« HAIDL & Parsons v Parsons at the LA Times | Main | Cross that bridge when you come it, if it's still there »

Complete Haidl 3 Verdict Coverage

Below is R. Scott Moxley's reporting on the verdict in the Haidl 3 rape case, as it appeared on The Blotter, with the most recent posts on top. For complete coverage of all aspects of the case, see the Weekly's Haidl Gang Rape Archive.


March 19, 2006



LA Times v the Weekly on Haidl Rape Plea


Filed under: Main — R. Scott Moxley @ 11:47 am

If there ever was any doubt that LA Times columnist Dana Parsons is the laziest, most misinformed journalist in the Haidl Gang Rape saga, consider his new column. In the past, he's blamed OC District Attorney Tony Rackauckas (not the rapists or their lawyers) for torturing Jane Doe, the victim. He's alleged that the DA never considered a plea deal that would have saved Doe from testifying at the second trial. He's claimed prison would not be an appropriate punishment for the rapists and later, after sentencing and a great deal of pressure from outraged women, claimed he supported six-year prison sentences.Those are three of the many errors Parsons has told over the years. (See our online Haidl Gang Rape archive and last Sunday's blog post: Parsons v Parsons.)In today's column, Parsons does a clever if unsuccessful job of defending his latest mistake. He says he only learned on Friday that the defense had rejected a plea deal before the launch of the second trial in February 2005.

Parsons doesn't explain that this lone fact destroys his recent anti-Rackauckas column. Nor does he explain why it takes him so long to get the news.

OC Weekly readers have known for 53 weeks what Parsons sadly just discovered.

From the Feb. 10, 2005, issue of the Weekly: "In the days before Haidl II began, a plea-bargain deal was in the works: Haidl, Nachreiner and Spann would admit guilt, accept three-year sentences and a lengthy probation. The district attorney's office refused comment, but sources said the deal was ready to go until Cavallo nixed it the day before trial began."

Getting facts wrong about plea deals and other key events, remaining silent about slimy defense lawyer tactics, blaming the prosecutor for prosecuting the case, not bothering to attend an overwhelming majority of the hearings, relying exclusively on the defense team for information, etc.–none of that compares to the biggest mistake: Assuming the girl was not unconscious during the crime. That blunder fueled all of his numskull columns, including the one that had Parsons lecturing and blaming the 16-year-old victim. She was just as responsible for the gang rape as the three men, he argued early in the case.

If Parsons really wants to issue a mea culpa, he should apologize to Jane Doe for perpetuating the defense lie that she faked unconsciousness because she was "a slut." He should also apologize to his readers, who've come to expect more thorough research. What happened to the days when he bravely championed victims?

The Times has a new slogan for Orange County: "Now More Than Ever," a cute play in OC on Republican Richard Nixon's 1972 slogan. (The paper has been seeking conservative readers for years.) But if it's Parsons on Haidl, the slogan should be: Clueless More Than Ever.




• • •



March 17, 2006







Haidl: The Art of Defending a Gang Rapist



Filed under: Main — R. Scott Moxley @ 4:58 pm



Last week, Orange County Register columnist Frank Mickadeit publicized Marge Miller's attack on my work in the Haidl gang-rape case. Miller, who lives in Minneapolis and claims she is Greg Haidl's great-aunt, knows exactly who to blame for the July 2002 rape: the victim, Jane Doe, who was 16 and unconscious when Haidl, Keith Spann and Kyle Nachreiner videotaped themselves sexually assaulting her, vaginally and rectally, with, among other things, a Snapple bottle, lit cigarette, apple juice can and pool cue. The men were sentenced to six years in prison on March 10.


But maybe word hasn't gotten back to Minneapolis yet. Miller still sends me e-mails and–apparently believing she could embarrass me–forwarded copies of our recent exchange to Mickadeit. He quoted her calling me "a jerk," asking me to "grow up" and insisting that I stop writing "biased crap" and "trash."


"You make me sick," Miller concluded.


My pal Mickadeit wasn't allowed to tell his readers the whole story, though. "I wish I could print Moxley's reply [directly to Miller], but at the last minute on deadline last night, an editor made me cut it," he wrote in his March 16 column. "No problem with letting her rip Moxley."


To aid psychiatrists, psychologists and the folks at the FBI's behavior sciences lab in their studies, I'm publishing Miller's e-mails from the course of the Haidl saga. They offer insights into why the Haidl family blamed the victim all the way until the day of sentencing. At the end of her 14 e-mails is my reply to her post-sentencing rant.



*"I am disgusted at your very biased reporting on the rape trial. It is obvious you have already condemned and sentenced the three young men. I see nothing in your article that in any way attributes some of the blame for this act to the girl. She went there willingly expecting group sex and got it. She is not a sweet little virgin as you make her out to be. This case has been blown out of all proportion due to Don Haidl's standing in the community. Why is it that all your reporting refers to 'Haidl' and not the other two boys? What is the meaning of your headline 'Haidl Your Daughters'? It makes no sense. These boys are not in any way a threat to society and should not be given jail time. There are hardened murderers and terrorists out there who are a threat to society and who do not get jail time like is proposed for these young boys. I'd also like to know where the Orange County Weekly got the tape to view and write so vividly about, when the people in the jury room were not allowed to see it? Please be more fair in your future reporting as journalists are supposed to be." (May 9, 2004)



*"Where did you get the tape that you so vividely [sic] described in your article? It wasn't available to the jury room people so how did the OC Weekly get it? Also, what does this headline mean: Haidl Your Daughters? It makes no sense. You said I was biased for the defense. I can be biased. I am not a journalist who is supposed to just present the facts. Your are [sic] biased for the prosecution and it shows!!!" (May 10, 2004)



*"I just went on-line and read your article on the Haidl Rape case and again you are at it with your story entitled 'Faultless.' What is your point? Why don't you mention the other two boys involved instead of just Greg Haidl? What about little Jane Doe? I heard your magazine was sleazy and now I know where you got that reputation. What you print is sleazy. Why don't you go find another scapegoat other than Greg Haidl and where did you, Mr. Moxley, get all your eyewitness accounts of the tape that was not supposed to be available to the public? Do you have a copy of the tape or are you making all this up? I have a feeling you are making it up because the tape could not be as bad as you vividly describe. Get the facts before you write articles." (May 13, 2004)



*"You are such an idiot. Doesn't say much for OC Weekly to have YOU on their staff. No, you did not get under my skin. You just think you did and that shows how stupid you are. I just know you are a liar and an exaggerator—trying to get porno readers I guess. Suppose that is all who read your rag. I don't! Happened to find it (your rag) on internet and noticed you were out of line in your reporting. Of course, sleazy magazines hire sleazy reporters so guess that is why you have a job. You won't find this high class person reading your rag again. Don't cry! You have enough sleazy people reading it." (May 14, 2004)



*"You remind me of a 13-year-old who just discovered smut and likes to talk dirty. Grow up!" (May 14, 2004)



*"Moxley, you are so obnoxious. Your language is filthy! You claim [pro-Haidl defense Los Angeles Times columnist] Dana Parsons did not see the tape. Where did you see it? Jane Doe was and is a slut as Attorney Joe Cavallo pegged her. She was not a victim but a willing participant who is in this for money—the money she intends to sue the Haidl family for. You are a weazel [sic] and a dirt bag and also very stupid that you cannot see through Jane Doe." (July 6, 2004)



*"My son is a Police Lieutenant and one is a College Professor. How about you jerk?" (July 6, 2004)



*"Like I said my sons are 1. a Police officer and 2. a College Professor. Your are [sic] a slime." (July 6, 2004)



*"SLIME." (July 6, 2004)



*"I think it [Haidl's arrest for statutory rape of another underage girl he met at his family's celebration of the deadlocked jury in the first gang-rape trial] was a set up. I think that DA has a tail on Greg Haidl and the call for a barking dog was a hoax. It was just a reason to get in that house and find Greg doing what all young guys do. If we arrest every kid having sex, there will be a lot of kids in jail." (July 16, 2004)



*"OK, Scott, let's see how fair your OC Weekly is. Start reporting on little Miss Jane Doe and how she has been arrested twice in the last month for possession, selling and using Meth. This was in the San Bernardino County Sun on 11/11/04. Funny you only go after Greg. Let's start seeing some articles in your RAG about her. She went to the Haidl home on the night of the alleged rape uninvited. She is no little saint. Find out if she is living at home. I read one report where she stated her parents had kicked her out because of her drug use. Maybe you can look into this and see if it is true and start giving people the other side of Jane Doe AKA The Women Libbers Little Star. Also quit insinuating in your articles that because Greg was skateboarding at a closed, previously vandalized public property that he and his friends were the ones who vandalized it. This is not true at all. By what you are omitting in your articles you are trying to make people believe. No wonder you work for a second rate so-called paper." (Nov. 14, 2004)



*"When are you going to start printing the truth Scott? Little Jane Doe went to the Haidl's UN-invited. Get that straight but then you don't recognize the truth unless it hits you in the ass and even then you have a hard time. Tsk, Tsk. Shame on you 100# weakling. How do you hold down your job? Get a life." (Nov. 14, 2004)



*"You got it wrong again! Greg was NOT found with a stash of Marijuana. It was in a vehicle that did NOT belong to Greg. Greg denied it was HIS, another kid said it was his and not Greg's. How can you print such lies and sleep at night? Just what is your point in trying to portray Greg as some kind of animal? Grow up." (Dec. 6, 2004)



*"You are such a jerk Moxley. Grow up. Try honest reporting for once instead of biased crap that you usually come up with. This is America where everyone should be entitled to fair reporting—not the trash you put out. You make me sick." (March 13, 2006)



And here's my March 13 reply to Miller:



You've claimed (in the uneducated style that's all yours) that I was wrong about the heart of the case. Now we have not only the judge but each of the defendants acknowledging in public that they knew the girl was unconscious and are responsible for this crime. Only pathetic assholes like you continue to defend a lie. And trust me: I'm going to continue to do exactly what I always have done—expose sick, disgusting people like you.



• • •



March 12, 2006


HAIDL & Parsons v Parsons at the LA Times


Filed under: Main — R. Scott Moxley @ 9:00 am

"Orange County Superior Court Judge Francisco Briseno handed down [six-year prison sentences] that made sense . . ." Los Angeles Times columnist Dana Parsons, March 12, 2006Versus"I [have] argued against prison [for the Haidl 3 gang rapists] . . ." Parsons, Nov. 17, 2004

* * *


"Two and a half years after the incident, the outrageousness of the boys' behavior remains, but the outrage subsides." Parsons, Feb. 4, 2005

Versus

"She was penetrated with a Snapple bottle, a cigarette and a pool cue . . ." Parsons, March 12, 2006 (He failed to mention that the defendants also shoved an apple juice can almost entirely into a lower orifice as well.)

Versus

"The foreign objects amount to kinky dildos." Parsons, Nov. 17, 2004

* * *


"The assault could have been aborted if any of the three had had the moral courage that night to stop it." Parsons, March 12, 2006

Versus

"I hate this case because . . . the victim's promiscuous behavior plays into the overall context." Parsons, Feb. 4, 2005

* * *


"An allegedly unconscious 16-year-old girl . . ." Parsons, Feb. 4, 2005

Versus

"The apparently unconscious girl . . ." Parsons–even after the guilty verdicts, March 24, 2005

Versus

It was "Jane Doe versus three then-teenage boys who sexually assaulted and videotaped her four years ago while she lay unconscious on a pool table." Parsons–demonstrating that he could finally write the truth but only after nearly four years and courtroom admissions by the guilty parties as they sought leniency, March 12, 2006

* * *


"We're long past the point of where anything new can be learned from this sorry event." Parsons, Feb. 4, 2005

Versus

"The message has to be: To girls who think it's cool or necessary to engage in promiscuous sex, think of Jane Doe." Parsons, March 24, 2005

* * *


"I hate [this case] because it has led me to take the side of the boys whose behavior I consider disgusting." Parsons, Feb.4, 2005

Versus

"I hate this case because of its agendas. In some circles, it's become sport. In others, it's politics." Parsons, Feb. 4, 2005

* * *


To learn what really happened during and after the crime–including the disgraceful role Parsons played in aiding the defense, go to OC Weekly's homepage, scroll to "News" and then click on "Investigations." Our Haidl Gang Rape story archive is there.
• • •


March 11, 2006


Haidl 3 Get 6 Years: The recap


Filed under: Main — R. Scott Moxley @ 1:36 pm

[Editor's note: This is a compilation of Moxley's Friday dispatches from the courthouse. For additional reader comments, please see his original posts.]


The naive thought this morning's Haidl 3 sentencing would last maybe 20 minutes. Around 11:30 a.m., Judge Francisco Briseno decided it was time for lunch.



Veteran journalists say they haven't seen such a crowd since the 1989 trial of serial killer Randy Kraft. Shouting matches broke out over seats. The Times and Reg sent SWAT teams of reporters. The three defendants–Greg Haidl, Kyle Nachreiner and Keith Spann–were brought in chained together wearing orange jumpsuits. Haidl's head is almost shaved; he's wearing glasses these days.



Everyone knew that Jane Doe would speak. The surprise of the morning was that two of the three defendants also spoke. Haidl took a deep breath and then read his statement in a plodding manner, almost inaudibly. He apologized to Jane Doe. "It was never my intention to cause you pain," he said. She sat in the front row, looking away. "If there's anything I can do . . . ." he said, and then trailed off. "What happened that night was not planned or plotted," he continued. "It was a miniscule piece of what I was. I wake up everyday and feel bad about the people I hurt. Someone was hurt because of my acts."



Nachreiner seems the most emotional of the three. He too apologized for his "repugnant actions," said "I accept full responsibility" and assured the court that his time in jail "gave him time to reflect on his life." He summed it up: "I was leading a self-destructive life." He was more eloquent, even elegant; his supporters openly wept. Even Haidl pere Don Haidl wiped a tear. Nachreiner said he wants something positive to come from this, maybe teach kids what he's learned. He ended with this to Jane Doe: "My heart goes out to you."



There was nothing from Spann. Moments later his mother explained he's not a good public speaker.



The parents of the defendants also spoke, and each repeatedly offered Jane Doe and her family an apology. Their sons are repentant, they said, and remorseful. What they did back in July 2002 on a pool table in a Newport Beach garage was unforgivable—but forgive, they begged. Don Haidl approached the podium, coughed and in a voice shaped by cigarettes and something like chronic bronchitis—"deep" and "gravelly" don't begin to describe it–apologized to the judge, prosecutors and the family. He said, "The girl and her family are not my enemies. They never were. This has been a complete tragedy." He blasted media reports that his son is a "rich, spoiled kid" as "pure garbage." He claimed Greg has showed remorse every day for his actions.



Despite the sudden show of remorse, the morning's highlight was still the testimony of Jane Doe, who spoke after her parents described how their longtime marriage has been suddenly difficult. Her father remembered waking up to hear his daughter crying in the middle of the night—always the same dream with the same guys. Speaking of the 2004 jury deadlock in the first round of the Haidl case, Doe's mother said, "I felt like she had been raped again—this time by the judicial system."



Doe said she long thought July 6, 2002, the morning after the rape, would be the worst day of her life. But then, she said, the harassment began. The Haidl private detectives tailing her, exposing her, rifling the family trash cans. She was abused on the witness stand by the Haidl defense team, she said. "First they took my life," she said, "and then they took my identity." One of the Haidl detectives was calling out her name on the high school campus. Then came the first trial, in 2004, when a jury returned deadlocked. She was scared—a victim treated as a perpetrator. When the second trial came in 2005, she considered suicide and then decided, "I was not going to let these men take my last breath too." Turning to the Haidl 3, she asked, "When did I become a piece of meat and not a friend?" She called them "sexual predators" who should spend "multiple years behind bars."



One man not present: lead defense attorney Joseph G. Cavallo. After the guilty verdict, his relationship with Haidl Sr. went way south.



This afternoon, after defense attorneys argue for probation, Briseno is scheduled to sentence the defendants. He gave one singular hint about his perspective on the case: "Clearly," he said at the outset, "Jane Doe is completely out of it, unconscious, when she is on the pool table."





At 4:07, Briseno finally put an end to the long-running saga of the Haidl 3, sentencing Greg Haidl, Kyle Nachreiner and Keith Spann to six years in state prison.


The defendants seemed to have expected nothing less; their supporters wept.


The judge's decision put a cap on an afternoon that saw the defense switch tactics. In the morning, we heard the defendants and their supporters protest their remorse. That changed after lunch, when Haidl's attorney, Al Stokke, went after Jane Doe, denying that her emotional stress could be positively linked to the attack. He criticized a prosecutor's request that the three not be segregated from the general prison population as "without question, the most outrageous position I have ever seen." It was tantamount, he said, to "calling for their murder."



When it was his turn, Brisneo said he didn't buy the defendants' claims of remorse; they were, he suggested, too little, too late. Nor could he ignore the "egregiousness" of the attack, noting that the defendants laughed and joked while their victim lay unclothed and unconscious on the pool table. He ripped into the defense team's suggestion that Doe had a history of using foreign objects as sexual toys, saying there was no evidence to support such a claim


The defendants took advantage of their victim's trust, Brisneo said.


Based on numerous doctors interviews with the Haidl 3, Brisneo had concluded that only "a lengthy period of time" in prison could help them "abate" their alcohol and substance abuse.



"Victim never consented to being degraded."


The press conference showed that Briseno had called it: the defendants' claims of remorse were indeed insincere.

In the morning we heard the defendants and their supporters apologize to Jane Doe and her family. They offered help. They promised to change. They took responsibility.

A few hours later, before sentencing the Haidl 3, Judge Briseno said he attributed the remorse to "self-pity" because they were so likely headed to prison. And indeed, when he sentenced the Haidl 3 to six years each in a state prison–plus lifetime registration as sex offenders–the awkward honeymoon was over.


Speaking at the post-sentencing press conference, Haidl attorney Al Stokke said, "Yes, we will appeal the sentence and the conviction."


He went on to say that his client, who will serve just 21 months of actual prison time, "is a very mature person now."


John Barnett, attorney for Kyle Nachreiner, took the microphone next. "Everybody lost today. There were no victors," he complained. "It's hard to put a pretty face on state prison for teenagers." Nachreiner is now 21.


But Keith Spann's attorney, Peter Morreale, pulled out the sharpest knife. He called Judge Briseno's sentence "a bit excessive," then called him an excellent judge and took aim at District Attorney Tony Rackauckas. It was not Spann who should be ashamed, he said, but the DA. "The way the prosecutor's office pursued this matter was unconscionable," Morreale said. "There was a political agenda that drove this case. A lot of politics were involved. It should have been handled professionally." In answer to a reporter's question, he called the prosecution "a witch hunt." He blamed the DA for "dragging everyone through the mud, including the victim."


It was Morreale who, in court, famously asked Jane Doe if she liked to swallow after oral sex.


Sheldon Lodmer, the civil lawyer for Jane Doe, applauded the DA, saying Rackauckas showed "a lot of fortitude." He said the defense had lost the trial in part because of "dastardly attacks on my client." He said Jane Doe and her family were pleased that the judge sentenced the Haidl 3 to state prison, but had not had time to digest the prison terms.


Assistant DA Chuck Middleton, who won the second trial, shot back at the defense. "Even today," the prosecutor said, "the defense is still victimizing the victim." He said he had hoped for longer sentences.


DA Rackauckas said, "This case captured the county and the country's attention because of the defense's relentless and ruthless win-at-all-costs actions before, during and after the trial."




• • •

March 10, 2006

Haidl 6-6-6: Defense still victimizing the victim

Filed under: Main — R. Scott Moxley @ 5:52 pm
Briseno called it: the defendants' claims of remorse were indeed insincere.In the morning we heard the defendants and their supporters apologize to Jane Doe and her family. They offered help. They promised to change. They took responsibility.

A few hours later, before sentencing the Haidl 3, Judge Briseno said he attributed the remorse to "self-pity" because they were so likely headed to prison. And indeed, when he sentenced the Haidl 3 to six years each in a state prison–plus lifetime registration as sex offenders–the awkward honeymoon was over.

Speaking at the post-sentencing press conference, Haidl attorney Al Stokke said, "Yes, we will appeal the sentence and the conviction."

He went on to say that his client, who will serve just 21 months of actual prison time, "is a very mature person now."

John Barnett, attorney for Kyle Nachreiner, took the microphone next. "Everybody lost today. There were no victors," he complained. "It's hard to put a pretty face on state prison for teenagers." Nachreiner is now 21.

But Keith Spann's attorney, Peter Morreale, pulled out the sharpest knife. He called Judge Briseno's sentence "a bit excessive," then called him an excellent judge and took aim at District Attorney Tony Rackauckas. It was not Spann who should be ashamed, he said, but the DA. "The way the prosecutor's office pursued this matter was unconscionable," Morreale said. "There was a political agenda that drove this case. A lot of politics were involved. It should have been handled professionally." In answer to a reporter's question, he called the prosecution "a witch hunt." He blamed the DA for "dragging everyone through the mud, including the victim."

It was Morreale who, in court, famously asked Jane Doe if she liked to swallow after oral sex.

Sheldon Lodmer, the civil lawyer for Jane Doe, applauded the DA, saying Rackauckas showed "a lot of fortitude." He said the defense had lost the trial in part because of "dastardly attacks on my client." He said Jane Doe and her family were pleased that the judge sentenced the Haidl 3 to state prison, but had not had time to digest the prison terms.

Assistant DA Chuck Middleton, who won the second trial, shot back at the defense. "Even today," the prosecutor said, "the defense is still victimizing the victim." He said he had hoped for longer sentences.

DA Rackauckas said, "This case captured the county and the country's attention because of the defense's relentless and ruthless win-at-all-costs actions before, during and after the trial."

• • •

Haidl 3 Get 6 Years

Filed under: Main — R. Scott Moxley @ 4:40 pm

At 4:07, Briseno finally put an end to the long-running saga of the Haidl 3, sentencing Greg Haidl, Kyle Nachreiner and Keith Spann to six years in state prison.

The defendants seemed to have expected nothing less; their supporters wept.

The judge's decision put a cap on an afternoon that saw the defense switch tactics. In the morning, we heard the defendants and their supporters protest their remorse. That changed after lunch, when Haidl's attorney, Al Stokke, went after Jane Doe, denying that her emotional stress could be positively linked to the attack. He criticized a prosecutor's request that the three not be segregated from the general prison population as "without question, the most outrageous position I have ever seen." It was tantamount, he said, to "calling for their murder."

When it was his turn, Brisneo said he didn't buy the defendants' claims of remorse; they were, he suggested, too little, too late. Nor could he ignore the "egregiousness" of the attack, noting that the defendants laughed and joked while their victim lay unclothed and unconscious on the pool table. He ripped into the defense team's suggestion that Doe had a history of using foreign objects as sexual toys, saying there was no evidence to support such a claim

The defendants took advantage of their victim's trust, Brisneo said.

Based on numerous doctors interviews with the Haidl 3, Brisneo had concluded that only "a lengthy period of time" in prison could help them "abate" their alcohol and substance abuse.

"Victim never consented to being degraded."

The DA is now holding a press conference on the sentencing. More to come. Meanwhile, see the previous post on this subject here.

• • •

Haidl 3 Sentencing Update

Filed under: Main — R. Scott Moxley @ 12:50 pm

The innocent thought this morning's Haidl 3 sentencing would last maybe 20 minutes. Around 11:30 a.m., Judge Francisco Briseno decided it was time for lunch.

Veteran journalists say they haven't seen such a crowd since the 1989 trial of serial killer Randy Kraft. Shouting matches broke out over seats. The Times and Reg sent SWAT teams of reporters. The three defendants–Greg Haidl, Kyle Nachreiner and Keith Spann–were brought in chained together wearing orange jumpsuits. Haidl's head is almost shaved; he's wearing glasses these days.

Everyone knew that Jane Doe would speak. The surprise of the morning was that two of the three defendants also spoke. Haidl took a deep breath and then read his statement in a plodding manner, almost inaudibly. He apologized to Jane Doe. "It was never my intention to cause you pain," he said. She sat in the front row, looking away. "If there's anything I can do . . . ." he said, and then trailed off. "What happened that night was not planned or plotted," he continued. "It was a miniscule piece of what I was. I wake up everyday and feel bad about the people I hurt. Someone was hurt because of my acts."

Nachreiner seems the most emotional of the three. He too apologized for his "repugnant actions," said "I accept full responsibility" and assured the court that his time in jail "gave him time to reflect on his life." He summed it up: "I was leading a self-destructive life." He was more eloquent, even elegant; his supporters openly wept. Even Haidl pere Don Haidl wiped a tear. Nachreiner said he wants something positive to come from this, maybe teach kids what he's learned. He ended with this to Jane Doe: "My heart goes out to you."

There was nothing from Spann. Moments later his mother explained he's not a good public speaker.

The parents of the defendants also spoke, and each repeatedly offered Jane Doe and her family an apology. Their sons are repentant, they said, and remorseful. What they did back in July 2002 on a pool table in a Newport Beach garage was unforgivable—but forgive, they begged. Don Haidl approached the podium, coughed and in a voice shaped by cigarettes and something like chronic bronchitis—"deep" and "gravelly" don't begin to describe it–apologized to the judge, prosecutors and the family. He said, "The girl and her family are not my enemies. They never were. This has been a complete tragedy." He blasted media reports that his son is a "rich, spoiled kid" as "pure garbage." He claimed Greg has showed remorse every day for his actions.

Despite the sudden show of remorse, the morning's highlight was still the testimony of Jane Doe, who spoke after her parents described how their longtime marriage has been suddenly difficult. Her father remembered waking up to hear his daughter crying in the middle of the night—always the same dream with the same guys. Speaking of the 2004 jury deadlock in the first round of the Haidl case, Doe's mother said, "I felt like she had been raped again—this time by the judicial system."

Doe said she long thought July 6, 2002, the morning after the rape, would be the worst day of her life. But then, she said, the harassment began. The Haidl private detectives tailing her, exposing her, rifling the family trash cans. She was abused on the witness stand by the Haidl defense team, she said. "First they took my life," she said, "and then they took my identity." One of the Haidl detectives was calling out her name on the high school campus. Then came the first trial, in 2004, when a jury returned deadlocked. She was scared—a victim treated as a perpetrator. When the second trial came in 2005, she considered suicide and then decided, "I was not going to let these men take my last breath too." Turning to the Haidl 3, she asked, "When did I become a piece of meat and not a friend?" She called them "sexual predators" who should spend "multiple years behind bars."

One man not present: lead defense attorney Joseph G. Cavallo. After the guilty verdict, his relationship with Haidl Sr. went way south.

This afternoon, after defense attorneys argue for probation, Briseno is scheduled to sentence the defendants. He gave one singular hint about his perspective on the case: "Clearly," he said at the outset, "Jane Doe is completely out of it, unconscious, when she is on the pool table."

Stay tuned.

Comments (8)

  1. Leona Christensen says:

    Maybe Dana Parsons means well. I wish he would not have caved to Don Haidl's money and flak. I am disapointed in him.

  2. Richard says:

    I thought they should have recieved longer sentences. "Gang rape" by definition means the victim was mentally and physically "captured, enslaved and used a tool." No one should subjected such terror.

  3. Maxine says:

    They were just a bunch of out-of-control teenagers.

    I doubt they'll serve much time.

    The gal has a very supportive family, as do they all.

    There are people in this world who don't even have that much, and suffer much greater injuries than this gal.

    My wish: that they all move forward with their lives and forget this silly-ness.

  4. Leona Christensen says:

    Silliness? A brutal gang rape where you are used like a piece of meat with your vagina and anus penetrated with a pool cue, lighted cigarette, Snapple bottle and juice can is not silliness or boys being boys. It is a crime!

    The men deserved longer prison sentences. Jane Doe will be haunted for the rest of her life.
    There is no way she can receive resitution for their crimes. Any settlement or prison sentence is a drop in the bucket compared to her suffering.

  5. Gabe says:

    Wow, only in Orange county/Newport Beach can the upper crust (and I do stress crust) denizens that call themselves "human" can support such animals and call a gangrape something like "silliness"

  6. Maxine says:

    Move on everyone.

    There's a whole world out there and such a young gal has her whole life ahead of her. Jane Doe can choose to wallow, or get on with her life like the rest of us.

    In 10 years, nobody will even remember this bit of nonsense. I choose to believe they'll all have gone on with their lives, and have no time for such foolishness.

    Nothing unique about this gal. We all have our hardships to bear.

    Stiff upper lip, and get on with it...as they say!

  7. alice says:

    In 10 years, you might not remember this but she will. HOPEFULLY in 10 years they will live a positive and productive life ... but their actions are not foolish but disgusting and inhumane.

  8. Pissed off Mama in Michigan says:

    I can't believe the comments that I have read on this trial. I wasn't even aware of this case until after the Duke Rape (this past week), but I am sickened at the response other OC'ers have. Blaming the girl, minimizing the actions of the boy, this world is getting to be more and more scary by the day and it is because you are going to enable this behavior! I hope none of you are parents, and if you are, despite your ignorant comments, I hope you never have to go through what this girl and her family have went through- although you could certainly use a lesson in empathy- or basic human compassion.

Post a comment

All reader comments are subject to our Terms of Use. By clicking "Post", you acknowledge that you have reviewed and agree to these Terms.

OC Weekly Flickr Pool

Notifications

Subscribe to RSS
Receive Email Updates

Archives

Monthly

Category

Orange County Results

Search Filters

Type: Entire Site

Keyword

Entire Site:

      Can you be more specific?

Loading...
Orange County Results

Search Filters

Type: Entire Site

Keyword

Entire Site:

      Can you be more specific?

Loading...
Orange County Results

Search Filters

Type: Entire Site

Keyword

Entire Site:

      Can you be more specific?

Loading...