A Miserable Failure
From time to time Oklahoma’s criminal justice system runs amok, usually with results which shock the average person with its absurdity. Such was the case on March 10th, 2006 when Pawnee County District Judge Jefferson Sellers permitted convicted child rapist Gregory Lynn Bryant, 38, of Pawnee, Oklahoma to walk out of the courtroom with zero prison time and on a suspended sentence following a child rape conviction.
At Bryant’s sentencing on March 10, 2006 Judge Sellers announced that he felt “that a miscarriage of justice had occurred”. Sellers then imposed a thirty year sentence, suspended the sentence in its entirety, ordered Bryant to follow a sex-offender treatment program including polygraph examinations, pay for any mental health treatment for the victim, have no contact with the victim or her family and have no unsupervised contact with anyone younger than 18.
Obviously Judge Sellers felt that the state had failed to make its case against Bryant at trial. Yet the jury returned a guilty verdict. The judge stated “I am powerless to grant a new trial on my own since it had not been sought by the defense. The court does not sit as a 13th juror who can override the decision of a jury with respect to the credibility of witnesses.”
What led Judge Sellers to make such a statement?
Was it that, at trial, District Attorney Larry Stuart did not offer any medical evidence of rape? Was it that the nurse who performed the sexual assault examination upon the girl was not called to testify at the trial? Was it Sellers admission that he thought he had erred in failing to grant a trial continuance sought by the defense, which wanted to have the nurse who performed the sexual assault examination on the girl testify regarding the results?
How did defense attorney Stephen Cale’s failure to request a new trial following Bryant’s conviction figure into the situation? This in light of Judge Sellers’ statement that he was powerless to grant a new trial since the defense had not asked for one. And why would the defense not ask for a new trial if the accused was innocent and the judge was amicable to such a request? Does this indicate that the defense did not want to risk another trial? If so does that suggest guilt?
The handling of this case by the judge, jury, prosecution and defense raises the above and many more questions. Either an innocent man was convicted of a terrible crime or a guilty man was convicted and then let off with a figurative slap on the wrist. We may never know the whole truth.
What not is open to question is the fact that this case represents a miserable failure on the part of all involved.
