Judge: No STD test for 2 convicted rapists
Judge: No STD test for 2 convicted rapists
Lisa Roose-Church, Livingston Daily 1:17 p.m. EDT July 8, 2016
(Photo: Livingston County Jail)
Two Pinckney Community High School students serving a jail sentence for raping a 15-year-old girl will not have to get tested for sexually transmitted diseases, a judge ruled Thursday.
Livingston County Prosecutor William Vailliencourt said his office would pursue further legal remedies of Judge Michael P. Hatty’s decision.
“The court granted the defendants the extraordinary benefit of (Holmes) Youthful Trainee (Act) status and then refused to require them to be tested to see if they placed the victim at risk for sexually transmitted diseases,” Vailliencourt said. “That makes no sense and is contrary to law. We will be pursuing this matter further to try to protect the victim.”
A message to the victim’s grandmother was not immediately returned.
The defendants, Jacob Glenn Houck, 17, and Nicklaus Haggerty Lefebvre, 18, were both sentenced in April to three years of probation with the first year in the Livingston County Jail for third-degree criminal sexual conduct. They were sentenced under HYTA, which means they will have no public criminal record if they successfully complete probation.
Authorities said Houck provided the 15-year-old teen girl with alcohol on school grounds before she returned to track practice, and that he and his co-defendants then picked up the drunken teen girl, took her to Houck’s home and sexually assaulted her.
Michigan law says anyone under age 16 cannot consent to sexual activity.
Assistant Prosecutor Daniel Rose asked the court to order both Houck and Lefebvre to undergo testing for sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV. He said state law allowed the Circuit Court to order it in absence of a District Court order at the victim's request, and that it should be completed "not later than 48 hours" after the felony information or indictment.
Defense attorney Rolland Sizemore, who represents Lefebvre, disagreed with Rose’s interpretation of the law. He said the law states that the District Court can order the testing if it finds “sexual penetration or exposure to a body fluid” occurred, but the District Court made no such order for testing.
Sizemore said the statute further notes the testing can be ordered if his client was indicted, which he was not.
“If there are vagaries in the statute, the court can look at the intention of the Legislature (and) … their intent is very expressly stated — either the District Court does it at bind over … or the Circuit Court can order it in an indictment situation; neither of those two things are here,” the defense attorney said. “Or, upon conviction, the Circuit Court has the authority … and that is not the situation here.
“It’s unfortunate it didn’t happen in District Court, but you can’t take a shoehorn and make language that doesn’t fit, make an illegal act legal," he added.
In making his ruling, Judge Michael P. Hatty said simply: The 48-hour window allowed under the law has passed.
“The court doesn’t have the authority to do what the prosecution wants,” the judge said.
http://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/2016/07/08/livingston-county/86844710/
Tags
Who is online
90 visitors
I thought that once someone was convicted, the conviction opened up the door to permit this type of testing....
But I can be forced to submit to a blood test if a cop thinks I was DUI? This doesn't make sense.