Written by Adrienne Lawrence at ESPN.com
On Wednesday, a California federal jury cleared New York Knicks guard Derrick Rose and two of his friends of committing civil rape. A former girlfriend of the Knicks guard, identified as Jane Doe, had made the accusations against the three men, suing them for $21.5 million.
Here’s what you need to know about the jury’s decision and the potential consequences for Rose both on and off the basketball court.
What did Doe have to prove?
The jury was considering three civil claims against Rose and his friends: sexual battery, battery and trespass. The most significant claim was for sexual battery — i.e., rape.
There was no dispute about whether Doe and the three men had sex. The issue was whether Doe consented to sex. Doe said she was too intoxicated to consent.
To prove that, Doe had to show (1) that the effects of the drugs or alcohol prevented her from consenting; and (2) that Rose and his friends did not actually and reasonably think she was capable of giving consent.
What did the jury decide?
The jury decided that Doe didn’t establish her claims by a preponderance of the evidence. Basically, this means she failed to show it was more likely than not that her version of the night was true. Or said another way, the jury didn’t believe that Doe’s version of the night was 51 percent more likely to be true than Rose’s version of the events.
How did the jury come to its decision?
The eight jurors on the panel (six women and two men) had to come to a unanimous decision on each of Doe’s claims in order for her to win.
The jury does not explain in the verdict its reasons for the decision. But after the trial, several jurors spoke with the media.
Several members of the jury said they were swayed by the fact Doe did not have any physical evidence, such as a rape kit.
One juror, identified as Jared, 25, said after the verdict that the jury panel did not find Doe’s tears credible. He said, “It felt like she was playing us.”
To continue reading this article, click here.
