John C. Riesbeck

Go to Database Search Page

Go to Database Index Page

Charge:	Rape
Sentence:	"Three months, reduction to E-2, and bad-conduct discharge"
Years Imprisoned:
Year Crime:	2010
Year Convicted:	2012
Year Cleared:	2018
U.S. State or Country of Crime:	U.S. Military - Federal Case
County or Region of Crime:
City of Crime:	Puerto Vallarta
Result:	Judicially Exonerated
Summary of Case:	"John C. Riesbeck was a Coast Guard Boatswain’s Mate Second Class (E-5) wrongly convicted in 2012 of forcible rape, making false official statements, and communicating indecent language. The only evidence against Riesbeck was the accusation of the complainant, Seaman S., that in September 2010 while they were crewmembers of the USCGC Midgett (WHEC-726) staying in a hotel in Puerto Vallarta, Mexico in separate rooms, that after consuming a large quantity of alcohol Riesbeck raped her in his hotel room. Seven months later S. reported her allegation the sexual encounter was rape, to the Coast Guard Investigative Service (CGIS) on April 18, 2011. Riesbeck's defense was that the sex was consensual, and that there were inconsistencies in S.'s account. During the jury selection process for Riesbeck's trial, his lawyer noted for the record “that there was no ‘conceivable, rational or logical reason’ for seven of [original] ten members to be women, five of whom were victim advocates." Riesbeck's lawyer did not formally object or ask to stay the proceedings, but proceded with his challenges. After the jury selection process was completed, Riesbeck's jury was comprised of five women -- four of whom were rape victims rights advocates -- and two men. After his conviction by the jury Riesbeck was sentenced to confinement for three months, reduction to E-2, and a bad-conduct discharge. Riesbeck appealed after he was convicted, and among his arguments was his right to a fair trial was denied by the composition of the jury was stacked against him. His conviction and sentence were twice affirmed by the United States Coast Guard Court of Criminal Appeals (Aug 5, 2014 and Nov. 30, 2016). Riesbeck appealed to the military's highest appellate court. On January 23, 2018 the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces vacated Riesbeck's convictions on the basis he was denied his right to a fair trial because the government had deliberately stacked the jury with female victims rights advocates. The Court also noted the weakness of the prosecution's case and unexplained inconsistencies in the complainants testimony. The appeals court stated in its ruling: "Yet the error in this case is both so obvious and so egregious that it adversely affected not only Appellant’s right to a fair trial by an impartial panel, but also the essential fairness and integrity of the military justice system." The Court ordered the charges and specifications against Riesbeck dismissed with prejudice. The dismissal with prejudice means that Riesbeck may never be prosecuted by the federal government again, must be reinstated to a full duty status, is entitled to six years of back pay, allowances, and promotions, and will receive the opportunity to continue to serve in the Coast Guard."
Conviction Caused By:	Jury illegally stacked with women who were victim rights advocates.
Innocence Proved By:	"On January 23, 2018 the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces vacated Riesbeck's convictions on the basis he was denied his right to a fair trial because the government had deliberately stacked the jury with female victims rights advocates. The appeals court stated in its ruling: "Yet the error in this case is both so obvious and so egregious that it adversely affected not only Appellant’s right to a fair trial by an impartial panel, but also the essential fairness and integrity of the military justice system." The Court ordered the charges and specifications against Riesbeck dismissed with prejudice."
Defendant Aided By:
Compensation Awarded:
Was Perpetrator Identified?
Age When Imprisoned:
Age When Released:
Sex:	Male
Skin/Ethnicity:
Information Source 1:	"United states v. Riesbeck, __ m.j. __, no. 17-0208 - cg (reversing conviction because 7 member jury was stacked with four women who were rape victim rights advocates.)"
Information Location 1:	http://www.armfor.uscourts.gov/newcaaf/opinions/2017OctTerm/170208.pdf
Information Source 2:	"Opinion Analysis: An error “both so obvious and so egregious that it adversely affected not only Appellant’s right to a fair trial by an impartial panel, but also the essential fairness and integrity of the military justice system,” in United States v. Riesbeck, By Zachary D Spilman, CAAFlog, January 24, 2018"
Information Location 2:	http://www.caaflog.com/2018/01/24/opinion-analysis-an-error-both-so-obvious-and-so-egregious-that-it-adversely-affected-not-only-appellants-right-to-a-fair-trial-by-an-impartial-panel-but-also-the-essential-fairness-and-i/
Information Source 3:	"United States v. Riesbeck, No. 1374 (CGCCA 5 Aug 2014) (Affirming conviction and sentence on basis Riesbeck didn't timely object to jury composition.)"
Information Location 3:	https://media.defense.gov/2017/Sep/18/2001811549/-1/-1/0/20140805%20UNITED%20STATES%20V%20RIESBECK%20%20-%20UNPUBLISHED.PDF
Information Source 4:	"CGCCA Finds Appellant Waived Challenge to Panel Make-up, By Sam Adams, CAAFlog, September 4, 2014"
Information Location 4:	http://www.caaflog.com/2014/09/04/cgcca-finds-appellant-waived-challenge-to-panel-make-up/
Information Source 5:
Information Location 5:
Book About Case:
Book Information:
Book About Case (2):
Book Information (2):
Movie About Case:
Comments About Case:

Go to Database Search Page

Go to Database Index Page

John C. Riesbeck

Charge:

Rape

Sentence:

"Three months, reduction to E-2, and bad-conduct discharge"

Years Imprisoned:

Year Crime:

2010

Year Convicted:

2012

Year Cleared:

2018

U.S. State or Country of Crime:

U.S. Military - Federal Case

County or Region of Crime:

City of Crime:

Puerto Vallarta

Result:

Judicially Exonerated

Summary of Case:

Conviction Caused By:

Jury illegally stacked with women who were victim rights advocates.

Innocence Proved By:

Defendant Aided By:

Compensation Awarded:

Was Perpetrator Identified?

Age When Imprisoned:

Age When Released:

Sex:

Male

Skin/Ethnicity:

Information Source 1:

"United states v. Riesbeck, __ m.j. __, no. 17-0208 - cg (reversing conviction because 7 member jury was stacked with four women who were rape victim rights advocates.)"

Information Location 1:

http://www.armfor.uscourts.gov/newcaaf/opinions/2017OctTerm/170208.pdf

Information Source 2:

Information Location 2:

http://www.caaflog.com/2018/01/24/opinion-analysis-an-error-both-so-obvious-and-so-egregious-that-it-adversely-affected-not-only-appellants-right-to-a-fair-trial-by-an-impartial-panel-but-also-the-essential-fairness-and-i/

Information Source 3:

"United States v. Riesbeck, No. 1374 (CGCCA 5 Aug 2014) (Affirming conviction and sentence on basis Riesbeck didn't timely object to jury composition.)"

Information Location 3:

https://media.defense.gov/2017/Sep/18/2001811549/-1/-1/0/20140805%20UNITED%20STATES%20V%20RIESBECK%20%20-%20UNPUBLISHED.PDF

Information Source 4:

"CGCCA Finds Appellant Waived Challenge to Panel Make-up, By Sam Adams, CAAFlog, September 4, 2014"

Information Location 4:

http://www.caaflog.com/2014/09/04/cgcca-finds-appellant-waived-challenge-to-panel-make-up/

Information Source 5:

Information Location 5:

Book About Case:

Book Information:

Book About Case (2):

Book Information (2):

Movie About Case:

Comments About Case:

"United states v. Riesbeck, m.j. , no. 17-0208 - cg (reversing conviction because 7 member jury was stacked with four women who were rape victim rights advocates.)"