Michigan attorney general's office defends Judge Rosemarie Aquilina's conduct

Late last month, 54-year-old disgraced former USA Gymnastics and Michigan State University physician Larry Nassar was attacked after being released to the general population at United States Penitentiary, Tucson in Tucson, Arizona.

Nassar had spent over five months at the maximum-security federal prison before he was released to its general population, but he was physically assaulted within hours of that release.

Despite the fact that Nassar is currently serving the 60-year federal prison sentence that he was issued in December on three child pornography charges, his new lawyers, Jacqueline McCann and Malaika Ramsey-Heath, blame Judge Rosemarie Aquilina for the fact that he was attacked, and they are seeking to have Nassar resentenced by a different judge.

Judge Aquilina sentenced Nassar to between 40 and 175 years in state prison in January on seven sexual assault charges. She did so following a seven-day sentencing hearing in Ingham County, Michigan during which 169 victim impact statements were delivered in front of Nassar, of which 156 were delivered by those who Nassar sexually assaulted.

Judge Aquilina effectively listened to many of the people who had been ignored about what Nassar was doing to them for many, many years, and she did so while speaking harshly both about and to Nassar himself. However, Nassar's attorneys believe that she crossed a line in doing so.

Nassar has been accused of sexually assaulting more than 300 people, many of whom female gymnasts, under the guise of medical treatment for more than two decades. Among those who have accused him of sexual assault are Olympic champion gymnasts Simone Biles, Gabby Douglas, McKayla Maroney, Aly Raisman and Jordyn Wieber.

Nassar was also sentenced in February to between 40 and 125 more years in state prison on three additional sexual assault charges following a three-day sentencing hearing in Eaton County, Michigan during which 65 more victim impact statements were delivered in front of him.

Despite the fact that Nassar's lawyers want him to be resentenced by a different judge, the Michigan Attorney General's Office stands behind Judge Aquilina.

Here is what Assistant Attorney General Christopher Allen wrote about the matter in a response to a motion filed by Nassar's attorneys, according to the Lansing State Journal.

"As the conscience of our community, and after listening to the statements of over 150 victims of Defendant Larry Nassar's sexual abuse, Judge Rosemarie Aquilina voiced the community's moral outrage. No wonder. Defendant Nassar is arguably the most destructive serial sexual predator in the history of the State, perhaps the country.

"On a few rare occasions, the judge's comments may have been less than tepid, but that is not the mark of improper personal bias...The magnitude of the sentencing hearing, and the sometimes caustic language the judge employed, was a direct result of Nassar's admitted misdeeds."

Allen also wrote the following in court documents, according to The Detroit News.

"As the voice of the community, a sentencing judge is permitted to use strong language to redress the victims and express the grievance of society. Judge Aquilina...expressed frustration with Nassar — with his conduct, his unabated pattern of abuse, the enormity of pain it caused the victims, the ripples of hurt to the family of those he abused, and the lack of his sincere remorse — and expressed it in a manner that channeled the community's frustration and moral outrage.

"That her frustration edged toward brief wishes of physical retribution, and that her ultimate sentence was described as a "death warrant," are the unfortunate result of the extent and severity of his crimes, which the judge responded to in a graphic manner. In short, Larry Nassar's reprehensible conduct required condemnation."

He added the following regarding the fact that the motion filed by Nassar's lawyers does not cite any evidence that Judge Aquilina was biased against Nassar.

"Because there is none. Indeed, Judge Aquilina's pre-sentencing conduct evinces a clear understanding of her role to adjudicate Nassar's case impartially and protect his right to a fair trial."

He also discussed the fact that Judge Aquilina denied a motion before Nassar's trial offering her evidence regarding the fact that Nassar had admitted to the possession of child pornography.

"Despite the strong basis for introduction of that evidence...Judge Aquilina kept it out, worried that the evidence would be "highly" or "unfairly" "prejudicial" to Nassar. Would a judge so irredeemably biased against a defendant keep out admissible evidence that the law deems 'exceptionally probative'? Her discretionary call reveals a fair-minded judge without external biases."

He also discussed the order that Judge Aquilina issued limiting public disclosure about the case early on in the proceedings.

"The order broadly barred public comment about the case by any witnesses or attorneys, including by the victims. Judge Aquilina issued that order because, she stated, 'We need a fair and impartial jury,' and stated, 'Justice cannot be served if we can't get a clean jury.' The judge was concerned about tainting Nassar's presumption of innocence."

He stated that some of the people who were sexually assaulted by Nassar actually went to federal court to challenge Judge Aquilina's order, claiming that it went against their First Amendment rights, before she entered a revised order after the federal district court entered a restraining order that temporarily halted the enforcement of her initial order.

"The court lifted this order only after Nassar pled guilty over seven months later. So, let's be clear: Judge Aquilina issued an order that bound victims from speaking publicly during the pendency of Nassar's case, dialed it back only when a federal action was filed against her, and lifted the bar only after Nassar pled guilty. Does that sound like a judge with a personal animus against the defendant?"