Several of you have asked us what Drew’s attorney did after he received the part of the police report not provided before trial. Due to the extreme discrepancy between her testimony under oath and what she had told police, along with other inconsistencies he filed a Motion to Set Aside The Verdicts. The motion brought forth several issues. Today’s post will only focus on the issue regarding the photos.
To be clear, we’re not saying that showing someone your semi-nude modeling photos is consenting to sexual contact. We are talking about two issues: the lack of credibility of her trial testimony and reasonable doubt.
Today I’ll share excerpts from the hearing regarding this issue.
The Court: Judge is talking, Attorney: Drew’s defense attorney is talking.
Transcript Pages: 124-127
Attorney: She acknowledged at trial she understood that that’s how he saw it, that it was leading him toward having sex with her. He didn’t want her to do it. She tells the court, I didn’t do it on that day. – – Then we find out a document that was unavailable to us at trial – – She said just the opposite. She said as she had previously done on numerous occasions with her friends, (she) began to show Drew her body photos with the intent of getting his feedback. Exactly what she says she didn’t do on this occasion.
The Court: When you compare (her) pages 66 and 67 you find that the top of page 67- – it’s true. She said at the bottom of page 68, Did you show him your modeling work? She says, No. The follow-up question, Was some of it posted? I didn’t have anything. I was moving. Question, you were moving, so you didn’t show him those things? No. In fact, isn’t that absolutely consistent with substantially consistent with Mr. Harrison’s page 146, line 12, where he said, She pulled out her phone. She was packing, so she didn’t have any portfolio books laying around. But on her phone she flipped through showing modeling photos, etc.
Attorney: What difference does that make, whether it’s on the phone or in the book? She says, I didn’t show him those things on that day, Your Honor.
The Court: All I’m saying, (Mr. Attorney) is I always focus, as your letter invited me to, on inconsistent testimony. I was interested in it. That’s why I reviewed the transcript. All I’m saying, maybe as I did on the Barnes & Noble issue, they both agree, (she) and Mr. Harrison, that she was moving and had her portfolio books apparently packed and unavailable.
Attorney: That’s irrelevant to the issue that’s before the court. If she is showing him photographs of herself in this state and she knows that’s what leads him on, whats the relevance of whether it’s in a portfolio book or she showed him on her phone? When she admits she did it when she’s talking to the police and she denies – – and the court didn’t get to the next exchange where she says or I asked, I think you told the court you did send him these photos. And she said, At some point, but not on that day.
The Court: I think our failure to communicate is what is the purpose for which you’re making the point? Is it just she said A versus Z? I’m finding there is some consistency and some inconsistency. They both agree the portfolio books were packed up. He said she pulled out her phone. She didn’t say that.
Attorney: She says she showed him photos. She says she didn’t show him photos.
The Court: Couldn’t she have been thinking of – –
Attorney: I didn’t ask her did you show him portfolio books. I said, Did you show him photos.
The Court: I know, but when she says, I didn’t have anything. I was moving. She’s clearly thinking about her portfolio books.
Attorney: I asked her, Judge, three times. Did you show him photos? And she says, No. She didn’t show him any of those photos on that day. She had shown them to him before and she admits that that led him on and he complained about that.
The Court: Just to finish my thought, what I was going to say is the question is, is this just a pure credibility issue saying A versus Z or are you arguing – – I guess, you’re arguing both, that in addition to the inconsistency, you’re saying it tends to show that he believed it was consensual and he believed he was being led on.
Attorney: And I think it shows he knew she was leading him on at that point toward having sex because she knew that’s the effect it had on him. She admits that under oath. She wanted to tell this court, I didn’t lead him on because I didn’t show him any photographs. Yet she admitted she did that when she’s talking to the police at the very initial conversation she had with the police.
This back and forth discussion went on and on.
Bottom line. Drew’s attorney was saying you found him guilty because you believed her testimony over his. Now he’s presenting not only this inconsistency, but other inconsistencies that I’ll share in future posts. I’m trying to keep each post brief while providing relevant parts of transcripts.
I sat there wanting to scream, watching the judge argue with Drew’s attorney about A versus Z when my son’s future, life and reputation were all on the line. I watched Drew’s shoulders trembling. He knew the truth and he knew the truth was being twisted.
The issue was shifted to portfolio books. The real issue before the court was denying having shown erotic modeling photos when she stated Drew saw that as leading him on. Drew’s testimony was consistent with the police report and we didn’t have access to this portion of the report prior to trial. Drew was the one giving honest testimony.
If the judge was so adamant about holding Drew to his exact words and testimony why didn’t he hold the woman to the same standard?