LANCASTER – A jury deadlocked Monday in the case of a 36-year-old man accused of trying to rape a 17-year-old girl walking home from school in Palmdale, forcing a mistrial.
The panel deadlocked 9-3 in favor of convicting Marlon Crowell of attempted rape and assault with intent to commit rape. Prosecutors had previously dropped an attempted sexual battery count.
A pretrial hearing was scheduled for Dec. 9 at the Antelope Valley Courthouse. At that time, the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office should announce whether it plans to retry the case, according to Spokeswoman Sarah Ardalani.
The case stems from an incident that was reported on Sept. 5, 2012.
That afternoon, Crowell allegedly blocked a 17-year-old girl’s path as she walked along the 38000 block of Sierra Highway and scared her by asking inappropriate questions. He then allegedly grabbed the girl by her blouse and tore it open after she made several attempts to get away.
The girl hit Crowell with her hands, threw her backpack to the ground and ran to a nearby parking lot, where she met a good Samaritan who drove her home, according to the prosecution.
–
Previous related story: Teen fights off attempted rape, suspect arrested
Marcus says
Wow, it’s amazing how you bash the criminal justice system. It has it’s checks and balances. Did you note that 9 of the twelve jurors were in favor of conviction, and three were not. 9 vs 3, hmmm, that says something to me, that most of the jurors obviously saw something to make them believe the accused might just be guilty of what he was accused of. Based on the trial, the district attorney will evaluate if they will re-try the alleged perpetrator again, after interviewing the jury members, and evaluating the evidence. Have you ever been on a jury ?. I have, there is a lot that goes on in the jury room, and no one can force anyone to vote one way or another. Hopefully the truth will come out, and if the district attorney decides not to retry the case, then hopefully the alleged perpetrator if he is in fact guilty will not assault anyone else. But that is doubtful, as sexual predators don’t just stop, they have to be stopped.
Tim Scott says
Nine to three tells me something too. No guilt established. It seems to tell you something different. Are you sure it is ME “bashing the criminal justice system” when it seems clear that you do not agree with how it operates?
philip stone says
A few things: 1. There is no Marlon Crowell on the Megans Law sex offender website, and I find it unlikely this guy became a sexual predator at the age of 36. I find it more likely he was drunk or high as heck. Would a sober person try an rape a girl on Sierra hwy in the middle of the afternoon? The odds of being caught are extremely high due to traffic and witnesses.
2. Remember the OJ verdict. Some jurors can be racist, biased, or just plain jerks.
marie says
Well said Tim Scott! It is all about their “conviction rate” Not justice
Tim Scott says
He said, she said…unconvincing, mistrial.
Now the prosecutor’s office will blare nonstop about the “injustice” while presenting their side of the case 24/7 in hopes the next jury will be more receptive. Not that a more receptive jury improves the chances that justice will be served, but prosecution isn’t about justice. It’s about winning.
Sam Bronkowitz says
So you form your rant based on a blurb on the Internet. Did you sit in on the trial and hear the testimony? Do you know anything about the case?
I have a problem with predators assaulting women while they are out in public. Are you okay with that? Are you one of the hundreds of convicted sex offenders that reside in the Antelope Valley, because you sure sound like one.
Tim Scott says
Since it isn’t relevant to the case at hand I won’t bother saying what you sound like.
What I know about this case is that three jurors who did sit in that courtroom tasked with listening to the testimony were not convinced of guilt. They stood up, undoubtedly, to pressure from the other nine to “just go along.” They stood up to the knowledge that there would undoubtedly be backlash from “guilty until proven…aw what the heck, must be guilty” fascists like yourself. Fascists who would sling groundless “must be a sex offender” or similar accusations at them for doing the right thing.
Another thing I know about this case is something it has in common with ALL cases. The prosecutor has INFINITELY more resources to apply to the retrial than the defendant has. They are applying those resources to making sure the next jury is full of guilty until proven innocent fascists like yourself. In all probability they will succeed in providing the kind of “justice” that you demand. Congratulations.
billandtimsbogusanswers says
9 jurors voted guilty,tim focuses on the 3 who didn’t.he assumes that they had to stand their ground under the pressures of “just go along”when if fact,he has no knowledge of this.wasnt in the jury room,just making stuff up,because he wants a not guilty.as far as the prosecuter having “infinite”resources to “fix”the next jury,is false as well.both sides get to interview the prospective jurors,equally.nothing to do with resources.when mike brown was shot dead by Darrin Wilson,tim was screaming for “justice”after 3 different investigations(grand jury,independent and federal)all found that it was justified.but tim still wanted “justice”?
anticrime says
Yes he is, because as.you already noticed, Tim is always defending criminals and now, sexual predators? OMG
Tim Scott says
Please point to a criminal or sexual predator I have defended.
Of course you, as a fascist who doesn’t agree with the whole “innocent until proven guilty” business will find it easy to pretend you can do that…so go ahead and demonstrate your commitment to fascism while actually saying nothing at all about me.
I’ll watch.