The attorney for the Rutgers-Newark professor accused of sexually assaulting a severely mentally disabled man sparred on Thursday with the man's brother over whether he had seen abrasions on the man's back.The question is: has the brother lost credibility with the jury by going too far?
On the witness stand during professor Anna Stubblefield's trial, the man's brother claimed he saw three abrasions and attributed the bruises to Stubblefield's alleged sex acts with his brother.
"They looked like somebody was dragging my brother across a floor," the brother said. "I think once we ascertained the ways in which Anna Stubblefield used my brother, I put two and two together."
Stubblefield's attorney, James Patton, however, questioned the brother about how he had not mentioned those abrasions when he reported the matter to a Rutgers official and when he gave a statement to police.
Patton also noted the brother did not mention the bruises in legal proceedings before the trial, including during a deposition he provided as part of a lawsuit he and his mother have been pursuing against Stubblefield.
"So the first time you mentioned it in any proceeding was yesterday?" Patton asked the brother, referring to when he began his testimony on Wednesday.
The brother acknowledged he had not discussed the abrasions in prior legal proceedings, but maintained there were bruises on his brother's back. He also said Patton had questioned him during that deposition and did not ask about the abrasions.
"To be sure, there were abrasions on his back," the brother said.