After nearly two weeks of testimony, the civil rape trial of NBA star Derrick Rose and two friends reached closing arguments Tuesday — with the defendants’ attorney deriding their accuser as a greedy liar and the woman’s lawyer calling the men “sexual deviants.”
The disparaging portrayals came as the two sides tried one last time to sway jurors before the panel begins deliberations.
“This is a classic case of gang rape,” said Waukeen McCoy, the plaintiff’s lead attorney. “They have no remorse, they are not apologetic.”
In a presentation that lasted more than a hour, McCoy walked jurors through a review of much of the testimony to highlight what he said were major inconsistencies among the defendants’ accounts of what occurred during the encounter.
And he returned repeatedly to the trial’s central question — whether the woman, who had been in a relationship with Rose until shortly before the alleged rape, had consented to sex with the three men in the early morning hours of Aug. 27, 2013.
McCoy has asserted that was impossible because the defendants had plied the woman with alcohol and drugged her, leaving her incapacitated.
“She’s not looking for a quick dollar,” McCoy said, “she’s looking for accountability.”
The Times generally does not name people who allege they are victims of sexual assault.
Rose’s attorney, Mark Baute, then addressed the jurors, urging them to see the woman as a jilted lover who grew angry and concocted the rape allegation as a means to extort money.
The woman, Baute said, “is not a real rape victim.… She is a liar.”
“The only reason we’re here,” he added, “is because Derrick Rose has money and she wants some of it.”
Over several days of testimony from the woman, Rose and his friends — Randall Hampton and Ryan Allen — the jury heard dramatically different accounts of the night in question.
Both sides agree that the woman and a friend came to the Beverly Hills house that Rose was renting and drank with the men. There also is no dispute that hours later, the three men went to the woman’s apartment and had sex with her.
What is at issue is whether the woman was intoxicated and whether she had invited the men to come to the apartment for sex.
During the trial, each side sought to prove its account by selectively citing dozens of text messages that were exchanged among the woman and the defendants throughout the day.
McCoy and Baute returned to the texts in their closing arguments.
McCoy held them up as evidence that the woman was unaware all three of the men were coming over and that she did not intend to have sex with them; Baute used them to demonstrate that the woman was alert in the hours before the alleged assault and wanted the men to come to her apartment for sex.
The jury of six women and two men must reach unanimous verdicts on the three defendants separately, and on each of three allegations: trespassing, sexually battery and battery.
For more news on federal courts in Southern California, follow me on Twitter: @joelrubin