Estimated read time: 3-4 minutes
This archived news story is available only for your personal, non-commercial use. Information in the story may be outdated or superseded by additional information. Reading or replaying the story in its archived form does not constitute a republication of the story.
SALT LAKE CITY — The Utah Supreme Court heard arguments on Wednesday from attorneys for Torrey Green, a former Utah State University football player who is appealing his multiple convictions of rape.
Green was sentenced to 26 years to life in prison in 2019 for the sexual assaults of six women. Green's attorneys argued that the cases of each of the six women were incorrectly consolidated into one case, and asked the Supreme Court to overturn Green's convictions.
"This is a somewhat unique case in which there were these six combined, consolidated cases ... the allegations were contested, he said/she said allegations, and the state then introduced prior consistent statements repeatedly to support the alleged victims' description of events," said Freyja Johnson, one of Green's attorneys.
David Simpson, assistant solicitor general at the Utah Attorney General's Office, rebutted the claims by Green's attorneys. He pointed out that the claims of each of the women had similarities, and it was important that the original case show a pattern of behavior, rather than being dependent on one victim's claim alone.
"Torrey Green wanted to attack each victim individually as a fabricator and a liar, and he wanted to proceed as if all of the charges against him were merely he said/she said cases which depended on the credibility of each individual victim alone," Simpson told the five justices. "But that would not have been true. The likelihood that so many women would be able to independently fabricate such similar claims against him was exceedingly low. And, fundamentally, at the end of the day, the victims were not alone."
Simpson argued that the trial was fair, and the convictions should be affirmed by the Supreme Court.
Green's attorneys responded, clarifying their argument was not that it was "pure chance" that similar allegations were made by each woman, but said they believed there were other motives the women may have fabricated their stories. They pointed to a Salt Lake Tribune article about the original accusations, after which other accusers came forward.
A couple of the justices questioned whether there would need to be evidence to prove that a victim had motive to lie or fabricate evidence. Green's attorneys claimed such motive could be implied and then vetted through cross-examination or argument.
After the arguments, Simpson told KSL-TV that the Supreme Court seems to be struggling with where to draw clear lines around the issue of when to admit evidence of multiple accusations against a single defendant.
"I'm hopeful that we, as the prosecution, have provided them a way that they'll be able to draw those clear rules while still ensuring the defendants are going to be able to have a fair trial and that victims are going to be able to get a fair say in the process, too," he said.
Simpson said he believes that if the Supreme Court affirms Green's convictions, it would make it easier to admit similar evidence of other acts of sexual assault in cases of alleged serial rape, which he thinks would make the process more fair going forward.
"My hope is that if we're able to have this conviction upheld, that it can set a precedent," he continued. "... We can tell victims that you won't be alone and we'll be able to tell the jury that your claims should be believed because other people have told similar claims in a way that would be very difficult for people to fabricate and make up."
Although arguments are complete, the Supreme Court could take months or possibly a year or more to issue an opinion in the case.
