No felony: Victim wants tougher penalty for crotch invasion
-
Antoine Rashard Anderson.CHARLOTTESVILLE POLICE
Caitlln Mahoney was walking out of a Charlottesville nightclub last fall when she made an unpleasant discovery: a man's hand up under her skirt. In court May 31, a judge convicted the perpetrator of sexual battery, but the victim says she's speaking out in hopes that courts will consider getting tougher on such crimes.
Mahoney, a 2009 UVA grad who was in town for homecoming on October 17, testified that she was leaving the after-hours Club 216 on Market Street when she heard a man trying to get her attention. She ignored him and continued walking toward the street.
"Someone reached up under my skirt and grabbed my genitalia," Mahoney told Judge Edward Hogshire, describing how she felt a palm-up hand and then felt another squeeze, this time to her buttocks.
"You don't do that to people," the 24-year-old Mahoney said she yelled at the man as she shoved him away. A police officer working private security for the Club intervened and handcuffed Antoine Rashard Anderson and charged the 29-year-old Gordonsville resident with sexual battery– as well as public intoxication, a charge he's encountered five other times, according to city court records.
Mahoney, however, made a case to the prosecutor that the contact was way too intimate for a mere misdemeanor and got the groping charge upgraded to a Class 4 felony: attempted object penetration.
Mahoney says a recent study of female UVA undergraduates found that 34 percent had experienced unwelcome sexual contact– including her own sister. Mahoney contends that only felony charges will make men understand that such assaults must stop.
As the officer was dealing with Anderson outside Club 216, Mahoney testified, the alleged perp was lucid enough to concoct an alibi: "He looked me directly in the eye and said, 'We're friends, right?'"
Defense attorney Nick Reppucci called his client's behavior "boorish" and "crude" but said it wasn't a felony. Judge Hogshire agreed, and found Anderson guilty of sexual battery. He'll be sentenced July 7 on the Class 1 misdemeanor, which carries up to 12 months in prison and/or a $2,500 fine. Mahoney thinks he got off easy.
"I think the main problem is with the statute that puts sexual battery on par with littering and reckless driving," she says. "Does he need help to see if he has an alcohol problem or a sexual problem with women? He can't get that with a misdemeanor."
A Class 4 felony carries a minimum of two years in prison and a maximum of 10.
"I feel if I hadn't been as assertive about protecting myself," says Mahoney, "this could have been worse."
31 comments
This is clearly a serious offense, but I'm not sure prison is the answer. Mandatory alcohol treatment may do more to protect future victims and make the offender a productive member of society.
Nancy, you are kidding, right? If this had taken place on the parking lots of the John Paul Jones arena, without a cop or other persons around to intervene, it could have escalated into another Morgan Harrington.
Yo yo yo
His defense was not an "alibi" -- an alibi is saying "I wasn't there -- I was in Poughkeepsie at the time." He offered an excuse, perhaps; an explanation, or a defense, or a completely concocted story. But not an alibi.
This isn't intended to excuse this sort of thing, but late night and after hours clubs with their extended periods of binge drinking do loosen inhibitions and promote this sort of uncivil conduct. And furthermore the young women do like to "look their best" so to speak and that is a red flag to a bull somewhat with liquored up young guys. Under the circumstances the battery finding by the judge was appropriate. The reality is that people who are drunk operate under diminished capacity. The young woman will get over the affront to her dignity all in good time and maybe she'll avoid late night venues of that sort in the future.
Of course if this were the world of "To kill a Mockingbird", they could simply lynch the young man.
His DNA needs to be taken and run against cold cases as well as stored for the future. I don't know if a misdemeanor conviction will allow the state to do that.
Angel Eyes, you have got to be kidding me.
She'll "get over it"? As someone who has been in this sort of situation before, what you've said is horrifically offensive on so many levels. Your comment suggests that you are attempting to make excuses, bringing up the very kinds of "logic" used against victims for centuries. Just because a woman wears a short skirt and goes to a night club does not give a man permission to grope her. Even in these situations, a rational and decent human being would never do that sort of thing -- intoxicated or not. His immediate attempts to claim she was his "friend" shows he KNEW at the time what he did was wrong. If he were genuinely sorry, he'd make an effort to make amends to his victim.
Again, I've been a victim of this kind of thing in the past. And it isn't something you just "get over". It sticks with you, because it is a very real violation of your person. Even years later, I still find myself uneasy sometimes and it has definitely impacted my relationships.
I think there should be a law that when something criminal happens there would be therapy sessions to deal with the problem at hand. Being in jail does not render rehab, nor does it help the person accept what he or she did and avoid future repeat offender. Being in Jail to most are denied responsiblity of crime and society. Having a felony charge against you hinder future jobs which does not help either. when will society welcome that its not fair to hold mistakes forever. There has to be forgiveness at some point. We all need a chance to redemption. I think all can be forgiven with the exception of murder. With change all can have a chance to rehabilitate themselvea for the better.
I think there should be a law that when something criminal happens there would be therapy sessions to deal with the problem at hand. Being in jail does not render rehab, nor does it help the person accept what he or she did and avoid future repeat offender. Being in Jail to most are denied responsiblity of crime and society. Having a felony charge against you hinder future jobs which does not help either. when will society welcome that its not fair to hold mistakes forever. There has to be forgiveness at some point. We all need a chance to redemption. I think all can be forgiven with the exception of murder. With change all can have a chance to rehabilitate themselvea for the better.
I think there should be a law that when something criminal happens there would be therapy sessions to deal with the problem at hand. Being in jail does not render rehab, nor does it help the person accept what he or she did and avoid future repeat offender. Being in Jail to most are denied responsiblity of crime and society. Having a felony charge against you hinder future jobs which does not help either. when will society welcome that its not fair to hold mistakes forever. There has to be forgiveness at some point. We all need a chance to redemption. I think all can be forgiven with the exception of murder. With change all can have a chance to rehabilitate themselvea for the better.
This seems like a serial sexual preditor that will do as much damage as he can get away with .On the other hand ,the justice system appears to do as little as they can get away with in preventing his barbaric behaviour . He doesn't appear to have any concept of decency or civility . He knows about the law ,however, and how to squirm his way to and through areas of the least resistance .I doubt he is a contributer to society . I expect he is a total pathetic menace causing severe damage .This low life should be put away and have the key lost forever ,however,he would still be a drain living off the backs of contributers .The victim here has been very courageous in an effort to get justice and deter the chances of more such victims only to be dealt blows by LE and the Judicial .Shocking all around .This should be a case study in the dangers of frequenting areas where one is exposed to such scum .
Are there no degrees of criminality? Did he cause "severe damage" or didn't he? You cannot just assume he must be worse than what you can prove in court.
Certainly not to diminish the actual offense, it does appear that the victims' self-esteem is intact. To her credit, she appears to be one that can stick up for herself. Unfortunately, this guy has probably gotten away with this sort of behavior in the past with less assertive victims.
All that said, in my opinion this should be a felony. The punishment may have even been the same, but as someone else noted, as a felon his DNA could be taken and the state would keep better track of him. Also, he most assuredly would think twice before perpetrating such an offense again.
Hogshire merely followed the pattern of local judges in discounting victims of sexual crimes.
I asked a friend who has been to 216 to find me a video of what it is like there.
she found this...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ugjB8qPeUo
everything in context
Angel Eyes
This goes a bit beyond "uncivil conduct" and an affront to her dignity - he did not fail to hold a door open for her, he reached up under her skirt and groped her genitalia! For the record it does NOT state how short it was not that it matters but you do seem to be trying to spread some of the blame to the victim. Thank heaven the police officer was there, I shudder to think what might of happened had he not been. This is not a "Mockingbird" situation and his color does not excuse his behaviour. He obviously had no respect for women and I hope we will not be reading about him in the future in connection with other assaults because this is what happened here -- she was assaulted.
angel eyes said:
"And furthermore the young women do like to "look their best" so to speak...."
Yup, girls are always askin' for it, aren't they? If only they didn't try to look their best, then the guys who lack control of themselves and are on the level of an animal wouldn't be tempted to grab and grope and rape them. Never mind that said guys are on the level of an animal, with no self awareness, higher reasoning or control. The girls looked their best, tsk tsk, and you know what THAT means.......
(eye roll.)
I said what I said fully expecting to be flamed in predictable ways. I stand by what I said without modifications or apologies. Many of the people on this forum appear not to view things objectively and think it's just awful when other people do.
In my opinion grabbing a buttocks in plain view of anyone and everyone is always "simple" assault for the "simple" reason that in order for it to rise to a felony the victim would need to be in immediate danger of escalation. I doubt that this loser expected to get laid on the staircase in front of the entire club. The reason I feel this way is that if she were walking down an alley alone and afraid of an escaltion and KILLED HIM I would call that self defense. If she had turned around and put a bullet between his eyes in the club it would be murder.
Now I am all for the judge giving the guy a few days in the slammer to make sure he gets the point and a few hundred hours community service so he can think about what he did.
I understand the girls point too. She should be able to not be groped, however the context of the event are very important matters and women need to realize that there are women at these events who expect and accept that behavior as par for the course. It is no different than going to a horse race and watching out for piles of horse droppings.
If this girl were groped while shopping at lowes it would be different and should be treated accordingly.
The judge gets it.
How would being groped at Lowes be different?
That's a weird comment.
"How would being groped at Lowes be different"
Because if someone were bold enough to grope a person at lowes they could not possibly use the defense that they were caught up in the moment of the event. They would be committing a predatory act.
For instance... the girls going for beads at Mardi gras cannot expect society to pay for their protection from other party goers who are as drunk as they are. Its called personal responsibility.
Jail is for predators, not guys who were titilated all night by girls wearing the slut uniform. This guy needs some straitening out but does not deserve prison
All the guy needed to do was to lie and say he had slept with her in the past andf was just trying to rekindle another hook up. and he would have probably been dismissed.
This was an act at an after hours club where lots of hook ups occur all the time.
This girl got groped he got punished the law worked. There is nio need to bring back the guilotine.
Bill, I will never agree with or understand your explanation. Whether at Lowes at 8 p.m., or a night club at 1:00 a.m., nobody has the right to stick their hand up a girls' dress. Even if she was dressed in a slut uniform and had been consuming alcohol, groping at either location are still both the actions of a sexual predator.
There is no "she was asking for it" involved here.
Gasdog, I never said she was asking for it. A person walking around in the woods isn't "asking" for a snakebite but they should not be too surprized if they encounter one.
This the real world. Peeople at club 216 get together and dance aggresvilvly, people dress accordingly and the atmosphere is different than lowes. If you can accept that hitting on her with conversation is more acceptable there as opposed to in line at lowes then you need to accept that location and behavior are interrelated.
He should be punished but he is not a predator based on this story. If it were DC they would have tossed him out on street and told him to not come back. This situation aside (because the guy was appaerntly agresssive enough to warrant arrest) Complaints like this muddy the waters for prosecuting real predators. It is playing the gender card.
If a woaman can't deal with slapping a guy for grabbing her butt then she should stay home.
If we arrested every guy that grabbed a butt at 216 the jail would be full.
I don't often comment on these articles, but I just want to tell Caitlin (if she's reading this) not to let the jerks on this message board get her down. We happen to live in a society where touching someone's genitalia without their consent is a crime, and neither alcohol nor being "caught up in the moment" are defenses for that.
Regardless of her attire, the location or the time of day, the the fact that she was ignoring him and walking towards the exit should have made it abundantly clear that contact was not desired.. The only one who should be required to avoid late night venues is Mr. Anderson.
I still don't agree, Bill. Even if the victim went to Club 216 dressed in nothing but a bikini swim suit and sandals, no total stranger has the right to reach up under her bikini bottom and grab her genitalia.
I think Judge Hogshire will probably agree with me that this is a pretty serious crime even though he reduced it to a misdemeanor. The defendant will be sentenced to his 12 months in jail, with about 10 months of it being suspended. On the other hand, if the judge wants to send a stern warning to the community, he might impose the entire 12 months with none suspended.
I thinkl the judge has already decided that this clown is a jerk who needs to be taught a lesson and not a predator.
"I still don't agree, Bill. Even if the victim went to Club 216 dressed in nothing but a bikini swim suit and sandals, no total stranger has the right to reach up under her bikini bottom and grab her genitalia"
Gasdog I never said that a stranger has the right to grab someones crotch.
If the guy is streaking across the quad he is not a sexual predator. If a girl pulls her top off at a frat party and a guy grabs a breast he is not a sexual predator. There are three areas (at least) there is fun gone too far, poor judgments, and sexual predation. I think this falls in the second category.
As a cop you know there are three kinds (at least) of speeders, people who are late, people who are mildly agressive, and jerks who think they own the road. The law gives Police discretion to decide what to charge and the courts the right to ajudicate. The debate here is about whether the law should be changed to allow women to dress and act however they want and then be able to have society (at great expense) pay to protect them. I say NO. I think women are properly protected as the law stands and women need to accept that they live in a world where personal responsibility is not just for men.
If a woman goes to 216 wheere it is a party atmosphere dressed in a slut uniform then the penalty for a buttgrab is what this guy is getting. Deal with it.
That penalty is strong enough to deter 99% of the guys. Putting that 1% in jail for a decade won't deter anybody because everyone with a lick of common sense knows that the real predator is out in the dark alley between 216 and her car.
Bill, OK, help me to understand this thing a little better....
Did the girl wear a slut uniform to Club 216?
Had she consumed alcohol while at Club 216? How much?
Was she sending signals that she was a slut machine ready to play? As in removing her top and exposing her breasts while at Club 216?
What poor judgement did the girl exercise while at Club 216? Is simply being there a form of poor judgement?
The "fun gone too far" in this story is a total stranger grabbing parts of the girl's body, a crime. And this crime is of a sexual nature. Therefore, the defendant is a sexual predator. The judge has to decide what degree of a sexual predator he is.
I think going to a hockey game is poor judgement. If the hockey puck hits somebody in the face and kills them, they asked for it! See how silly that sounds?
...and if you get hit with a hockey puck don't sue or have the player arrested...
I am not judging this girl or her behavior. I am saying that if a guy grabs a girls butt at a club it is different than a back alley. In the club it is a minor offense of people pushing the envelope too far and depending on the aggressiveness they should be tossed out by the bouncers or arrested for a misdameanor. If he tries it in the alley on the way to her car you can then try and convince a jury of intent to go further and escalate the charge.
It is not societies responsibility to protect everyone from everything. We have crosswalks but not crossing guards at intersections and we have 911 if things get out of hand but as a society it is every persons responsibility to look out for themselves and keep themselves out of harms way.
Why do we lock oor cars or doors? Why do we advise women to travel in airs late at night? Is that wrong? Should we just install more streetlights and beat cops?
I gurantee you that more butt grabbing went on on the dance floor than did in this incident. We do not need the law changed. This guy will either escalate in the future or he won't but all that happens when you pass laws like is wanted here is get people caught in the crossfire... all so girls can go clubbing, get drunk and then whine when they get taken advantage of. This girl may have been in a nuns outfit and sober but the other girls there were not.
Certain risks go with the territory and it is a waste of taxpayer money to protect people who want to party.
Let the law stand as it is. The Judge is called a Judge for his Judgement.
I'm sorry, I still don't get it. The laws are in place to protect ALL individuals at ALL times. It doesn't matter if a girl is shopping at Lowes, eating at a local restaurant, sunbathing at Chris Green Lake, standing in line at Chris & Bob's erotic film rental, or out partying at some club. No stranger has the right to reach up a girl's skirt and grab anything at any location.
If a girl goes to a nightclub this coming Friday night and gets dragged into the restroom and raped, should the punishment be less than if she was in Lowes shopping?
If it's such a waste of taxpayer money to protect people who want to party, why has the police chief just assigned 8 to 10 more cops to patrol Fridays After Five and the downtown mall? Should the punishment be less if the cops grab some guy who reaches up a girl's skirt and arrests him at Fridays After Five. After all, the girl was out partying and asking for it, right?
If a girl goes to a nightclub this coming Friday night and gets dragged into the restroom and raped, should the punishment be less than if she was in Lowes shopping?
...... No but the punishment should be MORE than the drunk clown who grabbed her butt as she walked past....
Suppose you got the law YOUR way and there was no witness other than a he said she said and the jury sends a guy to jail for a dozen years when the girl was just mad because he rebuffed her? This was not an attempted rape this was a jerk being a jerk and the reason he did it is because he needs a lesson not a 12 year degree in the penal system at taxpayer expense.
The taxpayers shouldn't have to foot the bill of 30k a year for a dozen years because someone gets their butt grabbed by a drunk in a bar. Society owes her a degree of protection but she owes society the respect to keep out of harms way.
As far as fridays goes it is a family atmosphere not a nightclub where over half the people are intoxicated and a highly charged atmosphere... I have yet to see people having sex in the bathroom at the Pavillion or simulating sex on the daqnce floor but I am told it is common at 216.
This girl didn't ask for it she just got hit with a hockey puck and the player was ejected...
Yhe judge was right.
The system worked in this case.
We might as well stop here, we will never agree on this topic.
Plus.... you certainly don't want to get me started on people trying to send innocent citizens to jail over some ulterior motive. There's a lot of innocent people in jail because the judge or a jury on occasion does believe the wrong person.
Maybe he left something there..........