Danny Masterson Loses Appeal, 30-Year Prison Sentence Stands
Baca dalam 60 detik
- Pengadilan banding California menolak permohonan Danny Masterson, sehingga hukuman 30 tahun hingga seumur hidup untuk dua kasus pemerkosaan tetap berlaku.
- Majelis hakim menilai dalil bias agama dan kedaluwarsa tidak berdasar, sementara tim kuasa hukum menuding ada bukti baru yang diabaikan.
- Upaya hukum berikutnya akan dibawa ke Mahkamah Agung California, memperpanjang babak akhir sengketa hukum yang telah berlangsung lebih dari dua dekade.
Danny Masterson, the actor known for the series That '70s Show, failed to overturn a 2023 court ruling that found him guilty of two counts of forcible rape. A three-judge panel at a California appellate court rejected all arguments raised by the defense team, so the sentence of 30 years to life handed to the 50-year-old man stands.
The decision is a severe blow to Masterson's legal efforts, which have been underway since he filed his appeal the following year. In their petition, Masterson's attorneys argued that Judge Charlaine Olmedo, who presided over the trial, was prejudiced against the Scientology teachings practiced by their client. They also alleged that several of the judge's statements violated Masterson's constitutional right to religious freedom.
However, the appellate panel asserted that there was no evidence of hostility or deviation from neutrality toward Scientology. They wrote in the ruling that the jury in the case was not asked to judge the rightness or wrongness of the church's doctrine, so the presence of expert testimony about the practices of that faith did not violate the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.
Beyond the religious issue, the defense team also challenged the application of a 10-year statute of limitations that they claimed should have barred prosecution. This argument was rejected by the panel, which stated that the provision does not apply when the crime of rape is committed against more than one victim. Another request concerning the judge's decisions to admit evidence and a request for judicial notice was also denied as it was deemed not to violate the defendant's constitutional rights.
The appellate panel also rejected a separate habeas corpus petition claiming that Masterson did not receive adequate representation. Masterson's attorney, Cliff Gardner, said the ruling ignored new evidence submitted over the past year. According to him, two complaining witnesses had stated that their sexual experiences with Masterson were consensual and positive. Gardner asserted that his client is serving a life sentence for a crime he did not commit.
"No one in California — neither defendants nor victims of sexual crimes — is safer because of today's decision," Gardner said, as quoted from his statement.
Masterson's fellow attorney, Eric Multhaup, called the ruling "fundamentally wrong." He claimed the habeas corpus petition contained strong evidence that was never presented to the jury, including conversations between the two complaining witnesses and their close friends before the allegations surfaced. Multhaup argued that the appellate court merely summarized the prosecution's evidence in one paragraph without considering mitigating evidence.
The case began with reports from two women who were former members of the Church of Scientology. Prosecutors argued that the victims did not report immediately because they feared retaliation under church rules that prohibit members from reporting fellow members to police. The 2023 trial featured a former Scientologist as an expert witness to explain the church's beliefs and practices.
With the appeal denied, Masterson's legal team is now preparing to file a petition with the California Supreme Court. The move marks a new chapter in a legal battle that has lasted more than two decades, and raises the question of how far the high court will reassess evidence that the appellate panel has so far left untouched. Will the California Supreme Court bring relief to the defense efforts, or will it reinforce the existing ruling?
