Held to answer

As a soldier in the #MeToo Army, Erica Naito-Campbell was not ready for battle.

The granddaughter of a prominent Portland, Ore., developer, Naito-Campbell accused two black civic leaders of sexually assaulting her, detailed in a convincing news story that later led to felony charges.

But after a one-week trial, Charles McGee and Aubre Dickson were quickly acquitted by a Multnomah County judge. It turned out to be another he-said-she-said story. The guys thought the sex was consensual. She said it wasn’t.

It’s a problem the #MeToo movement doesn’t know how to handle: What do you do when the victim of an alleged sex crime treats herself like a piece of tail – while at the same time demanding that everyone believe her.

The case dates back to 2012 but only went to trial last week because Naito-Campbell held off reporting it until it suited her motives.

A 38-year-old single mother of one child, Naito-Campbell has spent most of her life in Portland where her family name has a rich history of civic involvement. She graduated from Reed College and then obtained a law degree at Lewis & Clark Law School.

In court, defense attorneys characterized her as having failed to live up to the family name and noted she hadn’t worked for several years. They pointed to indications that she was writing a book about her #MeToo experience that she hoped would bring her money and a cause.

She also has spent time networking with professionals who do career-enhancing deeds like volunteering as mentors for black students or assisting with nonprofit organizations. That’s how she met Dickson, 44, a vice president at Key Bank and chairman of the state’s Housing Stability Council.

He, in turn, introduced Naito-Campbell to McGee, 33, who founded a nonprofit called Black Parent Initiative. With encouragement from Portland’s white progressives, McGee was plotting a political career. (His wife, Serilda Summers-McGee, is Chief Human Resources Officer for the City of Portland.)

The night of the incident Dickson met Naito-Campbell at the University Club for drinks (three rum-and-Diets for her, she testified, followed by a shot of whisky, which she sipped). In the course of their socializing, she mentioned that having a threesome was on her “bucket list.”

After the drinks, Naito-Campbell said she wanted to go dancing, but McGee wanted to go to a strip club. The trio headed to a strip club in Dickson’s car. After the strip club, they went to McGee’s house.

Naito-Campbell’s instincts warned her to be wary of McGee, but she testified that she thought Dickson was her friend and would protect her. She said she knew she was in trouble when they got inside the house, and they turned out the lights. First one, then the other, attacked her, pulling down her underpants and trying to rape her.

Based on her testimony, neither Dickson nor McGee got what they wanted – sexual satisfaction. It’s less clear what Naito-Campbell wanted or expected when she agreed to go to McGee’s house.

After fighting them off, moving from the kitchen to the living room, she eventually stood up and said, “I want to go home now.”

Dickson drove her back to her car at the University Club.

Naito-Campbell did not report the assault or seek a medical exam, in part, she said because of the racial dynamics: a white woman accusing two black men of attempted rape. However, she told several friends and her therapist about the attack.

Then last year McGee filed to run for Multnomah County Commission. Naito-Campbell had promised herself that if either man ever ran for office, she would expose what happened. She took her 6-year-old story to Willamette Week.

By then, the #MeToo movement was in full rage. It seemed that all a woman had to do was point a finger at a man, accuse him of inappropriate touching and – poof! – he was gone. Naito-Campbell’s accusation had the desired effect: McGee dropped out of the race.

But she had cast herself as the sole decider of whether a crime was committed. Running for political office has nothing to do with the definition of sexual assault. Likewise, her decision not to go to the police because of the racial implications. She is trained as an attorney. She could’ve read the criminal code. Race has nothing to do with defining sexual assault. Had two white men attacked her, would she have immediately gone to the police?

At trial, the case came down to Naito-Campbell’s word. McGee and Dickson did not testify, and their attorneys called no witnesses. It really was her trial. Unfortunately she gave the men’s attorneys a lot to work with.

McGee’s attorney, Christine Mascal, and Dickson’s attorney, Stephen Houze zeroed in on her credibility, particularly with regard to sexual matters since this was a sex case. They brought up previous sexual encounters she’d had, including one that sounded similar to the attack she described by McGee and Dickson. In this encounter, she ended up with a man at a place called Pussycats on Barbur Boulevard and eventually had sex with him.

Later, she felt confused.

“He apologized immediately,” she said.

They met a couple of days later to talk about it.

“He took full responsibility,” she said. “It wasn’t entirely his fault. He is still my friend.”

She saw him about a month ago at a Fred Meyer store. The encounter had no long-lasting effect on her, she said.

“There was no physical coercion. I was actually on top. I didn’t say no…,” she said. “I was actually in physical control of the entire event . … He took responsibility.”

Left hanging was the question: If she was in physical control of the entire event, why did he need to take responsibility?

When Houze referred to Pussycats as a strip club, Naito-Campbell corrected him.

“Pussycats actually isn’t a strip club. … It has individual rooms and individual dancers coming in,” she said.

“Rooms where people can have sex.” said Houze. “It’s a sex club.”

“I wouldn’t characterize it as a sex club,” she replied.

Her mother, Anne Naito-Campbell, sat in the front row of the small courtroom.

With only two short rows of benches for spectators, the racial dynamics played out with visitors fighting over space. An increasing number of black supporters, clearly there on behalf of McGee and Dickson, took over the back row and much of the front row.

On the fourth day, a young black man barged down the front row towards Anne Naito-Campbell to a spot next to her, which she was saving. He seemed ready to stake a claim.

“It’s for my family,” she said, almost pleading.

The man hesitated, then turned back and squeezed in somewhere else.

Criminal trials are often compared to real-life dramas. This one had a diverse cast of characters. The very black McGee, who slouched throughout much of the trial, his lower jaw jutting out in a pout, was represented by the white and maternal-looking Mascal. Dickson who sat tall and straight and cut a remorseful figure without saying anything, was represented by Houze, who’s white and has a stern grandfatherly approach.

The two prosecutors, Deputy District Attorneys Amanda Nadell and Amity Girt, both young white women, seemed indignant that there was any doubt the two men were guilty as charged.

Multnomah County Circuit Court Judge David Rees stated earlier in the trial, “I’m going to be highly focused on evidence.”

Ultimately, the prosecutors had very little evidence to offer the judge other than corroboration from Naito-Campbell’s friends that she had told them about the attack, plus emails sent by Dickson a month after the attack, apologizing and wanting to make things right. Those emails, though, could just as easily have suggested he was sorry he misread her intentions.

Naito-Campbell’s own words undercut her allegations. As Mascal pointed out, when Naito-Campbell said, “I want to go home now,” they stopped.

The weakness of the prosecution’s case was obvious in Girt’s final closing argument. She began, “Six months ago, Christine Blasey Ford started a conversation about whether we believe women… .”

Houze objected, and Judge Rees joined in.

“That is a fair objection,” Rees said. “This is a criminal trial.”

A criminal trial that was fueled by a political movement. The Multnomah County District Attorney’s Office took this case twice to a Grand Jury seeking prosecution. Was it because the victim’s last name was Naito-Campbell? Or because the DA wanted to appear responsive to the #MeToo crowd?

The only thing surprising about Rees’ verdict was that he did not preface it with a preamble praising the victim’s courage, which now has become obligatory anytime a woman accuses a man of sexual improprieties.

Ultimately, Naito-Campbell didn’t need a verdict in her favor to get what she wanted – an end to McGee’s political campaign. Both men lost their jobs. She will have to settle for headline justice.

That’s more than many victims receive.

– Pamela Fitzsimmons

Related:

The Last Days of America

A Lesson for Harvey’s Girls