Crash Into Me_ A Survivor's Search for Justice - Liz Seccuro [57]
ME: I did.
QUAGLIANA: What did you keep?
ME: I kept all the clothing.
QUAGLIANA: And where is it?
ME: I kept all of the clothing for quite some time. When I realized that nothing was going to be done for me, via the University channels, and I don’t recall when, at one point I came to burn those—to burn that clothing.
After that line of questioning, my desperate act sounded suspicious.
QUAGLIANA: If I can have a moment, Your Honor. Thank you. Thank you, Your Honor, that’s all.
I was relieved when Quagliana sat down. Now it was time for the redirect examination, by Dave Chapman, the Commonwealth’s Attorney.
CHAPMAN: Just a couple of questions on redirect. Now, you described having located your clothing in the vicinity where it was removed?
ME: Yes.
CHAPMAN: The things that you located, were they all in that vicinity?
ME: Well, it wasn’t a large room, they were scattered on the floor.
CHAPMAN: Okay. Did you have any difficulty locating the things that you did find and put on?
ME: I was in—I don’t recall if I did. I just wanted to find them.
CHAPMAN: Well, for example, did you make any special or extra effort to find the underpants that you could not find?
ME: Yes. I got down on the floor and looked under the bed and under the sofa.
CHAPMAN: Could you find them anywhere?
ME: No.
CHAPMAN: Ms. Quagliana asked you about whether any of your clothing was torn or damaged[.] I cannot remember the precise language used, but was any of your clothing affected by the events?
ME: Yes, it was.
CHAPMAN: What clothing and in what way?
ME: My sweater, the crew neck, because it was a cotton/Lycra blend, the hole—the pullover—where you put your head, was stretched out.
CHAPMAN: Were any of the items affected in a way that you observed?
ME: Not when I retrieved them to put them back on.
CHAPMAN: How about upon later inspection, were you able to detect any way in which any of the other items were affected?
ME: Later I—after sitting, I obviously had deposited some blood onto the skirt.
CHAPMAN: Any other [e]ffect that you can recall?
ME: I don’t recall.
CHAPMAN: Now, at the time you described becoming aware of the door opening and light and other people being in the room—
ME: Yes.
CHAPMAN: Had the sexual assault been completed by then?
ME: I assume as I was not actively being assaulted at the time. I was—
CHAPMAN: At that time that you became aware of people to the extent you were, was any additional sexual assault or any other kind of contact made with you by those people?
This was the question I had asked Beebe in the e-mail about other assailants.
ME: I don’t recall. That is—that remains a question I have.
CHAPMAN: But do you recall any?
ME: No, I do not.
CHAPMAN: Thank you, that’s all I have.
THE COURT: Ms. Quagliana.
I almost wished Chapman had had more questions. But now I had to face Quagliana once again. This was the recross-examination.
QUAGLIANA: Was the collar of your shirt visibly stretched out?
ME: To me?
QUAGLIANA: Was it significantly altered?
ME: To me, yes, to the naked eye.
QUAGLIANA: When you testified in response to Mr. Chapman’s questions about the presence of others, you have said on prior occasions that you thought that this was likely a gang rape, is that correct?
The phrase “gang rape” shot like a bullet through the courtroom. There were gasps, then the sound of journalists’ pencils scratching furiously. I didn’t specifically remember being assaulted by anyone else, but I remembered the voices, the bodies. I had asked the question in an e-mail to Beebe, and he had said he was the only one. I was terrified that there might be more to know. Still, no number of assailants could erase the terror of Beebe’s assault from my memory. The horrible possibility did not lessen Beebe’s guilt.
CHAPMAN: Objection, objection, absolutely objection! Never said during this examination, not a subject of prior inconsistent statement. Not covered here. I object to that line of questioning.
QUAGLIANA: Mr. Chapman asked her about the presence of other people, and