It was about a guy who raped a woman and supposedly had to pull a latch to put the back seat down in order to assault her. He was convicted of raping her and they re-enacted the "rape" with a car similar to the one the guy drove. They were trying to find if the guy could pull the latch with one hand and stranglehold the woman with the other but weren't able to re-enact it the way the victim said it happened. Anyone know what case this is?

Was this that guy Alex Kelly? He went on the run for years and his parents kept sending him money so he could party in europe?

Yep, Alex Kelly:

Mr. Kelly's accuser ... has testified that Mr. Kelly lowered the back seat of the Jeep from the front seat while pinning her down with his weight.

http://www.nytimes.com/1997/05/30/nyregion/fiancee-testifies-in-alex-kelly-rape-case.html?src=pm


To cast doubt on the idea that Kelly would force sex upon anyone, Puccio had Molitor testify that she and Kelly were involved in an intimate relationship during the period when the incident took place. More significantly, Puccio asked Molitor to describe how two hands were needed to lower the back seat of her family's Jeep. Pressing the point without objection, Puccio arranged to have the jury view the vehicle itself and let them examine how the seat-lowering mechanism worked.


http://law.jrank.org/pages/3708/Alex-Kelly-Rape-Trials-1996-97-Defense-Claims-Consent.html

Was this that guy Alex Kelly? He went on the run for years and his parents kept sending him money so he could party in europe?

Yep, Alex Kelly:

Mr. Kelly's accuser ... has testified that Mr. Kelly lowered the back seat of the Jeep from the front seat while pinning her down with his weight.

http://www.nytimes.com/1997/05/30/nyregion/fiancee-testifies-in-alex-kelly-rape-case.html?src=pm


To cast doubt on the idea that Kelly would force sex upon anyone, Puccio had Molitor testify that she and Kelly were involved in an intimate relationship during the period when the incident took place. More significantly, Puccio asked Molitor to describe how two hands were needed to lower the back seat of her family's Jeep. Pressing the point without objection, Puccio arranged to have the jury view the vehicle itself and let them examine how the seat-lowering mechanism worked.


http://law.jrank.org/pages/3708/Alex-Kelly-Rape-Trials-1996-97-Defense-Claims-Consent.html

yes, that is the one. Thanks. I can't find the original episode about this one but I know he was paroled in 2007. Any further news beyond then?

IIRC, he was sentenced to volunteer in a rape crisis center as part of his "rehabilitation", or whatever.

Of course, the members on this site were outraged than an unremorseful rapist would be shuffling mail, pushing a broom, emptying trash cans, or whatever, any where near rape victims that he could possibly cross paths with in a hallway or something. Talk about letting the fox guard the hen house! What a doofus judge.

I don't know if Kelly ever fulfilled that part of his sentence. One of our members here who's a lawyer explained that no rape crisis center would ever allow him to work there under any circumstances.

I don't know where he's at or what he's been doing since he was released from prison.

he actually raped 2 women,if I recall correctly.but the one with the problem where the seat occured was what was called into question.

I recorded the American Justice (Notorious) episode of this a little while back. It's an hour long and has some things the UM broadcast didn't.

It mentioned that several other ladies came forwarded and claimed they were raped by Alex Kelly, although I have no idea if they're telling the truth or not.

In the UM segment, we didn't even know the identities of the 2 victimes, but in the Notorious, they appear on camera, are named and give interviews.

I recorded the American Justice (Notorious) episode of this a little while back. It's an hour long and has some things the UM broadcast didn't.

It mentioned that several other ladies came forwarded and claimed they were raped by Alex Kelly, although I have no idea if they're telling the truth or not.

In the UM segment, we didn't even know the identities of the 2 victimes, but in the Notorious, they appear on camera, are named and give interviews.

funny how one show hides their identities and another reveals them. Does it have something to do with time passage as to why names are later revealed?

funny how one show hides their identities and another reveals them. Does it have something to do with time passage as to why names are later revealed?

It's been years since I've watched the UM segment on Alex Kelly, but I thought it was produced/aired while he was still on trial or about to stand trial. Perhaps the victims' names and identities weren't disclosed for that reason.