Update: We get
a deeper statement from the girlfriend.
Her actual name is in the original version of the story, but I won’t
include it. Via Roll Call:
The younger Moran’s
girlfriend, [censored], issued a statement in response to the media frenzy
Wednesday afternoon.
“This was an
accident that has been blown out of proportion,” [censored] said. “The statements
in the police report are inaccurate. Pat and I were arguing, one of my high
heels gave out, and I fell into the side of a trashcan. On impact, I fractured
my nose. False conclusions were made as a result. I hope our privacy will be
respected.”
Yeah, except... as
noted below, Pat Moran did plead
guilty. And it’s really hard to believe
the cops would be mistaken about Moran grabbing the back of her head and
slamming her into a trash cage. Also
please note that the Washington
City Paper has the police report and has posted it online. It adds what I suspected: that there were
more than one officer at the scene witnessing this. So why was it pled down, again? This deserves a little more digging.
And, by the way, a now-proven assault in a public place is not a matter of privacy. Just saying.
We resume the original post, as is, below the break.
---------------------------------------
Yes, I am back after a brief hiatus, and I want to talk about this breaking story about Patrick Moran, Congressman Jim Moran’s son, involved in beating up his girlfriend, because it raises a few interesting questions. Let’s start with the basic story from the AP:
Guilty plea for son of U.S. Rep.
Moran in assault case
By Keith L. Alexander and Ben
Pershing, Wednesday, December 12, 2:51 PM
The son of U.S. Rep.
James P. Moran pleaded guilty Wednesday to an assault on his girlfriend in
front of a Northwest D.C. nightspot on Dec. 1.
Patrick B. Moran,
23, of Arlington, pleaded guilty to one count of simple assault, a
misdeameanor. D.C. Superior Court Magistrate Judge Frederick Sullivan gave
Moran a suspended jail sentence of 90 days and one year of probation.
Moran was also
ordered to complete 50 hours of community service and domestic violence
counseling, and not to “threaten, harass or assault” the woman as a condition
of his probation, court records say.
A police officer saw
Moran grab a woman by the back of her head and slam it into a trash can at
about 1:23 a.m. in front of a nightclub called The Getaway in Columbia Heights,
according to court documents.
Moran and the woman were separated by police, who later
learned the woman was his girlfriend of six months. The two had argued inside
the club after Moran spoke with another woman there, according to court
documents.
Moran was initially charged with assault with
significant bodily injury, a felony. The woman was bleeding “heavily” from her
nose; according to court records; her nose and right eye were “extremely”
swollen. The woman was taken to a hospital, and a paramedic told police her
nose appeared swollen and her right eye socket was fractured.
According to a statement from a spokesman for Moran
(D-Va.): “The Congressman strongly condemns domestic violence. As was stated in
court by both his son Patrick and his girlfriend ... the situation was an
accident.
“They were the only two people involved in the scene,”
the statement continued. “In that sense, their statements are the only ones
that matter. They are both very embarrassed by the situation, which involved
drinking, and they are looking to move past it, and ask for their privacy to be
respected.”
Calls to Moran and
his court-appointed attorney Gretchen Franklin were not returned.
For one thing, let’s dispense
with one little bit of B.S. here. As a
matter of law, this was not an accident.
He pled guilty to assault, which is an intentional crime. You do not accidentally commit an assault.
And so he and his daddy’s spokesperson forfeited the right to call it an
accident.
Indeed it seems doubtful that
Moran maintained it was an accident throughout the hearing. When a judge accepts a guilty plea, it is a
constitutional requirement that the person must actually admit to every element
of the relevant charge. In other words,
the constitution requires that Moran
admit that this was not an accident.
The reason for that rule is
simple. Now, you and I know that there
are certainly cases where a person is wholly innocent of a charge but still
pleads guilty because they believe they are going to be wrongly convicted. But in the law of plea bargains, this is not
allowed, at least not officially. In the
law of plea bargain, you are only allowed to plead guilty if you are guilty,
and if you cannot admit guilt, then the judge cannot allow you to plead
guilty. It is possible, I suppose, for a
judge to fail to follow this rule, but I don’t see any reason to believe he or
she did here. The more likely thing is
he said it was an accident and then later stated it was not.
But this outcome is hard to
understand, given these facts. First, having
dug through the D.C. Court system and the D.C. Code, it appears he was charged
under this statute:
Section 22-404 Assault or threatened assault in a menacing manner;
stalking
(a)(1) Whoever
unlawfully assaults, or threatens another in a menacing manner, shall be fined
not more than $1,000 or be imprisoned not more than 180 days, or both.
(2) Whoever
unlawfully assaults, or threatens another in a menacing manner, and
intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly causes significant bodily injury to
another shall be fined not more than $3,000 or be imprisoned not more than 3
years, or both. For the purposes of this paragraph, the term “significant
bodily injury” means an injury that requires hospitalization or immediate
medical attention.
So it appears he was initially
charged under (a)(2) but was allowed to plead it down to (a)(1). But...why?
Some clue to this is contained in this passage:
According to a statement from a spokesman for Moran
(D-Va.): “The Congressman strongly condemns domestic violence. As was stated in
court by both his son Patrick and his girlfriend ... the situation was an
accident.
“They were the only two people involved in the scene,”
the statement continued. “In that sense, their statements are the only ones
that matter. They are both very embarrassed by the situation, which involved
drinking, and they are looking to move past it, and ask for their privacy to be
respected.”
Now, it is depressingly common
for the victim of girlfriend beating to decide she still loves the guy who beat her and
to lie and say it was an accident when it plainly wasn’t.* “Oh, I just fell down the stairs” is a familiar
refrain and something similar appears likely to have happened here (although I
suppose it is possible for her to be genuinely confused on this point). For instance, it is notable that Patrick
Moran was forbidden from harassing, assaulting etc. the girlfriend, but was not
prohibited from all contact; this
suggests that the woman still wants to see him, which suggests she has not
figured out that she needs to ditch him just yet.
But it is absolutely wrong of his
spokesman to say that they were the only two people involved, let’s remember
what came before this:
A police officer saw
Moran grab a woman by the back of her head and slam it into a trash can at
about 1:23 a.m. in front of a nightclub called The Getaway in Columbia Heights,
according to court documents.
So normally, practically speaking, it is hard to prosecute
when the only witness to the violence (besides the alleged perp) is a woman who
has decided that she still loves the guy and it was all really an accident,
etc. But that is because most acts of girlfriend/spousal
abuse are done in private. Most of these
bastards are not brazen enough to beat their wives or girlfriends in a public
place. Here, we not only have a witness
but a police officer. So why did
prosecutors feel that the case wasn’t strong enough to convict him under the
felony version of the charge? That’s a
mystery I would like to see explored and explained. It’s not necessarily rotten and corrupt—maybe
the officer didn’t have a sufficiently good view to be certain, but it deserves
exploration to make sure it isn’t the case that they are going easier on the son
of a Congressman.
And speaking of, I found this bit interesting as well:
Calls to Moran and his court-appointed attorney
Gretchen Franklin were not returned.
So... why is he getting a free lawyer? Bear in mind you do not automatically get a
free attorney when charged with a crime, but only if you can’t afford your
own. So there is a means test you have
to go through before you are granted one.
And
despite Jim Moran’s claims to be broke, it is unlikely that any sitting
U.S. Congressman could pass this test, so the only explanation seems to be that
Jim Moran was refusing to lend a hand. Which
is interesting.
---------------------------------------
* It is common for women in this
situation to also say they want to “drop the charges.” This grows out of the popular myth that it is
up to the victim of a crime whether a person is prosecuted for a crime, or at
least they have veto power over it. This
is simply not true.
In the criminal law, a criminal
case is between the relevant government against the defendant, not the victim
of the crime against the defendant. In
Virginia, it is styled Commonwealth v. Smith, in some states it is “the people
v. Smith” but the upshot is the same: it is the relevant government entity v.
the defendant, not the victim v. the defendant.
That is because a crime is considered, at least in part, an offense
against the government.
Once you grasp that simple truth,
it explains two things that confuse people about the justice system. The first is why a victim has no direct
control over whether a person will be prosecuted: because they are not
technically even a party to the action!
It also explains why, for instance, O.J. Simpson was found not guilty in
criminal court for the murders of Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman, but then found
liable in civil court for their deaths.
The first case was the state of California v. Simpson, and the second
was the Brown and Goldman families v. Simpson.
Just because the state of California took its shot at O.J. and lost,
doesn’t mean that the Brown and Goldman families claims should be prejudiced by
that failure.
---------------------------------------
My wife and I have lost our jobs
due to the harassment of convicted terrorist Brett Kimberlin, including an
attempt to get us killed and to frame me for a crime carrying a sentence of up
to ten years. I know that claim sounds
fantastic, but if you read starting here, you will see absolute proof of these
claims using documentary and video evidence.
If you would like to help in the fight to hold Mr. Kimberlin accountable,
please hit the Blogger’s Defense Team button on the right. And thank you.
Follow me at Twitter @aaronworthing,
mostly for snark and site updates. And
you can purchase my book (or borrow it for free if you have Amazon Prime), Archangel: A Novel of Alternate, Recent
History here.
And you can read a little more about my novel, here.
---------------------------------------
Disclaimer:
I have accused some people,
particularly Brett Kimberlin, of
reprehensible conduct. In some cases, the conduct is even
criminal. In all cases, the only justice I want is through the
appropriate legal process—such as the criminal justice system. I do not want to see vigilante violence
against any person or any threat of such violence. This kind of conduct is not only morally
wrong, but it is counter-productive.
In the particular case of Brett
Kimberlin, I do not want you to even contact him. Do not call him. Do not write him a letter. Do not write him an email. Do not text-message him. Do not engage in any kind of directed
communication. I say this in part
because under Maryland law, that can quickly become harassment and I don’t want
that to happen to him.
And for that matter, don’t go on
his property. Don’t sneak around and try
to photograph him. Frankly try not to
even be within his field of vision. Your
behavior could quickly cross the line into harassment in that way too (not to
mention trespass and other concerns).
And do not contact his
organizations, either. And most of all, leave his family alone.
The only exception to all that is
that if you are reporting on this, there is of course nothing wrong with
contacting him for things like his official response to any stories you might
report. And even then if he tells you to
stop contacting him, obey that request. That
this is a key element in making out a harassment claim under Maryland law—that
a person asks you to stop and you refuse.
And let me say something
else. In my heart of hearts, I don’t
believe that any person supporting me has done any of the above. But if any of you have, stop it, and if you
haven’t don’t start.
As a physician specializing in domestic violence I can understand why this was plead down. The Serious Bodily Injury clause requires to prove a requirement for hospitalization or immediate medical attention.
ReplyDeleteA bloody nose (or even a broken nose if we take the girlfriend's statement) is highly unlikely to require hospitalization.
As for immediate medical attention -- its iffy. The "profusely" bleeding nose observed by a nonmedical person might have stopped very quickly, as most bloody noses do. Then it would require no medical attention. A broken nose does not require immediate medical attention -- it usually only requires medical attention at all if you want a good cosmetic result.
It sounds to me like someone realized that it was going to be an uphill battle to prove a difficult element with a noncooperating complaining witness. I am sure that being the son of a congressman had nothing to do with it. This case was resolved the way many DV cases are resolved.
"So why did prosecutors feel that the case wasn’t strong enough to convict him under the felony version of the charge? That’s a mystery I would like to see explored and explained."
ReplyDeleteIt may be as simple as taking the plea rather than the expense of a trial. Also, with an uncooperative victim, your prospects with a jury must diminish.
Glad to see your back from your Hiatus Aaron.
ReplyDelete