Opinion ID: 835782
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The Victim's Testimony

Text: On direct examination, the victim testified that she ended her intimate live-in relationship with petitioner in June 1996 and started dating her current boyfriend, Klingforth, several months later. Klingforth was petitioner's best friend, and that fact made matters between petitioner and the victim increasingly acrimonious. At petitioner's invitation, the victim agreed to meet petitioner at his home on the evening of September 12, 1996, to finalize the breakup. Petitioner, a hairdresser, told the victim that he had an appointment with a client at his home at 8:00 p.m. The victim testified that she arrived at 6:40 p.m. Soon after she arrived, petitioner asked her to have sex with him, but she refused. She testified that petitioner insisted that she go to his bedroom to get a gift that he had left there for her. On the bed, she found a little ring-type box containing a handwritten note reading, Fuck you. The victim testified that petitioner then threatened her with a rifle, made her remove her clothing, and forced her to perform oral sex. He told her that he had AIDS and had slept with prostitutes and said, I think I'm going to just go ahead and fuck you. However, instead of further assaulting the victim, petitioner showed her that the rifle was not loaded by breaking it in half, opening it up, and [sliding] the barrel    down. The victim described the weapon as an old rifle with a silver barrel. Petitioner said that he would call Klingforth to tell him that they had made love for the last time and parted as friends. The victim left the house and went to her car, but petitioner followed her and took two letters from her car that she had written to him. Then petitioner's client arrived, and the victim drove away. The victim then described a series of telephone calls that she had placed and received after leaving petitioner's home. From the car, she called Klingforth, telling him that petitioner would be calling but that she had not consented to anything that petitioner might describe. Klingforth asked the victim whether petitioner had raped her, and she said that he had not. Upon arriving home, she called Klingforth again to say that she would call again shortly, after her son-in-law, who lived with her, had left the house. Later, she called Klingforth a third time and told him that petitioner had used a gun and had forced her to have oral sex. She then received a call from petitioner, who told her that he had placed a call to Klingforth as he had promised. Later that night, she called her therapist and left a message saying that petitioner had used a gun and had forced her to have oral sex. The following day, the victim told her employer about the incident, and he convinced her to call the police. Later, petitioner came to the victim's workplace, and her employer asked him to leave.