense investigator on the case, Shanna Bly, contacted a young female who is said to have had a prior sexual relationship and friendship with Mr. Sonne. The female, whose name will not be released, currently lives in Massachusetts and had moved there this past summer to attend veterinary school.
The defense flew her from Massachusetts on the evening of January 17 so that she could give witness testimony in court the following afternoon on Mr. Sonne’s behalf. During her testimony, she claimed to have met Mr. Sonne at the Davis gym where he had been working in January of 2011, and that they had begun a sexual relationship around April of 2012.
Hutchinson’s strategy was to cut to the chase about exactly why this young woman was here to testify – and to make it clear for the jury.
He immediately asked her if there had ever been a position in their sexual experience pertaining to their arms. She admitted to her arms being held above her head during the three times she had sexual relations with the defendant, and that it was indeed consensual. She even admits to her initiating the position every time and that she never felt as if her arms were being pinned down to where she could not relieve herself of the position.
Hutchinson clarified with the witness that she had gotten to know the defendant well, through not only their sexual relationship but through an honest friendship, as well.
He ended his direct examination by asking her, “Based on your experience, is he the type of person to rape someone?” She responded, “No, I was completely surprised to hear about the situation he was in.” She had agreed to fly to California to testify because she wanted to help Mr. Sonne and defend him to the best of her ability.
On cross-examination, Deputy District Attorney Amanda Zambor focused on a more personal narrative of the witness’s sexual relationship with the defendant. She questioned the witness about the first, second and third times they had had sex, in detail. The young woman admitted to waiting to have sex with the defendant until she grew more comfortable with him and that she did not want just to jump into such a relationship. Zambor questioned her about the location of their sexual encounters, to find that each time had happened at Mr. Sonne’s apartment in Davis.
Zambor asked her about the positions, and the witness said they usually did not start with her arms above her head but that it was just something that happened naturally. She repeated that she could still move out of the position if she had wanted and that she never felt out of control.
During all three times, the witness claimed to have never said “no” or “stop.” Zambor finished her cross-examination by asking, “If you heard he said saying ‘no’ was more of a dare in regards to sex, would that change your opinion of him?” The witness says, “No, knowing Thaddeus he was probably joking.”
On the defense’s part, this testimony was brought to the stand to perhaps show the nature of Thaddeus Sonne in a different light, and raise questions about whether or not the defendant is indeed capable of committing the crime of rape by force.
After the witness’s testimony, the court heard testimony in the afternoon from another witness for the prosecution – Detective Ariel Pineda from the Davis Police Department. The videotaped interrogation of the defendant was shown to the jury, and was quite difficult to watch. Mr. Sonne was visibly in shock and disbelief. He was also clearly still intoxicated.
When on the witness stand, Public Defender Dan Hutchinson asked the detective why he did not listen to the defendant once he had requested an attorney, before giving his statement. Detective Pineda stated that he only heard a mention of his request through the other officers who arrived and took the initial report.
In the video, Mr. Sonne then told the detective that he and the alleged “victim” were merely having consensual sex by the building outside the train station. He stated that he was really drunk, as was the alleged victim, and it was she who led him outdoors and initiated the act.
Mr. Sonne had blood on his fingers but police never took photos. Hutchinson proceeded to ask Detective Pineda why he did not take a photograph and he stated, “I figured they would do all of that at the assault center in Sacramento.” Mr. Hutchinson stated that this would have had a huge impact on the legitimacy of the defendant’s story. He then asserted, “This may have been an important piece of evidence.” It did not appear to have moved the detective in the slightest.
It did seem clear, from the video, that the Detective Pineda had certainly been trying to make the defendant admit to something he did not do. He kept repeating to the defendant, “Just be honest, you told me you were going to be honest.” However, Mr. Sonne stuck to his assertion of innocence. Mr. Hutchinson then asked the detective when it was that he had interviewed the alleged victim and he stated, “Not until 11:55 a.m., the next morning.”
In reading the transcripts of said interview, Mr. Hutchinson asked why there were spots on the recording where it seems as if Detective Pineda took the initiative to shut the recording off. Detective Pineda had no real reason or answer in clarification.
The defense then read a part of the transcript where the girl said, “I don’t think I want to purs…” and then the recording was shut off. This, of course, may lead to questions of legitimacy on behalf of the Police Department and whether or not the jury is being fed reliable testimonies.
This was the last witness testimony to be heard until the further jury trial resumes on the 28th of January.
The article says:
> Thaddeus Sonne is being charged on a
> count of rape by force
I could never understand why if we decide to keep the woman’s name in sexual assault cases private that we don’t also do this for the man’s name (at least until a jury finds him guilty).
A while back I read that Dr. William Kennedy Smith (who was never convicted of any kind of sexual assault) was thinking about running for elected office so his family took a poll and 90% of Democrats that recognized his name referred to him as “the rapist”…
It’s an interesting question. We had a small discussion of that last night at our meeting. My view is that the defendant is listed on the court records, so at this point, it seems a bit futile. But it’s an issue I will think about more in the future.
At the risk of losing some of my hard won liberal credentials on this post, and speaking as an individual who because of my profession has a very direct interest in protecting women from rape, I feel that the disclosure of the man’s name, but not the woman’s is only one of the discriminatory practices with regard to rape.
Another is with regard to capability. We are in effect expecting the man to achieve a degree of control that is quite likely not compatible with the degree of alcohol he has consumed. If we determine ( as we should) that an inebriated woman is not capable of giving consent, how do we then expect that the man will be able to use a higher order of reasoning and control at the same degree of inebriation ?
Also, when is “no” effective and when is it “definitive” ? If the woman indicates “yes” until after penetration, but then says “no” either because she changes her mind “too late” or in response to disruption, such as the police arriving, what is the man’s culpability in these instances ? “No, of course, does always mean “no” but we should not forget the temporal importance of when it is spoken. I do not know the answers to these questions. I am only posing them because, as with most issues, I do not believe this is quite as straight forward as some would like to portray it. Given that this has the potential for ruining many lives, it is very important that we address these issues in a fair manner.
As always, I view this from a preventative perspective. The best way for young men and women to protect themselves from either the reality of rape, or the false accusation of rape, is to not drink to the point where their inhibitions are lowered beyond their control. Every year young people face the life threatening and life devastating impacts of irresponsible alcohol consumption. It is my sincere hope that there is a just outcome perhaps with some form of restorative justice if this young man is convicted and my sincere hope that we as a community will work to address the underlying issues and not just seek punishment for this particular instance.
medwoman wrote:
> At the risk of losing some of my hard won liberal
> credentials on this post
This post warms my heart and every time I hear someone say that they are using logic to move away from the “official” “liberal and/or Democrat” position or “official” “conservative and/or Republican” position I think that we might actually have a chance at solving problems and/or making the country a better place. As long as we have one side yelling “the woman is never lying” and the other side yelling “the man is never lying” we will never really solve our problems.
A few years back a friend that is a college professor had a (good looking) woman (from a wealthy family) that was failing his class come in to talk to him in his office. She told him that if he did not promise to give her an “A” in the class she would rip off her shirt and bra and run down the hall yelling rape… He said that he was in shock and for some reason responded “how about a “B”… She said OK and he gave her a “B” even though she deserved an “F” since he knew that many people would not believe him and a rape “accusation” would really hurt his career path in the academic world…
SOD
“She told him that if he did not promise to give her an “A” in the class she would rip off her shirt and bra and run down the hall yelling rape… He said that he was in shock and for some reason responded “how about a “B”… She said OK and he gave her a “B” even though she deserved an “F” since he knew that many people would not believe him and a rape “accusation” would really hurt his career path in the academic world…”
I can’t imagine what one could do if ever put in that position.
I appreciate your narrative here, liberal neighbor. Too often what I read in comments or editorials is the writers agenda focused through the lens of a particular case, in which the agenda may or may not apply to the details. Your questions are exactly what makes these issues so sticky, and individual to the case. I have no sympathy at all to drunk driving, because the choice is made with the first drink and 100% in the power of the individual, and today there is no lack of societal knowledge on the subject. When two intoxicated individuals meet and choose to go down the road of doing what they may not do sober, the lines of cause, effect, responsibility and blame are blurred.
Every Thursday night in Davis, hundreds trek downtown to allow themselves to have a drink to get past their inhibitions to do what they want to do at some level but would not do sober, and in doing so may stray far past letting down inhibitions into going far beyond their personal morals, possibly repeating the cycle to forget what they did the week before. The unwise location of ‘in public outside by the train station’ allowed this one instance to be spotted, but the same grey scenario repeats many times behind closed doors every ‘Little Friday’, as it has always been.
Med Woman, thank you for your usual clear thinking and fair mind. Every case is different and fairness should always prevail, not stereotypes or presumptions. Fairness is fortunately not a liberal or conservative concept, just a correct one. I hope it is applied in this case and I wish it were applied in all cases.
So far from what I’ve read in both articles I could never convict Mr. Sonne of rape.
Two kids drunk out of their minds, and now their lives changed forever. Too bad.
If she was so drunk going into that last bar, why was she served? Same for him. I dont know the rules about this, but I remember reading some drunk driving accident cases where the bars were successfully sued for serving obviously drunk patrons who came in the doors that way, and left in worse shape then drove.
About that threft of rape to get a B: In law school back east, one of my study group partners was a female grad of a UC school, and she was very, very ambitious. Made no bones about it. Well, she got an A+ in Torts Class, and she told me it was from screwing the male, married professor. He probably found one student per class for it.
“Two kids drunk out of their minds, and now their lives changed forever. Too bad. “
A few of us after MLK Day and the main speaker’s talk about a restorative justice approach noted that there was a better way to have handled this. More on that later.
Some of my thinking on this issue goes back to the story of one of my study partners during my pre med days. He and a girl of interest had had, according to his telling, too much to drink at a party and proceeded to drink a bit too much more at her apartment. They then proceeded to have sexual relations that to his interpretation were entirely consensual until a few days later when he was picked up and accused of rape. Of course, one does not know exactly what occurred, and perhaps due to the amnesiac effects of alcohol, perhaps the participants did not know exactly what occurred either. The reason that I am writing this is because, for whatever reason, most likely lack of evidence, the case was dropped, my friend’s life was not ruined ( he is now a happily married, successful radiologist ) who developed a much wiser approach to living following this harrowing experience. What he had learned was to avoid the situation in the first place and was very careful regarding his alcohol consumption and very free in discussing this with others whom he perceived as at risk due to their behaviors.
I am very interested in hearing more about the restorative justice approach to these situations and how such an approach could be incorporated into our courts and our educational system.
medwoman wrote:
> What he had learned was to avoid the situation
> in the first place…
My Dad always told me to avoid being alone with woman and children since if a woman or child say you did something inappropriate people tend to believe the women and children…
Last year after the Herm Cain mistress story broke I heard a reporter (who seemed to be joking around) say to Ron Paul “We have never heard anyone ever accuse you of any kind of inappropriate relationship”. Ron looked the guy straight in the eye and said “that is because since I got married XX years ago I have not been alone with any woman other than my wife”.
The reporter then seemed to think that Ron Paul was joking and asked a follow up question and I forget exactly what he said, but he said that he was very serious and even mentioned that if he is in an elevator alone and a woman gets in he will get out and wait for the next elevator.
We need more parents who don’t just tell their kids not to drink too much and have sex by the railroad tracks with people they meet in bars but to really point out the down sides of drinking so much and hooking up with people that think having drunk wild (usually unprotected) sex outside bars is a good idea are usually a little crazy and will add a lot of unnecessary drama to your life.
@ Medwoman…love your responses! Very well-written, educated thoughts/responses. I thank you…
Kindly, Antoinnette
I think this kind of thing happens a lot, all over this college town, but most of the time is not reported. Either both the participants go “what the heck did we do last night?” and move on, or there are no witnesses, and unless it was really, really awful and violent, nothing is reported out of fear or shame.
It’s pretty easy to blame the victims, but we should not default to blaming the young woman in the instant case. NO means NO means NO. Others heard her say it.
I want to stress that none of us were there, most of us are not even in that courtroom for the trial, and we should trust the jury to get it right.
Thanks for the useful exchange here. A few people have made reference to the issue of alcohol use in this case. I think this merits more discussion. When reading the original article on this case (not this one) I was absolutely stunned by the amount of alcohol the young woman testified to have consumed that day. I could not believe she was still on her feet and I could not believe a bartender in any local establishment would continue to serve her. I do not lead a sheltered life but I just could not believe what I was reading.
Is this something we can talk about? Is this level of alcohol consumption just a “personal choice” issue? What does this level of consumption, and the attendant impairment that comes with it, suggest about our tolerance for destructive behavior? I am troubled by this and a bit upset that even after a known history of deaths due to alcohol “poisoning” in this town we apparently continue to see this behavior as merely a “commercial transaction.”
I think this is a very important topic for community discussion. I have strong feelings about this as a doctor who has seen a great deal of the adverse consequences of the abusive use of alcohol whether it is due to addiction or binge drinking. I see this as a public health issue and I see us failing abysmally in impressing upon our youth the dangers of alcohol abuse. Binge drinking is particularly dangerous due to its well known associations with:
1) death from alcohol poisoning
2) accidental injury through falls, risk taking behaviors, automobile injury, gun related accidents
3) intentional injury from fights and domestic or date violence
4) transmission of sexually transmitted diseases
5) unintended pregnancy
6) fetal alcohol syndrome which is closely linked to binge drinking
and these are just the specific examples which spring to mind immediately for me since I have seen them all. This list is purely medical and so of course does not even begin to consider the broader social problems associated with poorer academic performance and inadequate skills preparation for moving on post the college years or the long term adverse medical consequences.
A quick Goole search did indicate that it is illegal for a bartender to continue to sell drinks to the obviously inebriated customer. However, I think that there may be too loose an interpretation standard, and there is doubtless the inability of the police to effect adequate enforcement.
I have spoken to a few people who know Mr. Sonne and they believe he is innocent, and the incident was consensual. Re: medwoman’s comments & Robb Davis’ comments: the Davis police do not pursue alcohol related crimes nearly as agressively as pot. When my children were in high school, there were several wealthy families who allowed their underaged children to have kegger parties. I always told my kids that they could call me if they were ever drunk, just don’t drive or get in a car with anyone who had been drinking. I picked up my child & several friends at a home where the (very wealthy) father was home during the kegger party. There are many parents in Davis who think it is okay for their underaged kids to consume alcohol and the police do not prosecute them for providing alcohol to a minor. But if pot were involved, the police would not only arrest the parents, they would probably call CPS. There is such a double standard in Davis. It’s sickening. The police could easily monitor the bars in Davis re: serving to someone who is intoxicated. They choose not to. But they will harrass anyone who has pot, even if the person has a legitimate medical prescription. We have had alcohol poisoning deaths in Davis. How many people have died from overdosing on pot?
“There are many parents in Davis who think it is okay for their underaged kids to consume alcohol and the police do not prosecute them for providing alcohol to a minor.”
That’s B.S.
rusty49
Which part of the statement above do you believe is B.S ?
I cannot speak to the second half of the statement, but I can attest to the fact that there have been in Davis within the past 5 years when my children were still attending schools here a number of parents who did indeed knowingly allow their children to host party’s where alcohol was served. My son in particular parted company with some of his friends over the issue of alcohol at partys. So at least the first clause is accurate. None of these people were ever prosecuted, however, this may be because these parties never came to the attention of the police.
I just had a thought about prevention that is very simple and straight forward. Maybe someone would know if something like this has ever been tried or suggested. Since noninvasive measurement of alcohol levels via breathalyzer is very straight forward, why not have breathalyzers in bars ? Very easy then to check to see if it is safe to serve that next drink ! Since a business owner has the responsibility to decline service to anyone who is inebriated, why not take out the guess work ?
Yes, when I heard her testimony on the stand I could not believe how she made it to catch a bus to and from her friends? and it was not over. She stated once she was downtown, drank even more, 3 to 4 more hard alcohol drinks. Given her weight, I am just grateful she survived to tell anything..my son was poisoned with a whole lot less once, nearly died and he weighed 254 pounds at the time. I am not quite sure this can be possible? Amazing to me how she could have drank that much and still be alive with a body weight of 120 pounds. I am also concerned about why any bartender allowed her more? I am inclined to feel these bars should be monitered more closely so this can never happen again. We have already lost enough kids from alcohol poisoning. I just wonder how many more cases we will listen to before this is stopped?
I also would like to reiterate the defendant stating in his interrogation on the night in question, rather morning, that the only time the alleged victim said the word “no,” was when the officer flashed his light on them while in the act. He stated she never made any other motion to stop or said it any other time. But, again, not making any judgment, it is up to the jurors, just re-stating the facts I heard in testimony so far.
Medwoman
“I cannot speak to the second half of the statement,”
And that’s the part that I say is B.S. If cops come upon a party where liquer is being served to minors they will bust them everytime. The cops can’t take a chance that later one of the kids is found overly sick or hurt during their transportation home because cops know the dire consequences they would face.
I love medwoman’s suggestion. Isn’t there a simple paper strip now used by the police to determine alcohol blood level? Or is that paper strip only used on minors? (To determine if there is any alcohol whatsoever in their system, for the proverbial “baby d.u.i. test”?) It seems so simple and yes, it would turn bartenders into law enforcement, but if it saved one life, would it be worth the hassle?