Judge refuses to drop Newport Beach surgeon’s rape case

An Orange County Superior Court judge has declined to dismiss the charges against a Newport Beach surgeon and his girlfriend accused of a series of drug-fueled sexual assaults, rejecting not just the expected desire of defense attorneys but an extraordinary effort by the county’s top prosecutor to toss the high-profile case.

The case now continues toward trial, possibly under new prosecutors.

Judge Gregory Jones said Friday that the evidence District Atty. Todd Spitzer argued was too weak to merit the litany of charges against Dr. Grant Robicheaux and Cerissa Riley should be scrutinized by a judge and jury at trial.

Jones has not presided over such, or any alleged victim testimony.

“Victim credibility is generally the single most important aspect of any rape case,” he wrote in his 25-page decision. “The prosecution is asking that this case be dismissed based upon victim credibility concerns when the alleged victims have never been given the opportunity to testify. The court finds this puzzling.”

Furthermore, Jones said he has reservations about Spitzer’s office continuing to oversee the prosecution, given how he has excoriated how his predecessor, Tony Rackauckas, handled it, previously calling it manufactured and a politically poisoned “travesty.” He ordered the D.A.’s office to respond to his concerns and return to court June 12 for another hearing.

“I think the public confidence in justice being pursued on this case would be seriously undermined if the Orange County district attorney’s office continues on the matter,” Jones said during a short hearing Friday at the Harbor Justice Center in Newport Beach.

Neither the defendants nor Spitzer had immediate comments Friday.

Jones said in his ruling that he was not weighing in on the evidence or resolving a dispute with this ruling but determining if there was even a dispute to resolve.

News

Judge must weigh ‘furtherance of justice’ in ruling whether to dismiss charges in Newport surgeon’s rape case

District Attorney Todd Spitzer wants to drop charges against Dr. Grant Robicheaux and his girlfriend, Cerissa Riley, saying the case can’t be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. But people backing the accusers say they shouldn’t be cast aside.

Feb. 8, 2020

Jones said at a Feb. 7 dismissal hearing that the case had been “infected” by politics, and he acknowledged again Friday that “the political aspirations of district attorneys, past and present, and their thirst for media attention have created a minefield of legal hazards in this case.”

The case became an instant sensation when Rackauckas announced charges in September 2018 — at the time, Rackauckas said investigators had “thousands of videos” in evidence that showed there could be “hundreds” or “more than a thousand” victims of a handsome young doctor and one-time minor reality TV personality who, with his striking girlfriend, allegedly prowled for victims to incapacitate with drug and drink before taking them back to his Balboa Peninsula beach house to violate them.

Robicheaux and Riley have previously pleaded not guilty and repeatedly denied having nonconsensual sex with their accusers.

Spitzer, who defeated Rackauckas in November 2018, says those videos don’t exist. In February, the current D.A. dropped a bombshell, saying that, because of insufficient evidence, he wanted to drop all charges against the pair. Those covered 17 charges, including five counts of rape, against Robicheaux, and three counts of rape among 13 charges against Riley.

He claimed Rackauckas was motivated to embellish the case in his unsuccessful attempt at reelection to his longtime position as the county’s lead prosecutor. Defense attorneys have taken the same tack.

In an at-times explicit and detailed summary of the charges filed May 29, Spitzer and the two senior deputy district attorneys he commissioned last year to do a thorough review of the case said Jones must reach the same “inescapable conclusion” that the evidence is insufficient. The defendants were simply swingers who partied hard with consenting like-minded people, and the initial lead investigator within the D.A.’s office was bent on returning an inaccurate depiction of events “for reasons still unknown.”

“The People fully grasp the gravity of such a motion, especially in light of the vast amount of publicity and other events surrounding this case,” wrote Spitzer and deputies Richard Zimmer and Karyn Stokke. “Although this sentiment would likely be greeted by many in the public as less than sincere, in this case, it actually takes more courage to face the public scorn and outcries that accompany this motion to dismiss, than to have ignored our ethical duty and simply pressed forward with the trial.”

Jones called the actions of both Spitzer and Rackauckas “problematic” but reserved much of his criticism for Spitzer, questioning his turnaround when he had appeared to side with the accusers before taking his current office. Jones also questioned Spitzer’s unsuccessful attempt to have the case passed off to the state attorney general because of Rackauckas’ alleged misconduct if he thought the case was “terminally ill.”

“The public has heard from the politicians,” he said in his ruling, referencing several news conferences hosted by both Rackauckas and Spitzer. “The public has never heard from the alleged victims. Any objective analysis of this case leads to the conclusion that these charges should be put before a jury. A back room dismissal by prosecutors without the alleged victims ever having the opportunity to be heard is contrary to the core values of our legal process, and the interests of the public.”

Jones was slated to issue his ruling in April, but he put off his decision in light of the coronavirus pandemic, which largely shuttered the courts until late May.

Support our coverage by becoming a digital subscriber.