Photo by Michael Woodward
OFFICER IN COURT: APD Officer Bryan Benson, near right, attends a preliminary hearing of charges against him stemming from an alleged rape on May 29.
Anderson Police Officer Bryan Benson, charged with raping a woman in custody, faced a preliminary hearing on July 29 in which Shasta County Superior Court Judge James Ruggiero said he strongly suspects that Benson committed acts as charged. Benson has been charged with rape, kidnapping, bribery and assault under the color of authority in connection with the alleged rape on May 29, and Benson now faces a formal arraignment of the charges on Aug. 12.
Prosecutor Curtis Woods, a deputy district attorney, said after the hearing he expects to add the charge of kidnapping for the purpose of rape. The added charge is a combination of the kidnapping and rape charges that involves a "substantially higher penalty," he said.
In a telephone interview after the hearing, Woods said that the laboratory results on seminal fluids found at the site of the alleged rape identifies Benson's presence. Woods added that that information was not necessary at the preliminary hearing to show probable cause.
At the preliminary hearing, Kristen Fredrick, an investigator with the Redding Police Department, related the victim's accusations and story of her alleged rape by Benson to the court, in response to questions from Woods.
Benson, in a gray suit, sat quietly next to his attorney occasionally writing notes throughout the hearing. His family sat in the front row in public seating area. Anderson Police Captain Robert Kirvin was also attended the hearing, stationing himself in the back row of the audience.
Following Fredrick's testimony, Benson's attorney, Stephen Palazzo of Goyette and Associates of Sacramento, requested all charges be dismissed due to insufficient evidence to support the crimes as charged.
The charge of bribery, he said, requires the receipt of something of value. But the law does not view sex as something of value, Palazzo said.
As for the charge of rape, Palazzo said that the only proof that exists is the "self-serving statements" of the victim saying that she did not consent.
Regarding the kidnapping charge, Palazzo said the charge requires the victim be removed a substantial distance away or there must be an increase in harm to the victim. During the alleged rape, Palazzo noted that Benson and the victim were within view of a public street according to Fredrick's testimony, and the route taken was near enough to the route to the Shasta County Jail, so there was no kidnapping evident.
Judge Ruggiero denied the defense's request to drop charges and called for an arraignment of the charges on Aug. 12 at 8:30 a.m.
In a settlement hearing held prior to the preliminary hearing on July 28, the prosecution and defense did not resolve the case, leading to the preliminary hearing.
Cottonwood fire on First Street
Scripps Interactive Newspapers Group
Comments » 16
anotherjeff writes:
(thank you Michael Woodward)
Represented by Stephen Palazzo of Goyette and Associates of Sacramento
**********************************************
Paul Goyette and Goyette & Associates, Inc.,(G&A) have an unprecedented record in representing high profile criminal defendants in complex cases that are closely covered by the media. Paul Goyette is currently enjoying an unprecedented win streak in high profile criminal defense cases having not lost a case that has gone to verdict since 1995.
"Will you pay more to have the G&A team represent you?"
Of course. But it comes back to the fundamental question of how important is it to you to win your case?
"Why choose G&A to represent you or your loved one in a high profile criminal case?"
The answer is simple: How bad do you need to win? Put another way, how important is it to you win this case? http://www.goyetteassociates.com/firm...
anotherjeff writes:
Watch Out! The 'spin' is coming.
**************************************************
Goyette & Associates Inc., has assembled a unique team of highly specialized experts to achieve the result you need. G&A’s Chief of Staff, Jennifer Coalson-Perez, coordinates all media relations. Jennifer’s long history in the legislature and public relations allows our team to get out in front of negative media stories and in fact, uses the media to our advantage. Many lawyers will tell you they are great at handling the media when they have never been in front of a television camera in their life. The key to successfully representing clients in high profile cases is confidence. ibid.
anotherjeff writes:
The lawyers representing Benson, have "...NOT LOST A CASE that has gone to verdict since 1995." (Caps added for emphasis) ibid.
anotherjeff writes:
From Benson's lawyer's promo materials:
******************************************
"Will you pay more to have the G&A team represent you?"
Of course. But it comes back to the fundamental question of how important is it to you to win your case?
******************************************
I would add: 'Besides, it's the TAXPAYER'S money, anyway.'
anotherjeff writes:
Re: DNA evidence.
Note that the long-awaited DNA results were strangely 'ignored' in court today.
This hearing had been continued from last week SOLELY for the lab results.
Palazzo ONLY argued that 'rape' was 'consensual' (you slime!), NOT that it didn't occur. (Believe me, if there was ANY chance, he would claim it didn't happen.) (Oh, he DID claim that.)
One could easily conclude that the results were POSITIVE! And that this evidence 'somehow' got squelched from public view. Who do you suppose would have an interest in that? These are some VERY powerful interests/people. What was the quote from the PR promo from Palazzo' firm - something about controlling the media?
anotherjeff writes:
"...allows our team to get out in front of negative media stories and in fact, uses the media to our advantage."
Yea, that's it.
anotherjeff writes:
Don't let 'em get to ya', Mr. Woodward.
anotherjeff writes:
Mr. Woodward, thank you for updating the story with DNA information. A positive DNA test is NEWS! The rationale for NOT introducing the evidence at the Prelim is WEAK. I suspect a attempted 'spin' by Palazzo and ilk.
joeblow writes:
(This comment was removed by the site staff.)
irishgurly writes:
hmmm...... What stupid comment did joeblow have to say in order for somebody to delete it????
irishgurly writes:
Redding.com has to preread my comments before posting them unlike Anderson so .....In response to stupidityamongstbrilliance:
Perhaps, Mr. Goodwin and this young lady already had an ongoing relationship?
You must be a sleezebag to thing the victim would have anything to do with either of the pigs!!! She had never met or even seen either Officer in her life. So keep up your stupidity and support your local rapists.
joeblow writes:
I wonder if the results from the "victims" last DUI were also fixed!!
citizenactivist writes:
So what are you suggesting JOEBLOW? an
ongoing business relationship existing
between Benson and the victim?
so every time she'd go drinking then
driving Benson would appear and demand
his due? got it.
joeblow writes:
Could be an on-going relationship, but I was thinking more along the lines that the "victim" isn't as angelic as some are saying. She's clearly got issues, so maybe the character of Benson is at issue, but sounds like her's might be too!!! I'm sure that Benson's attorney has already dug up the dirt on her anyway!
anotherjeff writes:
QUIT blaming the 'victim'!
suku writes:
Hmmm, it is possible that the victim's last test was fixed. Is that why she got a DUI? Someone 'fixed' it to prove she was 'guilty?'
Share your thoughts
Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.