WELL, YESTERDAY, the jury deadlocked on whether to convict highly connected accused child molester Jeffrey Nielsen.
I noticed the story on the LA Times/OC homepage late last night, just after midnight. It continued to be prominently displayed (on the Times' homepage) this morning.
I was on the OC Register’s homepage late last night too, and, surprisingly, the Reg had a report there as well. But I couldn’t find it there this morning. It moved somewhere else.
The conservative OC Reg has not really covered this story. Could it be because of the powerful Republicans who are embarrassed by it?
Well, I guess so!
Perhaps the most interesting reporting on the Nielsen non-verdict came today from OC Register columnist Frank Mickadeit, so I'll start with that. [UPDATE: See also Teeny bop panty drop, by R. Scott Moxley.]
1. The OC Register: Would like to know more about jury:
The three papers covering the trial were not told the jury was coming back to tell Judge Craig Robison it was having problems reaching a verdict and the judge might declare a mistrial. The Register and Times specifically asked the Superior Court and the D.A.'s Office to be informed when the jury came back. We provided cell numbers and made sure we were within 20 minutes' drive of the Newport Beach courthouse. But we didn't find out until more than a half hour after the mistrial was declared and jurors had already left.
…We do know the votes on the six counts were 4-8, 3-9, 7-5, 5-7, 2-10 and 2-10. Based on the way I was told they were reported by the foreman in open court, the first number is that of the "guilty" votes, the second the "not guilty" votes.
As I'm sure you're aware, the chief advisor to OC DA Tony Rackauckas is local GOP bigshot Michael Schroeder. Schroeder is among the Republicans who, one might guess, is embarrassed by the Nielsen story. (Schroeder wrote letters of recommendation for Nielsen.)
Schroeder's wife, Susan, is the DA's chief spokesperson.
2. The LA Times/OC: Mistrial in molestation case against former congressional aide: Jury can't decide on charges against Jeffrey Nielsen, who once worked for Dana Rohrabacher, may face another trial on the charges.
An Orange County jury deadlocked Monday on whether to convict a former congressional aide on charges he molested a 14-year-old boy he met in an Internet chat room, leading the judge to declare a mistrial.
Jurors had deliberated less than three days when they sent a note to Superior Court Judge Craig Robison just before noon Monday saying they could not reach a verdict on any of the six charges against Jeffrey Nielsen.
Paul S. Meyer, the attorney representing Nielsen, said he was "exceptionally disappointed" with the outcome.
"This case deserved a unanimous not-guilty verdict," Meyer said. "We understand that, generally, a majority to a large majority of the jurors agreed with that assessment."
Deputy Dist. Atty. Dan Hess said it was unfortunate the jury couldn't reach a verdict. He plans to retry the case, after a full review of the trial.
Both sides are due back in court April 6 for further discussions.
Nielsen, 36, was arrested three years ago at his Costa Mesa law office and charged with molesting the teenager, identified in court as John Doe because his identity has been shielded, on three occasions in the spring of 2003: twice at his Ladera Ranch condominium and once at the Westminster mobile home where the teen lived with his family.
The trial in Newport Beach's Harbor Court might not have gained intrigue if not for Nielsen's political connections. A USC-trained lawyer, he has worked for Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-Huntington Beach) and local GOP chairman Scott Baugh. Nielsen's father, Ben, is a former Fountain Valley mayor.
…While on the witness stand, Nielsen acknowledged that he had looked at computer photographs of men having sex with boys, but that he didn't consider it any more exciting than other gay pornography, and that those images were not on his mind when he met with Doe….
3. The OC Register: Hung jury in molestation case: New trial considered for Jeffrey Ray Nielsen, former aide to congressman, accused of lewd acts with teen.
A Superior Court jury deadlocked today after more than three days of deliberations on whether a former aide to an Orange County congressman molested a 14-year-old boy he met on a Web site for gay men.
The Orange County District Attorney's Office is considering seeking a new trial….
Defense attorney Paul S. Meyer, who argued that the boy was a liar who fantasized about having an affair with Nielsen, said he was disappointed with the hung jury.
…The case has drawn drew widespread attention because of Nielsen's connections to several Orange County Republican leaders.
He was once a legislative aide in Washington, D.C., to Rep. Dana Rohrbacher, and worked on an Assembly campaign of Scott Baugh, now the Republican Party chairman in Orange County.
In addition, Nielsen was given recommendations to University of Southern California law school by Republican activists Tom Fuentes and Michael Schroeder….
…Nielsen acknowledged when he testified last week that he chatted with the accuser on the gay Web site and later met him on three occasions. But he insisted they never had sex, exposed themselves, kissed, or touched each other sexually.
Instead, Nielsen said he counseled the teenager, who told him that he was troubled about deciding whether he should come out as gay. Nielsen said he felt empathy for the boy because he was facing the same dilemma.
MORE REPUBLICANS:
The district’s Tracy D has sent out one of her lovely “Updates”. This one mentions that
Former United States Attorney General Edwin Meese recently visited in Irvine. SOCCCD Trustees Donald P. Wagner and Thomas A. Fuentes and Chancellor Mathur greeted him at a dinner in his honor.
Early in his career, Meese served as Chief of Staff to California Governor Ronald Reagan.
Naturally, there's no mention of the fact that Mr. Meese is highly ethically tainted.
[Y]ou don't have many suspects who are innocent of a crime. That's contradictory. If a person is innocent of a crime, then he is not a suspect.—Ed Meese
4 comments:
There was a Saddleback student on that jury.
Yup, and she voted NOT GUILTY. When will you get off your bias bandwagon and look at the case based on the facts, as that juror did?
You ass. Where in my comment was it bias? Talk about bias. Are you are the one who likes little boys...
Sorry for the implication that you were biased. Here I'm just comparing this article's mindless drivel, rant speculation and blatant libel to what the Times and Register have had to say. Funny, both laid out the facts of the case, whereas this article ignored them. The writer is just using this guy as a pawn to come after the writer's other enemies. He's a lawyer, so I hope he sees this and sues.
Post a Comment