The rape case against former Utah State University student Stacey Nelson-Waggoner was not prejudiced by testimony from two women who had also accused him of raping them, the Utah Supreme Court ruled Tuesday.
Rather, testimony about Nelson-Waggoner's other alleged bad acts was greatly needed to prevent his trial from turning "into a contest of credibility between defendant and" the victim, states the court's unanimous opinion, written by Justice Michael J. Wilkins.
The decision upholds a prior Supreme Court ruling that allows rape prosecutions to include testimony of the alleged offender's other bad acts to demonstrate "a pattern of behavior in which the defendant engaged that was consistent with the pattern of behavior" on trial, according to the decision.
"It clarifies that serial rapists who have shown a distinctive pattern of behavior cannot treat incidents of that behavior as separate and non-relevant to one another," said Tracey Tabet, a spokeswoman for the attorney general's office.
The decision will also help establish the "element of consent" in other rape trials that would otherwise degenerate into a he-said, she-said debate.
"In this particular case, that is what was at issue," Tabet said. Nelson-Waggoner and the victim "were both arguing different versions of what happened and by allowing this testimony to establish that there was a distinctive pattern of behavior that he had engaged in" the jury could determine whether the activity had been consensual.
Defense attorneys were not impressed.
"It's a very sad day," said attorney Bel-Ami de Montreux, who handled the appeal, after learning of the ruling.
Nevertheless, "we feel like this will not be the end of it." At the least, attorneys can seek civil review alleging Nelson-Waggoner's civil rights were violated by allowing "extremely prejudicial" evidence into the trial, de Montreux said.
Nelson-Waggoner, 24, had asked the state's highest court to find that 1st District Judge Ben Hadfield erred in allowing two women testify Nelson-Waggoner had raped them under similar circumstances as the victim in the case on trial.
Prosecutors filed five counts of rape, a first-degree felony, against Nelson-Waggoner in March 1997 after five women accused him of raping them at separate times between December 1996 and February 1997.
The first trial resulted in an acquittal after Hadfield decided the rules of evidence prohibited his other accusers to testify at trial. But a Supreme Court ruling two months before his second trial, the one reviewed by the court, opened the way for testimony on alleged prior bad acts to be admitted to prove "the method of operation and how these rapes were committed," according to the opinion.
"First . . . there were significant and striking similarities in the manner in which (Nelson-Waggoner) carried out (the victims's) rape and the manner in which he allegedly carried out the other rapes," the opinion states. "Second, the time between all of the incidents was a brief 10 weeks.
"The combination of these two factors makes the bad acts evidence in this case highly probative," and "the need for the bad acts evidence was great," the opinion states.
Nelson-Waggoner is serving a five-years-to-life prison term for his rape conviction, and a consecutive 10-years-to-life sentence for the aggravated sex-assault conviction.
E-mail: hans@desnews.com