In United States v. Santiago, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 8686 (3d Cir. 2012), the Third Circuit examined a conviction related to hostage taking. The defense argued the kidnapping was staged by the victim to get ransom money to pay for his gambling and/or sex addictions, but the trial and appellate courts held that testimony related to those arguments should be excluded.
A forensics expert for the defense investigated the victim's computer and "found various files indicative of child pornography and emails suggesting that Correa had solicited prostitutes, several online poker applications, miscellaneous financial information, a video game titled "River City Ransom," and a reference to a website that included the words "A Little Kidnapping Never Hurt Anyone." An e-mail was also found where the victim claimed "to be 'broke' ... while negotiating prices with prostitutes."
In the defense's original argument, they suggested that the hostage victim had actually staged the kidnapping in order to obtain ransom money to pay his gambling debts. The defense later conceded that the victim had no gambling debt and did not have a gambling addition. Instead, the new theory was that his addiction to porn and prostitutes gave him a financial motive for planning the kidnapping. The district court concluded that all testimony from the experts related to gambling and sex addition was not relevant, was hearsay, and/or was highly prejudicial.
On appeal, the Third Circuit affirmed, finding that "there was no evidence that [the victim] was in debt or that [his] income was insufficient to satisfy his sexual activities." His communication that he was "broke" was made "while negotiating prices with prostitutes" and was simply him "haggling over prices" as he "had the incentive to understate his ability to pay." Further, "[e]vidence of [the victim] soliciting prostitutes and viewing pornography would likely inflame the jury.
0 comments:
Post a Comment