THREE SENTENCED TO SIX YEARS OF STATE PRISON FOR VIDEOTAPING GANG RAPE OF PASSED OUT 16-YEAR-OLD GIRL

 

OCDASeal

Orange County District Attorney
Press Release


Tony Rackauckas, District Attorney
401 Civic Center Drive West
Santa Ana, CA 92701

For Immediate Release
March 10, 2006
Contact:Susan Kang Schroeder
Deputy District Attorney
(714) 347-8408 Office
(714) 292-2718 Cell

THREE SENTENCED TO SIX YEARS OF STATE PRISON FOR VIDEOTAPING GANG RAPE OF PASSED OUT 16-YEAR-OLD GIRL

SANTA ANA – All three men convicted of a videotaped gang rape of a 16-year-old unconscious girl were sentenced today to six years in state prison.  They will have to register as sex offenders for the rest of their lives.  They must also pay fines, restitution and stay away from Jane Doe and her family.  Judge Francisco Briseño found that the defendants were slow to express their remorse for the crime.  Furthermore, he stated that any personal remorse to Jane Doe guarded and out weighed by personal self pity.  The Judge found each of the defendants equally culpable.  Regarding Jane Doe, Judge Briseño stated, “. . . coming back for the second trial was the bravest thing I have ever seen.”  Judge Briseño is the most senior jurist on the Orange County Bench.

Gregory Scott Haidl, 20, Corona del Mar, had been previously convicted of six counts of sexual penetration of a person unable to resist due to intoxication by using a finger, Snapple bottle, juice can, cigarette and a pool cue.  He could have received up to 18 years in state prison.

Kyle Joseph Nachreiner, 21, Rancho Cucamonga, had been previously convicted of four counts of sexual penetration of a person unable to resist due to intoxication by using a Snapple bottle, juice can, and a pool cue.  He could have received up to 14 years in state prison. 

Keith James Spann, 21, Rancho Cucamonga, had been previously convicted of five counts of sexual penetration of a person unable to resist due to intoxication by using a finger, Snapple bottle, juice can, and a pool cue.  He could have received up to 16 years in state prison. 

STATEMENT BY DISTRICT ATTORNEY TONY RACKAUCKAS
Justice did not hinge on the number of years in state prison or the dollar amount in fines and restitution.  Reasonable minds may disagree on such things.  Justice was done today because these defendants will be punished in state prison and they will have to register as sex offenders for the rest of their natural lives. The public now knows who they are, what they did and where they live. 

This case captured our country’s attention because of the defense’s relentless and ruthless win-at-all costs actions before, during and after trial.  This case stood for whether we would hold men responsible for having sex with a woman who was unable to say “no.”  This case stood for whether a woman had a right to control her body regardless of any past sexual history.  The answer given today was a resounding “yes.” No matter whom they are, who they know, and what they have, all defendants are equal under the law.
This family, this Jane Doe, did not ask to be placed in the spotlight.  They did not ask for the defense to put their reputation on display for public gossip, scrutiny and second guessing.  This young woman endured things a young 16-year-old should not endure.  I don’t know how many adult professionals could have endured the multiple days of the most personal and insulting cross examinations and arguments that were presented in this trial.  Jane Doe was so traumatized by what had happened during the first trial that she broke down in the parking lot at the second trial.  I am not sure where she found her resolve, her courage.  But Jane Doe wiped her tears and gathered herself and told her story from the witness box the best way she could.   And because she stood up to them, she stood up for everyone. 

The prison sentences, restitution – no amount of punishment or money will make her whole again.  Their lives are forever changed.   Judge Briseño made the right decision in sending these defendants to prison.  He gave them more consideration than they ever gave to Jane Doe. 
 
FACTS OF THE CASE
On July 5, 2002, three 17-year-old defendants asked a 16-year-old girl who lived in San Bernardino County to Haidl’s father’s lavish home in Corona del Mar.  Jane Doe considered the three as her friends and trusted them.  Soon after she arrived, she drank a beer and took one hit of marijuana that was offered by the defendants.  Nachreiner then gave Jane Doe a tall cup of “pine” tasting drink which she gulped down.  Jane Doe woke up the next day in front of Spann’s house with vomit in her hair and her bra

shoved down her urine stained jeans.  She had no memory of what had happened to her while she was at the Haidl residence after she drank the “pine” drink. 

Haidl and Nachreiner subsequently took the video they taped without Jane Doe’s knowledge or consent to another friend’s house and accidentally left it behind.  A group of teenagers found the tape and thought the girl on the tape was dead.  One of them turned the tape over to a neighbor who was a police officer. 

The images on the tape were disturbing.  The tape showed the three young men repeatedly sexually assaulting (in the vagina and anus) an unconscious Jane Doe with various foreign objects such as a Snapple bottle, an apple juice can, a lit cigarette, and both ends of a pool cue.  Spann had intercourse with Jane Doe as she laid asleep on the pool table.  They slapped and pinched her and made signs to each other that she was still out cold.  They continued for more than 40 minutes while making hand signs pretending they were gangsters, laughing, and mugging for the camera. 

The defense put on an unprecedented publicity campaign to smear Jane Doe’s name and made outrageous allegations that were never proven.  The defense’s media spokesperson even handed out Jane Doe’s private medical records to the members of the media.  Their actions were so egregious that the California Legislature enacted law that limited attorneys in what they could say in court or court documents as to a sexual assault victim’s past history. 

Unfortunately, the first jury could not reach a verdict. This meant that Jane Doe had to endure another round of brutal cross examinations lasting multiple days by three experi