Crime

Update: UC Berkeley student exonerated of rape charge

October 17, 2014 2:58 pm by Emilie Raguso

Image via Facebook

The case against a 20-year-old UC Berkeley student charged earlier this month with rape has been dismissed, authorities said Friday afternoon, and he has been found “factually innocent” of that allegation.

Eugene Quillin was scheduled to enter a plea in the case Friday morning.

But Teresa Drenick, Alameda County district attorney’s office spokeswoman, said Friday afternoon that the case against Quillin was instead dismissed.

Quillin’s attorney, Ted W. Cassman, said shortly before 4 p.m. via email that the case was dismissed for insufficient evidence, and that the judge ruled Quillin to be factually innocent.

The court ruled Friday morning that Quillin “is hereby exonerated,” and that his detention by police “shall be deemed not to have occurred.”

In court Friday, deputy district attorney Joni Leventis said, according to a court transcript, that she had closely reviewed the evidence from police, and had interviewed the woman who initially reported the rape.

“I’ve had several discussions with her about those events and we’ve concluded that Mr. Quillin did not commit any sexual assault on September 27th, 2014. And I would add that Jane Doe is in agreement with that conclusion that we have come to,” Leventis told the judge.

Leventis also told the judge that there had been no indication that Quillin had been responsible in any way for the woman’s intoxication.

“There is no evidence that Mr. Quillin provided any drugs or gave any drugs in any manner or caused the intoxication or the level of intoxication, if you will, of Jane Doe in this case,” she said.

Cassman said via email that he appreciated the work of Leventis and the district attorney’s office “for their fair and thorough review of the case.”

He continued: “Eugene is innocent. The system worked. But in the meantime, Eugene and his family suffered greatly, not only from a false charge but also from exaggerated and inaccurate press reports.”

Police arrested Quillin at UC Berkeley’s Delta Upsilon fraternity Oct. 2. The district attorney’s office initially charged him with rape by use of drugs.

The news of the dismissal of the charge against Quillin came Friday amid a flurry of other reports of sexual assault released by the University of California Police Department.

Thursday evening, UCPD said five people had come forward saying they had been drugged and sexually assaulted at the Delta Kappa Epsilon fraternity in the 2300 block of Piedmont Avenue.

Friday afternoon, UCPD said they also received a report that a member of a different fraternity, Theta Delta Chi, said he had been sexually assaulted by another member of that fraternity, and that other people also may have been assaulted.

This story was updated after publication to reflect information and court documents shared by Quillin’s attorney, Ted Cassman.

Get the latest Berkeley news in your inbox with Berkeleyside’s free Daily Briefing. And make sure to bookmark Berkeleyside’s pages on Facebook and Twitter. You don’t need an account on those sites to view important information.

Tagged Berkeley crime, Berkeley fraternity, Berkeley Police, Breaking news Berkeley, Eugene Quillin, Sexual assault in Berkeley, UC Berkeley

guest

Hard to say what did or didn’t happen, but having the same lawyer as Barry Bonds in Balco may have helped.

Pretty sure a Public Defender would not have made the charge go away so fast. I wonder how much it really costs to get justice?

http://www.achlaw.com/articles/coverage-of-our-cases.php
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/08/sports/baseball/08balco.html?_r=1
thomas Jr.

Barry Bonds’ lawyer? Really? I wonder how much that cost.

“There’s no justice, there’s just us”.
guest

So, in your opinion he’s probably guilty despite being exonerated by the court system. Probably guilty until proven innocent via trial in the Court of Tom.

Glad you’re not in any position of power.
Lord Dashtlove

…and because false charges can be lodged against someone, dragging their name through the mud, with virtually no recourse.
guest

I suppose it might sound that way to an intensely pedantic person but most readers will be able to see that Steve is clearly referring to what he believes *should* be done in a perfect world, not what *is* currently legally correct.
John Freeman

No, “guest”, you are making up stuff when you falsely assert “in your opinion he’s probably guilty”.

I have no idea what he did or did not do. Neither do you.
John Freeman

Do they not teach civics anymore? The level of ignorance displayed in comments like the one quoted below is disappointing.

because false charges can be lodged against someone, dragging their name through the mud, with virtually no recourse.
Berkeley Resident

They are a very good (and local) law firm. It doesn’t mean the result isn’t correct.
John Freeman

Quillin has exercised his main recourse by having the arrest record destroyed. Your superstition about the future impact of his name being in the news is nothing more than that. Nevertheless, in general, if police or prosecutors were reckless and did significant harm he could take civil action.

The accuser, “guest”, did not make an arrest or file charges.

You write as if oblivious to these points so, again, I surmise you are ignorant of some pretty basic civics or, as your name-of-the-moment suggests, commenting with malice.
guest

Actually there is no claim that the victim told anything false to police.
I think this comment is slander.

A victim reports a crime. The police and DA accuse. Even if you are not sure who mugged you, you should report being mugged.
DefenseLawyer

Pretty sure an Alameda County Public Defender would have been all over this, just as quickly. Now…whether the DA would return the calls as quickly, or take the time to examine the case as quickly, or jump into the re-investigation as quickly IN RESPONSE…that’s another question. DAs snap to attention for VIPs just like anyone else.
DefenseLawyer

You’ve made a reasonable–but incorrect–assumption. The phrase “level of intoxication” doesn’t mean that she was too intoxicated to give consent. People have intoxicated consensual sex all the time (insert witty comment here). You’re missing another possibility, which in this case happens to be the actual situation (news travels fast in the legal community):
The young woman was intoxicated. The accused had nothing to do with her becoming intoxicated. The young woman had sex with the accused. It was CONSENSUAL, inasmuch as she actively participated in, and assisted with, the sexual acts. Afterwards, she had second thoughts and regrets. She re-thought and re-thought and re-thought what had happened, and other(s) helped her re-think. She concluded that perhaps she hadn’t really “consented,” and reported it to police. It was charged. Subsequent investigation confirmed the active participation/assistance/consent. That’s not rape, at least not currently.*
*All of this is timely, of course, because “rape” is something that is legally/socially defined. Is it “no means no”? Or “only yes means yes”? Is it consent if you don’t SAY the word yes, but you actively encourage the act? That’s the scenario put into issue here, at the same time UC Berkeley has been exploring the definition of “consent.”
DefenseLawyer

John, you’re just wrong on this one. It’s understandable–851.8 has spawned case law precisely because it’s not perfectly clear on its face–but you are, actually, wrong. A factual finding IS exactly what you say it isn’t. It IS a positive finding about one thing that happened that night, which is that the defendant IS actually innocent IN FACT (that’s why they call it a “finding” of “factual innocence”). The motion can be made in a variety of settings. You’re misreading the section you quote (about an accusatory pleading) but it doesn’t matter, because that’s the wrong section anyway. An accusatory pleading WAS filed here — that’s the thing that was dismissed. And the finding can be made regardless of the accuser’s feelings or opinion–the DA was simply reciting that fact, in this case, to fend off accusations that the DA was selling out another “victim” (see, e.g., accusations about the Tallahassee police re: Florida State football misconduct). It’s a CYA comment.
In this case, the DA followed up on inconsistencies in the original report, and determined that no rape had occurred. Just drunken consensual sex. The very unusual 851.8 finding is, in fact, properly described as an exoneration.
DefenseLawyer

I have no idea who Steve Shorr is, but that sentence is simply misleading, legally. You don’t get a finding of factual innocence when there is some, but not enough, evidence to “support the charge.” You get the finding when you can establish (let’s say it together!) your innocence IN FACT. That’s why it just doesn’t happen very often.
rhuberry

One of the problems I see with this kind of relationship being called rape is that it almost makes light of what I usually think of as rape — as in a violent assault type of situation. Why are so many college kids, who are mostly underage, getting so drunk they don’t know what they’re doing? And instead of taking responsibility for drinking too much (probably illegally), they decide to try to blame someone else for their behavior which they regret when they sober up. What a shame that ”feminism” has gotten to this – women as victims, men as bad and taking advantage of them. Get your drinking under control, boys and girls, and behave yourselves!! Enough of this ”rape” stuff already.
John Freeman

I don’t think you are anywhere contradicting me. You seem to agree with me that “factual innocence” does not necessarily imply a positive finding of innocence. You seem to agree that “factual innocence” can mean nothing more than that charges were defectively filed. We agree, then, about the information contained in the news reports.

Now additionally you claim to be privy to additional, unreported information and hint that somehow positive evidence of innocence was presented. That’s interesting, if true, but material sourced to “DefenseLawyer” in Berkeleyside comments isn’t what we have been discussing until now.

Elsewhere, in another comment, you describe your alleged insider knowledge of the case by saying:

news travels fast in the legal community

This alone makes me suspicious of your claims of insider knowledge and should discredit you as a legal professional if you are one. It would be interesting to see you substantiate your claims better.

Regardless, heretofore we were talking about the actual contents of the news reports, not your rumors.
John Lordlove

So Google search results are now “superstition” according to you and the accuser is blameless in the charges that were brought against this man.

How delightfully absurd.
Love Lordman

I love the way you twist logic, here, to try to convict an innocent man in the court of public opinion. Yet not so long ago you twisted logic in opposite ways to try to defend a pervert employed by BUSD who sexually harassed students.

Simple contrarianism at its finest.
guest

Tom has been playing pretend lawyer on Berkeleyside, under one name or another, as long as this site has been around.
John Freeman

I think it’s worth pointing out that you apparently claim to be an officer of the court yet you come onto Berkeleyside to allegedly, anonymously reveal privileged conversations with Jane Doe. Perhaps you are a very bad attorney? AND you do this in order to make assertions about the case that contradict Quilin’s own attorney.
John Freeman

“DefenseLawyer” has claimed to reveal the contents of privileged discussions with Jane Doe and has contradicted Quilin’s own attorney about the case. I don’t think DefenseLawyer is truthful.

re:

that sentence is simply misleading, legally.
Berkeley Resident

Well, if that’s the scenario then it is indeed a huge shame, for everyone involved and particularly for future victims.
guest

“John Freeman” has continued to pretend to be a legal expert despite having no education or expertise in the field. I don’t think John Freeman is qualified to make the statements he keeps making here.
Guest

Interesting that on other crime articles, Berkeleyside gets criticized for irresponsible journalism on the basis of not publishing PHOTOS of people who have been arrested (not convicted). Talk about a no win situation.
rusty

At the bottom of the artice linked below is a copy on the court order exhonerating Eugene Quillan and ruling him factually innocent.

http://www.contracostatimes.com/contra-costa-times/ci_26750499/uc-berkeley-student-exonerated-rape-case
John Freeman

I’m glad to know that the finding was pursuant to section 851.8 of the penal code, exactly as I was pointed out was likely. There was no presentation of evidence that positively exonerated. The DA simply did not complete the process of filing an accusation.

I’m sure this won’t stop the flood of “creative” male supremacist interpretations in comments. Nevertheless, here we are.
TaserLord

Tom,

sometimes busy people who desire a certain outcome elect to get there by the most efficient path. Given the choice between a) not filing and letting the guy go free; and b) filing, having to go to court and say, “we don’t have a case” and chalking up a losing mark for the prosecution, it’s pretty clear that a person who doesn’t spend all day, every day spinning convoluted explanations for simple problems would go with (a).

How about taking a break from the keyboard? Learn to play the bongos or some other satisfying pursuit.
guest

It’s odd that you’d make a comment like this suggesting that everyone who disagreed with you on this issue was making “male supremacist interpretations” given that nobody actually believes it and it’s a straw-man nonsense position you made up to
bludgeon some neighbors with.

I’m sure this won’t stop the flood of creative “misunderstandings” and straw man attacks in your comments. Nevertheless, here we are.
John Freeman

Let me be very clear that the comments in this thread which variously accuse the woman lying, “having regrets”, and so forth — and which were willfully, stubbornly ignorant and even deliberately deceptive as to the relevant law — are pure anti-female hate speech. It is male supremecy in action. I don’t care how any of the comment makers “feel” internally. Their actions are unambiguous. Yours is no exception, “guest”.
rusty

If there were not the unfairness in the system that results in the false accuser’s identity remainig secret basically forever, we would have access to all the evidence. The press
would be able to call on this accuser and ask the usual – why, when, how, who
etc, and she would be compelled to answer or be disgraced – likely both – just
like any other false accuser.

Imagine someone who accuses his neighbor, who has no criminal record, of burglarizing
his house. The matter is reported on, as here, nationwide. An astronomically
high bail is set in spite of the very very remote likelihood that the neighbor
will abscond. The neighbor has to spend tens of thousands of dollars on bail
bonds, legal fees and investigators. Then it is shown that there was
simply no evidence it ever happened and a court declares the neighbor factually
innocent, which happens almost never. Would it be proper for the press
to hide the identity of and never confront the accuser?

Understand that there is no law that compels the press or anyone else to hide or not report
the name of Quillan’s accuser. It is mere PC group-think run amok and a
gross breach of basic journalistic ethics.

The Berkelyside reporting has actually among the very best nationwide on this
story. I think the Berkeleyside editors should publically state why they
do not seek to find and interview the accuser. As I’ve said before, who
does this secrecy help? Legitimate victims of violent rape? If so, how?
guest

In what way do you believe that blanket-accusing anyone who disagrees with you of being an “ignorant male supremacist spreading anti-female hate speech” adds to the discussion?

Do you think that making these kinds of accusations about large groups of people is beneficial in some way?

M	T	W	T	F	S	S
« Sep				Nov »
		1	2	3	4	5
6	7	8	9	10	11	12
13	14	15	16	17	18	19
20	21	22	23	24	25	26
27	28	29	30	31

Update: UC Berkeley student exonerated of rape charge

Categories

Archives

Site info