Expert Witness Says No Medical Evidence That Sex Was Non-Consensual + Exam of Alleged Victim Done “Below the Standard of Care” in Jordan Johnson Rape Case

A forensic gynecologist told those in Missoula District Court on Friday, Feb. 22, that after reviewing materials in the Jordan Johnson rape trial, he not only found no evidence that the sexual intercourse between Johnson and his accuser was non-consensual, but he also found that the medical exam done on the woman was "below the standard of care."

Dr. Ted Harriton of Tucson, Ariz. took the stand as an expert witness for the defense. He was the first witness that the jury of seven women and five men have heard from. The prosecution has not finished presenting its case, but due to scheduling needs, Harriton was put on the witness stand prior to the prosecution's witness Detective Connie Brueckner being cross-examined by the defense. Additionally, Scott Wright of Eugene, Ore., a character witness for Johnson, testified after Harriton before Brueckner was brought back onto the witness stand.

Harriton no longer sees patients. He has been in practice for 45 years as a gynecologist and obstetrician, and during that time estimates he's conducted 100,000 adult female exams.

Now he works as a consultant and lecturer. He charges $375 and hour to review cases for lawyers, as he has done with the Johnson case.

Harriton said that after reviewing the alleged victim's medical records from her Feb. 5, 2012 exam at First Step Center for Sexual Assault Victims — including photos and video, as well as her written report of the incident, transcripts of interviews with a First Step nurse and her supervisor, and police interviews in the case he found "no medical evidence the intercourse they had that night was non-consensual."

Dr. Ted Harriton regarding his review of the case

Harriton said that he used the written report from Claire Francoeur, who completed the exam at First Step on the alleged victim that day, and compared it to the photos and video she took that same day and found multiple inconsistencies. He also said that the exam Francoeur performed was "below the standard of care."

"She just didn’t seem to know how to do the exam," said Harriton, who in the past has taught courses on giving post-sexual assault exams. "There were many things that she did that were below the standard of care."

Later in cross-examination with the prosecution, Harriton agreed that he was not familiar with the state of Montana's procedures for rape exams.

The details of inconsistencies and Harriton's other findings with the exam were explained during a closed session of the court due to the use of photos and video from the woman's exam.

Harriton later discussed in testimony that the only abrasion of any kind that he saw in the photos or video was a small laceration. He said that it could have been made by a finger nail. Harriton also stated that he was unsure how long the laceration had been there, but it appeared to be about 12 to 48 hours old. The alleged victim was seen by Francoeur about 11 hours after she and Johnson had sexual intercourse.

Dr. Ted Harriton discusses the laceration

During cross-examination by the prosecution, Adam Duerk asked Harriton about the fact that he has testified in hundreds of sexual assault cases, but never on behalf of the alleged victim, always for the defense. Harriton said he would testify for prosecuting attorneys, but he has never been asked to do so.

Duerk also brought up that Harriton has testified to having similar findings in many other sexual assault cases. In those he also found that the medical exam was inconclusive and the alleged signs of forced sexual intercourse could have come from other sources.

Harriton said he couldn't speak to all of the times that he has testified in the past, but that each case is different and his findings are based on evidence.