The trial of the two former Ohio State football players accused of rape is currently underway this week, with the center of attention being a video captured on a cellphone that captures the sound of a woman discussing her consent to engage in sexual activity and crying.
On Tuesday, defense attorneys and prosecutors disagreed on their opening arguments. The jury should consider what the video taken by one of the men means and whether the woman was coerced.
The charges that each man is facing are first-degree felonies, specifically one charge of kidnapping and two charges of rape. The alleged incident took place on Feb. 4, 2020, in a Northwest Side apartment, where a 19-year-old woman, who was 19 at the time, was reportedly sexually assaulted by Amir I. Riep and Jahsen L. Wint, who were both 24. Currently, the two individuals are being tried in the Franklin County Common Pleas Court.
The Dispatch refrains from disclosing the identities of purported victims of sexual violence unless they give their permission.
Previous connected narrative: Trial to commence for former Ohio State football players charged with sexual assault.
On Tuesday, the woman went to Riep and Wint’s apartment to spend a few hours with Riep and potentially engage in video game play. She testified about this when she took the witness stand.
Wint forcefully raped her and forcibly removed her clothes, proceeding to assault Riep. She frequently described the horrifying details, often shedding tears as she did so.
Wint and Riep, the defense attorneys, said during the opening arguments that both men felt ashamed afterwards but had consensual sex with the woman.
Dan Sabol, the defense attorney for Riep, stated that when the woman started to feel uneasy, the men retreated.
The woman stated that Riep coerced her into agreeing on video to engage in consensual sexual activities while she was still unclothed, following the sexual acts.
Sabol said that he instructed his client to always make sure to get it on record that you do whatever is necessary to avoid ending up in a Franklin County courtroom, because he was instructed at a prior week’s football team meeting at OSU to take a video.
Throughout his initial statements, Daniel Meyer, an Assistant Prosecutor from Franklin County, urged the jury to carefully observe the individuals speaking on the video and consider the tone of their voices.
The short video shown in the courtroom was poorly illuminated and did not show any visuals, but it did showcase the voices of Riep and the female person.
Agreeing with him, she inquires if Riep desires her tearful countenance to be included in the recording, and requests him to affirm in the video that the sexual encounter was consensual.
The lady stated on Tuesday, “I was concerned that I wouldn’t be able to return home if I didn’t mention” that.
The prosecution pointed out that the woman was forced to wash away any DNA evidence by directing her to wash her vagina and then take a shower, according to Riep.
Sabol stated that the woman gladly accompanied him, continuously apologizing throughout the encounter. He mentioned that Riep consistently showers following sexual activities.
During the court proceedings, photographs depicting bruises and scratches on the lady’s physique were presented as evidence. These images were captured by a sexual assault nurse examiner on February 6th. The following day, the woman disclosed that she pursued a civil protection order in order to safeguard herself against the two individuals. Subsequently, a few hours later, the woman reported the purported rape incident to the Columbus police.
Defense attorneys said the woman’s story about that night has changed over time while Riep’s and Wint’s stories have stayed the same.
Sam Shamansky, the defense attorney for Wint, declared, “The veracity remains unaltered… The truth remains steadfast.” “I will demonstrate this and expose her falsehood.”
Riep and Wint were the first to be charged when the police affidavit submitted to Franklin County Municipal Court aligns with this, according to Sabol. He mentioned that the woman initially informed the police that the sexual encounter with Riep began as consensual, exemplifying the defense’s argument.
The trial by jury of Riep and Wint is anticipated to endure for numerous days.