Sex assault civil case has no underlying criminal charges

LOS ANGELES -- A federal jury heard Wednesday about an alleged sexual assault from a plaintiff whose story has been used methodically by defense counsel to dismantle her case.

What started as a case against a coworker, Mt. San Antonio College and several administrators has whittled down to a he-said-she-said scenario pitting a former student and employee of the college against the man she says assaulted her. Mosavi v. Mt. San Antonio College et al., 15-cv-04147 (C.D. Cal., filed June 3, 2015).

In Chief District Judge Virginia Phillips' courtroom Wednesday, the jury heard from key witnesses, including the plaintiff and lead investigators from civil and criminal sides of the case. While plaintiff's attorney Shanta Driver relied on her client to paint a picture of significant pain and suffering during and after the alleged incident, defense attorneys from Carpenter Rothans & Dumont LLP stressed the underlying problems with the account that led the school and law enforcement to drop charges against the accused man.

The Los Angeles County district attorney declined to file a criminal case in May 2015 based on plaintiff Aarefah Mosavi's allegations. But her attorneys filed civil claims alleging sexual assault and battery, violence motivated by religion and discrimination. Mosavi testified that after she was assaulted by a co-worker in December 2013, she suffered damages in the form of physical and mental illnesses.

Mosavi, now a student at UC Berkeley, was questioned by Driver, a pro hac vice attorney known for her high-profile cases involving the preservation of affirmative action plans under Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306 (2003).

Driver is also the national spokesperson of By Any Means Necessary, a leftist group that has organized large-scale Black Lives Matter protests, including some where violence occurs. Appearing in her capacity as the national director of United for Equality & Affirmative Action Legal Defense Fund, Driver allowed Mosavi to describe her recollection of the alleged assault and interactions she said she had with school administrators when she returned to school for the spring semester.

Defense attorneys have highlighted discrepancies between early conversations the plaintiff had about the night in question and later claims she made to criminal investigators. Driver pressed her client to explain why she refrained from telling the whole story from the beginning.

"I just get really distraught," she said, pausing to compose herself. "It's difficult for me to divulge every detail."

Defense attorney Martin L. Carpenter pressed Mosavi to answer why it wasn't until the criminal investigation that she alleged his client, Chester Brown, had penetrated her with his fingers. Mosavi said she believed "penetration" referred only to the use of the phallus.

But defense witness Lorraine Jones, who was in charge of handling Title IX investigations on behalf of the college at the relevant time, said she specifically told Mosavi penetration could also mean the use of a foreign object or fingers.

"When I asked her that, she started crying, and she got angry," Jones recalled on the stand. "She said, 'I was not raped,' almost in disgust. I remember it vividly."

Jones said she pushed Mosavi on the issue when she noticed a shift in tone from her emails and in-person interviews as well as a drastic escalation in accusations. She said the matter was first brought to her under the pretense that Mosavi was uncomfortable by a male colleague's unreciprocated affection toward her, but later it became an issue of assault. Jones testified that when Mosavi said she wanted to pursue criminal charges, she referred her to public safety officials.

The defense also called an LA County sheriff's investigator who handled the criminal investigation and testified about the lack of evidence needed to substantiate a criminal case against Brown. Outside the presence of the jury, Driver stipulated the evidence the investigators were looking for -- semen and saliva on Mosavi's clothes -- wasn't going to be relevant in a case where there was no alleged ejaculation or use of the mouth.

U.S. District Judge Michael W. Fitzgerald, previously assigned to the case, granted summary judgment to all defendants except Brown, the accused. In his order, Fitzgerald said the plaintiff had not provided sufficient evidence showing the college's treatment of her case "differed from their treatment of other similarly situated individuals, or treated her with deliberate indifference, in violation of her right to equal protection under the California Constitution."

Driver has appealed Fitzgerald's summary judgment to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which agreed to stay proceedings until the civil trial against Brown concludes.

The defense plans to call a student who worked with Mosavi and Brown to testify Thursday. Phillips is planning to give the jury their deliberation instructions by day's end.