"Rape Cop" Jurors: Moreno Definitely Raped Her, But "CSI Effect" Saved Him

A lack of DNA evidence seems to have been the deciding factor for jurors in the trial of two NYPD officers accused a raping a young woman in her East Village apartment in 2008. DNAinfo tracked down two women who served on the jury, and their comments definitely won't send you flying into a teeth-gnashing, window-smashing rage (assuming you're heavily sedated). "In my heart of hearts, I believe her that the officers did it," juror Melinda Hernandez says. Not to be outdone, another female juror says she's certain they were guilty.

"[Kenneth Moreno] raped her," the unidentified female juror tells DNAinfo. "There is no doubt in my mind." But never mind that whole "beyond a reasonable doubt" business, today's modern jury demands DNA. As juror John Finck, 57, explains, "We were strictly bound by the judge's instruction that there must be evidence beyond a reasonable doubt in order to convict the defendants of the major charges of the case."

That does NOT mean there needs to be DNA evidence, but as one legal expert told the Post after the verdict was announced, "CSI has made things difficult, there's no law saying that 'beyond a reasonable doubt' means we show you DNA. It means 'evidence that points to a moral certainty that is beyond dispute.'" "My heart breaks for her. I think the system failed her terribly," says Hernandez, the juror who played a crucial role in the system that acquitted the cops.

And if there's not enough bile rising up in your throat, don't miss the Post's profile on defense lawyer Joe Tacopina, the $750-an-hour attorney who won former Officer Kenneth Moreno's acquittal. The tabloid describes him as perhaps "the most hated lawyer in New York"—or as one colleague puts it, "He's slick, he's got a big ego, and he'll represent any scumbag." Or rather, he'll represent any gentleman who doesn't kiss and tell and really loves his girlfriend.

Speaking of gentleman callers, there's still a chance Moreno and his partner Franklin Mata could do time; multiple sources tell DNAinfo they expect the judge to "throw the book at them" over the official misconduct charges. They suspect Judge Gregory Carro is displeased with Moreno and his wife's disparaging comments about the accuser. As one lawyer puts it, "When you get a verdict like that you should keep your mouth shut and run from the courthouse. He may have done himself in... through his poor decision-making."

Update (9/9/11): Gothamist has published a long-form feature about the Rape Cop case, written by one of the jurors. It takes you behind the scenes during their deliberations, and explains how they came to their controversial verdict. Buy it today as a PDF or on Kindle.

Contact the author of this article or email tips@gothamist.com with further questions, comments or tips.

By John Del Signore in News on June 6, 2011 11:29 AM

Comments [rss]

Manderin

I'm pretty sure that Moreno and his rape partner in crime will lose everything in this victim's lawsuit against them and the city of NY. I think that the fact that the system so obviously failed her will actually make her win more money in the civil suit than she would have gotten from a civil trial jury had she gotten the justice she deserved. I did not trust officers much before this case and now I REALLY don't trust them.

Heidi

I left the area...but I've heard they're trying to make a hero out of the cop though...now he's assigned to teach children in the schools about the dangers of drugs, alcohol and gangs - again, nice system america...

TimeDown

I wish you had spoken up. I am not criticizing you because I understand the valid and good reasons not to but the more people who come forward the more members of the public will realize we have an ever growing problem. Hopefully they will.

Heidi

I've heard that prosecutors get frustrated about this CSI effect...and so this article disturbs me. It almost seems like a back-door ploy to teach the sheep they don't need to hold out for solid forensic evidence. The one thing everybody should understand is - not all criminals are dumb. And cops ESPECIALLY are going to know not to leave DNA evidence behind.

I was sexually assaulted by a cop during a traffic stop...when I kicked him - not to resist the arrest, but to make him stop massaging my vulva, clitoris and buttocks - his partner then tased me. It knocked me out...and when I came to, I went wild - screaming and kicking like a mad-woman. They used that to hurt me more...dropping me on my face on a curb with my hands cuffed behind my back. And when they got me to the jail cell...before they would remove my restraints, a female guard said "look at me", so I did (thinking she was going to ask if I would calm down so they could undo my cuffs and unstrap my legs) - she then pepper-sprayed me.

This all happened in america - at the end of 2005 - right smack dab in the middle of bush's administration. And still - no one will listen to me or do anything about it. Nice system america...

Guest

So the precedent that this verdict sets is that "Rape is OK as long as there's no DNA."

Heidi

Not just that - I think you also have to be a cop...

Guest

Good point. I'll revise in the form of a haiku:

To rape is OK
As long as you're a cop and
There's no DNA

________________________________

Simona Lo

how the f*ck did they afford a $750/hr laywer?!?!?!?!

TimeDown

There seems to be a big misconception here and in the general public that defendants are routinely winning acquittals. This is simply not true on the state or federal level. The media just pays a lot more attention to acquittals than all the numerous convictions. For reference, in 2010 only 0.5% of cases in New York City ended in acquittals: http://criminaljustice.state.n... . And the federal government in 2008 had a 90.3% conviction rate: http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/conte... or here for the whole report: http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/conte... .

AGDM

The only justice in this country is awarded to those with deep pockets. Now some people may understand why a lot of people just don't trust the system and those employed to uphold it. Seems they are looking out for number one primarily as evidenced by their behavior and how easily they get off the hook. I know they say if u can't beat em join em but I refuse to become a piece of shit.

Heidi

amen to that :)

Sulayman

I don't believe these jurors. they're probably changing their story afters seeing the media outcry. They had the option of declaring a hung jury if they were so convinced he was guilty.

Gothamistriss

The whole case was what she said vs. what he said. She was hammered and admittedly blacked out most of the night. I saw this verdict coming from a mile away. Doesn't mean he didn't do it, but our justice system is set up to let 5 guilty men go free rather then put 1 innocent man in jail. The justice system didn't fail, the prosecution did.

virgilstarkwell

our justice system is set up to let 5 guilty men go free rather then put 1 innocent man in jail. The justice system didn't fail, the prosecution did.
true and truer.

Heidi

Maybe the prosecution failed "accidentally on purpose" - those fucks work hand-in-hand with the cops everyday...but the point is - the prosecution as it stands - and the dumb - or fearful - jurors ARE our system. Put that in your pipe and smoke it :)

Guest

Go back and look at my earlier comments about this story. Of COURSE that cop raped her. But here's why my prof. in law school always said we should not have jurors. Because have you seen the majority of jurors? Sat there in court while they pick them? Far, far too many are complete. fucking. idiots. Just think of the idiots you encounter all the time. Absolutely no common sense. These morons praying to jesus for a better life because their life sucks balls and surely it's not their fault, etc. These folks are the same unemployed morons who make up juries and throw entire good cases out the window because they actually think they know better. That cop's wife is a bitch. She needs to keep her fucking mouth shut. "We've lost so much..." boo HOO moron. How about focusing on how your husband raped a chick when she was drunk. As always, it's not their fault. Noooooooooo

Spirit of 76

Like I wrote before, we need jurors, but professional ones rather than conscripted amateurs. People with intelligence and expertise whose only job is to decide cases, not watch the clock until their jury duty is over so they can go back to their regular employment. We need people who didn't get all of their legal training from TV shows. And no, a bench trial is not the same. I wouldn't want a single judge deciding the verdict any more than I'd want a US Supreme Court comprised of one judge.