Ex-Idaho lawmaker convicted of rape was denied a retrial. He’ll be sentenced next week
A district judge on Thursday denied former Idaho state Rep. Aaron von Ehlinger’s motion to retry his case or acquit his rape conviction. Von Ehlinger is now expected to be sentenced next week.
Von Ehlinger was found guilty of raping a legislative intern by a 12-person jury in April. The former intern, 19 at the time of the sexual assault, said he forced her to perform oral sex at his apartment after they had dinner. The woman was kept anonymous throughout the trial and was referred to only as J.V. in court records.
Fourth District Judge Michael Reardon said that in a case like von Ehlinger’s, in which the jury found beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was guilty, he’s not “inclined to try and second-guess that jury’s decision.”
“Based on those reasons, I’m going to deny the motion for judgment of acquittal and deny the motion for a new trial,” Reardon said in court Thursday.
Von Ehlinger is expected to be sentenced at 3:30 p.m. Wednesday at the Ada County Courthouse. The former Republican legislator resigned from his Idaho House seat last year after an ethics panel looked into his behavior for “conduct unbecoming” and recommended expelling him.
Motion for retrial, Cox presents witnesses
During the hourlong hearing, Reardon said he would consider three questions: whether von Ehlinger deserved a retrial, whether he deserved acquittal and whether his constitutional rights were violated.
Jon Cox, von Ehlinger’s attorney, brought forward two witnesses, including Alicia Schiffer, his legal assistant. Schiffer testified that in April, while the jury was deliberating in von Ehlinger’s case, Cox Law received an email from a Boise resident named Brandy Bentzinger.
The contents of the email were not presented in court Thursday, but Schiffer said in her testimony that the email included images of Facebook posts between Bentzinger and an unidentified man.
Bentzinger was expected to testify about the contents of her affidavit, which could have presented additional evidence and was grounds for Cox’s motion to retry the case, as Cox argued the potential new evidence discredited J.V.
In Cox’s motion, he said he filed an affidavit by Bentzinger. Cox alleged that the affidavit proves J.V. made various claims to Bentzinger about the sexual assault that were “conflicting with the version of events” provided by a nurse who examined the victim. The affidavit was sealed and inaccessible to the public, and the Idaho Statesman has been unable to review it.
Reardon disagreed with Cox. While the judge didn’t disclose the specifics of the affidavit in court, he said it could be just as discrediting for von Ehlinger.
Bentzinger briefly testified Thursday and confirmed that she previously worked with J.V. at a cleaning service company. But before Bentzinger could continue, Ada County Deputy Prosecutor Whitney Welsh objected and asked the judge if she could ask a few questions.
During Welsh’s questions, Bentzinger said she had spoken with Boise Police Detective Brandon Joseph on June 22. Welsh then questioned her about previous conversations she’d had with J.V.
“Isn’t it true that you told Detective Joseph that J.V. said that she did not want Mr. Aaron von Ehlinger’s penis in her mouth?” Welsh asked.
“I assume so, yes,” Bentzinger responded.
“And isn’t it true that J.V. also told you that she turned her head away when Mr. Aaron von Ehlinger attempted to put his penis in her mouth?” Welsh asked.
“Yes,” Bentzinger responded.
Welsh objected to Bentzinger’s testimony and argued that the witness didn’t have any information pertinent to the case. Reardon agreed and ended the testimony early, and said that it wasn’t going to provide anything different than the affidavit he had already reviewed.
Judge: Von Ehlinger’s constitutional rights not violated
Cox also argued that von Ehlinger’s case should be acquitted because Ada County Deputy Prosecutor Katelyn Margueritte Farley allegedly asked leading questions at trial to Anne Wardle, the nurse who performed the sexual assault exam on J.V. A leading question is when an individual asks a question that suggests a certain answer.
Cox, in his motion for acquittal, claimed that Wardle testified only that von Ehlinger “forced his penis” in J.V.’s mouth after Farley led the witness. Wardle initially testified that von Ehlinger grabbed the back of J.V.’s head and “pulled her head down towards his penis.”
But Reardon said along with Wardle’s “numerous statements” about what von Ehlinger did, testimony from Wardle’s report also mentioned that J.V. had sustained an injury to the back of her neck consistent with someone resisting forcible penetration.
“There is no question that penetration occurred,” Reardon said. “The question then became whether or not that was consensual.”
Reardon said he wouldn’t reverse a decision by the jurors, who unanimously agreed that the oral sex was not consensual.
Reardon lastly took up Cox’s argument that the court violated von Ehlinger’s Sixth Amendment rights because he couldn’t cross-examine or confront J.V. Reardon pointed to countless other cases in which victims don’t testify, such as murder or drug crimes.
During the trial, J.V. took the stand briefly, but became overwhelmed with emotion and stepped down. Her short testimony was stricken from the record.
“I understand the concern about an accuser not being in court and delivering evidence, but there are a number of cases which are tried and proven without the injured party giving testimony,” Reardon said in court. “If the law required that the injured party gave testimony, the crime of homicide could never be prosecuted.”
