Lasaga, out of options, now comes to trial

More than 14 months after the arrest of geology and geophysics Professor Antonio Lasaga shocked the Yale-New Haven community, questions still linger. But on Thurs., Feb. 24, opening arguments will be made in United States v. Lasaga. For the first time, Lasaga's family, friends, colleagues, and students will hear testimony and see graphic evidence of exactly what the former Saybrook Master is alleged to have collected on his home and office computers.

The federal case is far less serious for Lasaga and the University than what comes next; Lasaga will also face state charges of first-degree sexual assault and the promotion of an obscene performance by a minor—charges that, if proved, could carry a 15-year sentence. In addition, the state charges are the basis for a civil suit by the family of the minor against Lasaga, the University, and the city of New Haven.

FILE PHOTO Antonio Lasaga's status with the University remains in limbo.

As the federal case proceeds to trial, it remains just as enigmatic as when Lasaga was first arrested. On Fri., Feb. 4, Judge Alvin W. Thompson denied a motion by defense attorney William F. Dow III to suppress evidence collected against Lasaga. A jury of 11 women and five men was selected to sit in judgment of a professor against whom the prosecution has amassed seemingly overwhelming evidence. Nevertheless, the defense appears ready to go to trial.

An uphill battle

While Dow refused to comment for this article and has not spoken publicly about the defense, legal experts were skeptical of the decision to go to trial. "In a case like this, there really aren't a lot of good defenses," J. Robert Flores, a former deputy chief of the Child Exploitation and Obscenities Division at the Department of Justice, said. "It is extremely rare for a child pornography case to actually go to trial." Because the motion to suppress was denied, assistant U.S. Attorney Kari A. Dooley will be permitted to show potentially graphic images collected from Lasaga's home and computer. Such evidence could very well be damning in and of itself."It's awfully difficult to convince a jury in light of [hard evidence]," Charles Stillman, a defense attorney who specializes in white-collar crime, said. "This will be a jury of parents and siblings and grown-ups who, of course, were once children themselves. The man has a major uphill battle."

With no way of preventing the collected child pornography from being shown to the jury, a number of experts noted that a full trial might be necessary in order to appeal such a decision. "By entering a guilt plea, [Lasaga] would lose the right to an appeal," Michael Martin, an expert at Fordham University Law School, said. "It is conceivable that if the admission of that evidence makes it an open-and-shut case, and if the evidence is disputable, then the higher court might overturn the decision."

Yet what remains to be seen is how exactly Dow will defend Lasaga's actions at all. A number of experts considered a "jury nullification" defense Lasaga's best option. In such a case, Dow would try to convince jurors that regardless of state and federal laws to the contrary, Lasaga's actions should not necessarily constitute criminal behavior. "He will have to convince jurors that what he was doing was private activity," Flores said. "[He needs to] convince the jury that they need to send a message to police that they don't want them snooping around people's houses."

Stillman added, "He may be seeking to vindicate his right to be in possession of these materials." According to experts, such an argument would be contingent on proving that Lasaga's activity was essentially harmless. While the accusations of sexual assault on a minor might contradict such a claim, Dooley will most likely be prohibited from informing the jury of the pending state charges. "I would be very surprised if the federal jury were told about the state charges," former Assistant U.S. Attorney Richard Lawler, Jr., BK '67, said. Flores was doubtful the prosecution would even try. "If I were prosecuting the case, I wouldn't go anywhere near the state charges," he said. "Doing so only gives the defense grounds for a possible appeal."

Regardless, Lasaga's chances of convincing a federal jury that his actions ought to be permissible seem relatively low. A jury nullification defense is "almost certain to fail. There is a general consensus that child pornography is wrong," Political Science Professor Rogers Smith said. Smith, who has monitored the Supreme Court's decisions on child pornography, explained that the Court ruled as recently as 1990 that even the mere possession of child pornography constitutes a crime. Flores felt similarly. "Anyone who looks at these files feeds the market," he said. "Even if they are not directly harming the children, the more that such pictures are collected, the more children are victimized, putting aside any privacy rights."

DANIEL SILK/YH Lasaga's federal trial will begin next week, and no one can predict what sort of arguments the defense might attempt.

While neither Dooley nor Dow would discuss whether or not the possibility of a plea-bargain had come up, some legal observers still doubted the trial would be completed. "This is a very difficult crime to admit guilt [of]," Hugh Keefe, a defense attorney affiliated with the Yale Law School, said. "Many cases such as these start, and then a plea is worked out during the course of the trial." Stillman even suggested that Lasaga faced the possibility of serving consecutive time if convicted on both the state and federal charges. "Pleading guilty could be quite beneficial to him here," Stillman said.

An enigmatic status

But despite the serious allegations Lasaga faces, the University has yet to publicly address his current standing. In the days following Lasaga's arrest, Yale officials made it clear that the former Master simply stepped down from that post and that he was on paid leave from the University as a tenured professor. As of last summer, Lasaga's tenure was "under review," according to Lawrence Haas, Yale's director of public affairs, who spoke to the Associated Press on Fri., Aug. 6. But since then, University officials have refused to comment. According to Tom Conroy, Deputy Director of Public Affairs, Lasaga "remains a full professor on leave from the University." Asked if Lasaga continues to draw a salary, Conroy responded that such information "is between him and his employer." He refused to comment on Haas' earlier statement.

Conroy stressed that he is not "aware of any timetable that has been established" to evaluate and make a final decision regarding Lasaga's status at the University. Even though Yale has yet to announce when it will make its decision, both legal observers and University faculty feel that postponing any decision until after the trial would be wise. "I think it was appropriate for him to withdraw from his Mastership and from teaching," Smith said. "But I also think that it is appropriate to wait for a final decision from a court of law."

Flores agreed that postponing a decision was appropriate, but did not feel that Yale ought to simply defer to the court's verdict in making its own. "These are very serious accusations," he said. "It's important that the University eventually make its own independent judgment. Just because a court finds him not guilty does not mean that he is completely innocent."

And while the Administration continues to remain silent, Yale is becoming more intimately involved. In the pre-trial witness lists, numerous Yale employees—including Paul Gluhosky, the Information and Technology Services employee who first discovered the pornographic images on Lasaga's office computer—were scheduled to testify. Geology and Geophysics Professor Ronald Smith and department chair Danny Rye are both listed as defense witnesses.

Furthermore, the University is listed as a defendant in a civil suit filed by the parents of the 13-year-old boy Lasaga is accused of sexually assaulting. Lasaga served as a mentor for the boy through a city-sponsored program. The suit, which seeks unspecified damages, alleges that some of the assaults occurred on Yale property and that images of the assault were transmitted and stored using University computer equipment. The suit also alleges that the perpetrator, which the brief mistakenly identifies as "Victor Lasaga," had a "propensity" toward pedophilia and that he used "his position as mentor to cultivate his perversion." As of the time of the suit's filing, University officials would not discuss the case.

And more to come

Even if Lasaga should emerge from the federal trial unscathed, he will still have to face the far more serious state charge of first-degree sexual assault. While Dow has filed similar motions to dismiss and suppress evidence, no hearings will be held until the conclusion of the federal trial. Stillman emphasized how difficult an acquittal in such a case would be. "I've spent my life trying to defend people and their liberties," he said. "But I look at this as a grandfather, and a father, and a citizen, and the exploitation of children should be punished."

It is unlikely that Lasaga will sit through what could be two highly embarrassing trials. It is even less likely that he will avoid prison time, and Yale will eventually have to make an official decision as to his status with the University. But without knowing just what he or the University will do next, the still-shocked community will have to wait and see. As Kefe pointed out, "We must assume innocence until a jury brings back a conviction."

Back to News...