Judge Sentences Vukodinovich to 14 Years in Prison For Sexual Relations with Mentally Deficient Woman

Yolo-Count-Court-Room-600

by Dan Williams

Yolo County Judge Stephen Mock sentenced Thomas Vukodinovich on Thursday to 14 years in prison for the rape of and inappropriate sexual contact with a mentally deficient person.  Given the age of the defendant, there is a good possibility that this will represent a life sentence.

Thomas Vukodinovich, an elderly sufferer of Asperger’s syndrome who, while under the employ of Yolo Employment Services, or YES, had sexual relations with a developmentally disabled client of the company. The jury had to decide essentially if the victim was able to consent due to her lack of intellectual capacity. They convicted Mr. Vukodinovich on 11 counts of sexual misconduct, including rape and attempted rape.

Several supporters of the victim filed into the courtroom as the defendant sat stoically in his wheelchair.

The judge began the usual proceedings, a list of the charges and the verdicts, posed the usual questions, and made sure the defendant understood it all. But then things took a turn for the unusual. Mr. Vukodinovich started to speak on his own behalf, with no real indication from his lawyer, Lisa Lance, if this was planned, or if it reflected the unexpected death throes of a man condemned. “None of this would have happened if [the victim] had never put her hand down my pants!” The well-dressed man behind me muttered under his breath, “Jesus Christ.”

The defendant went on: For years, he said, he was able to hold the victim off. He had thought, he said, that he had finally gotten her to stop. He related that she started again in 2011. “I knew then that if I told anybody, I was done.” There were times, at that point, that he would look back in the van and she would be on the floor naked, “waiting for me to do something,” he stated. His voice was soft at this point. “I don’t know, I just gave up I guess.” The man behind me interjected again, this time with an unduly loud scoff.

Mr. Vukodinovich professed that everything he said in his videotaped interview was just to assuage the police. “I would recant it all if I could!” he exclaimed, clearly frustrated. “Everything she said she said to me, I said to her!” He said he’s the one who told her that things needed to stop, and many times.

He switched subjects. “I didn’t stop it because, because I was comfortable with these people.” His voice soft again, his head bowed, “She was 50 going on 5 and I was 70 going on 7, we were both minors as far as I’m concerned.” He then went on to speculate for the victim: “She wanted to be a woman, with a husband,” he said, and then said that one day her family would realize that fact. He continued, accusing the family of the victim, indirectly, of coaching the victim about what to say to the police, and essentially how to successfully “call rape.” “Someday,” he said, “she will recant the whole thing.” He ended in tears, “I have nothing more to say.”

The judge commented on the monologue, saying that, while misguided, it was heartfelt. Then the judge went on to state that, because the charge of rape carries the longest sentence, it will be the principal charge. This clearly ruffled the defendant’s feathers.

“That charge is a phony!” Mr. Vukodinovich exclaimed. “I didn’t put my tongue in her vagina, [the investigator] did!” He then went on, “All my life, I thought the police were my friends.” He explained, fighting back tears, that now he knows they were just trying to get him on something.

The judge piped in, reminding him that he was charged with a crime, presented his evidence, and was convicted by a jury of his peers. Then the judge stated, “…and based on the evidence… I’m inclined to agree with them!”

This put an end to Mr. Vukodinovich’s interjections.

Most guilty counts in this case carry consecutive sentences, the judge explained. He then began listing the mitigating and aggravating circumstances.

He took advantage of a position of trust, he did so over a long period of time, and there was a large disparity in intellect between the defendant and the victim. On the other hand, the defendant is elderly, ostensibly unable to offend again, has no criminal record, admitted wrongdoing, and suffers from Asperger’s syndrome. This explains why he felt comfortable with his clients, but, as the judge said, “your [illness] didn’t compel you to commit this crime.

After all counts were added up, Mr. Vukodinovich will serve a sentence of 14 years in prison. His public defender, Lisa Lance, has gone on court record saying they will appeal the sentence.

Author

  • Vanguard Court Watch Interns

    The Vanguard Court Watch operates in Yolo, Sacramento and Sacramento Counties with a mission to monitor and report on court cases. Anyone interested in interning at the Courthouse or volunteering to monitor cases should contact the Vanguard at info(at)davisvanguard(dot)org - please email info(at)davisvanguard(dot)org if you find inaccuracies in this report.

    View all posts

Categories:

Court Watch

7 comments

  1. is this guy really threat enough to the community that he needs to live out his life in custody, at a cost of $50K per year to the state taxpayers?

  2. My view is his side of the story was simply that (A) he was misled by investigators into falsely confessing and (B) questioning whether the woman was not competent to consent to having sexual relations.

  3. What I cannot help but wonder is who was really harmed here and in what way. Now please, do not think that I am making excuses for rapists. I probably have more experience with and less compassion for rapists than anyone here who is not with the police. However, this situation with the failure to consider that things might have changed significantly in her mental capacity since she was assessed at age 14 and to not reassess this situation in a meaningful way is a failure of our justice system.

  4. This was a sad story…it appeared more like to disabled people doing something they felt very normal and was turned into the most hidious thing by our system.

    Observing this trial, there was no evidence of a rape, non clear enough to even remotely call it that..and as for the age of the disabled woman…once again, why in the world the judge would not allow another assessment, a recent one, is beyond me.

    I just wonder if this had happened with different circumstances; i. e. a relationship via a different setting, if there would have been charges. Yes, I do believe he deserved to be punished for work misconduct, but that would about sum it up. As for the other charges..they are straight out of this world and to me, were not proven without a reasobable doubt.

    I hope he get an appeal…and to answer the question, “does this qualify as a person who we should spend another 50,000 on to keep behind bars?” absolutely NOT…..absolutely NOT…we have so greater a fish to fry than this….

    Lisa Lance did a fantastic job no matter what…beings so soft spoken most of the time in court, she shined when it was time to stand up and defend an innocent man of the sex charges. I sat in awe over the power she held in that courtroom with her defense. My hat is off to her…:-)Win or lose…

    It is interesting how some cases can turn out fair and others so awfully wrong/unfair. But it is what it is, I suppose…

    Great article Dan….:-)

Leave a Comment