This morning Judge Norman E. Young took a third round of arguments related to whether or not attorneys could discuss Jeremy Williams's prior conviction of forcible rape in his upcoming trail for a 2014 alleged rape in the Riverton area. And ultimately, he ruled that it is admissible and relevant evidence. Williams has been tried in this case once already, but a mistrial
was declared due to a misreading of laboratory evidence by his defense team.
Now, with a new defense team, Williams's attorney Devon Petersen wanted to
put his clients' 1997 rape conviction off the table for presenting to the
jury. He argued that a jury would be unable to objectively look at the
evidence in the case once it new of his client's previous conviction. He
argued that it was prejudicial and not relevant due to significant details
between the two cases.
The prosecution pointed out that Young permitted the evidence to be used in
the first trial, and that nothing had changed. The prosecution outlined
multiple reasons why the prior history was legally admissible.
Young, delivering his decision, broke down his analysis point by point.
Noting that this type of decision is a common reason for appeals to the
Supreme Court, he called the task one of the most "frustrating and
difficult" decisions he has to make.
Williams's second trial is scheduled for May. Read more background on the