Oregon v. Rideout

Plaintiff
State of Oregon
Defendant
John J. Rideout
Plaintiff's Claim
That the defendant was guilty of first-degree rape.
Chief Lawyer for Plaintiff
Gary D. Gortmaker
Chief Defense Lawyer
Charles Burt
Judge
Richard Barber
Place
Salem, Oregon
Dates of Decision
27 December 1978
Decision
Not guilty.
Significance
For the first time in modern American history, a man faced trial for raping his wife. A national public discussion of the issue followed questioning whether a man had an absolute sexual right to his spouse's--or cohabitant's--body.Two other states besides Oregon had passed laws that did not grant married (or cohabitating) men immunity from the rape of their wives--and New Jersey was about to come on board. The Rideout trial led many other states to abolish marital and cohabitation exemptions to rape.
In 1978, Oregon, Delaware, and Iowa were the only states that did not recognize "marital privilege" as a defense against rape. All other states followed common law, which defined rape as "the forcible penetration of the body of a woman not the wife of the perpetrator."
On 10 October 1978, 23-year-old Greta Rideout telephoned the police for help,saying "My husband just got through beating me." When a police officer arrived at her home, Rideout said her husband had raped her. On 18 October, John Rideout was indicted on a charge of first degree rape.
Does Marriage Mean Consent?
In November, a circuit court judge denied Rideout's request to have the casedismissed on constitutional grounds. When it became clear that the criminal trial would proceed, District Attorney Gortmaker asked Judge Barber to prohibit "common law defenses," that is, a defense of John Rideout's actions based upon the common law presumption that a wife cannot refuse to have intercoursewith her husband. Gortmaker argued that Oregon's law, passed in 1977, had replaced English common law within the state. The judge denied the motion.
Charles Burt, Rideout's lawyer, explained the common law "marital privilege"for prospective jurors on 19 December. He said that the issue was not whetherthe couple had had sex on 11 October, but whether there had been "forcible compulsion" and whether a woman's marriage to a man meant she could not say "no."
Dr. Gilbert Geis, a professor of criminology at the University of Californiaat Irvine and a specialist in the issue of spousal exemption, spoke to Les Ledbetter of the New York Times during the trial. He traced husbands' immunity from charges of rape to a seventeenth century English jurist, Judge Matthew Hale. Hale's promulgation, as recorded in the 1736 "Historia PlacitorumCoronae, A History of the Pleas to the Crown," explains that "the husband cannot be guilty of a rape committed by himself upon his lawful wife, for by the mutual matrimonial consent and contract the wife hath given up herself in this kind unto the husband which she cannot retract." (Dr. Geis also pointed out Hale's other claim to fame was the number of witches hung by his order during the 1660s.)
No Help from Friends . . .
The lawyers made their opening arguments before Barber and a jury of eight women and four men on 20 December. The prosecution told the jury to prepare themselves for Greta Rideout's testimony that her husband had struck and raped her within sight of the couple's crying two-year-old daughter. The defense countered by saying that Greta Rideout had a "serious sexual problem" and that his 21-year-old client "honestly believed if you are married to a woman, you have a right to sex."
During the following two days, a number of the couple's friends, neighbors, and relatives testified for the prosecution. While witnesses agreed that Johndid, indeed, beat his wife, a few gave testimony that raised questions aboutGreta's motives for accusing him of rape.
David Lowe testified that during an argument prior to 10 October, he had heard Greta warn her husband that she would have him arrested under Oregon's newrape law. The manager of the Rideout's apartment building, Jackie Godfrey, testified that following John's arrest, Greta had mentioned a $50,000 offer from the Warner Brothers film company. Jackie Godfrey's daughter, Eugenia, and her husband, Wayne, also testified as to the conversation.
Testimony given by two other prosecution witnesses, Jenny Reisch and John Rideout's half-brother Jack Hinkle, substantiated that the Rideouts had a troubled marriage, but they also cast doubt on Greta's truthfulness. At the beginning of the trial, Burt had said that Greta Rideout taunted her husband by saying that she, and her friend Jenny, had once had a lesbian relationship. Jennytestified that there had been no such relationship, and that Greta Rideout'sstory had been "made up" to "bait" John.
Burt told the court that Greta said she had been raped by Hinkle. However, Hinkle testified that he had never raped his sister-in-law. He also testified that the Rideouts had once lived with him, and that they had been in the habitof "play[ing] games" that involved chasing each other through various roomsbefore having sex.
Other testimony was less open to interpretation. Dr. Lewis Sayers, the physician who examined Greta after the incident, testified that both her mental andphysical condition were "probably from a forced act of intercourse." OfficerDeborah Cleveland, who arrested John, said his comment about his wife's battered jaw was, "If I'd done it right she wouldn't be here to complain."
Greta was the prosecution's last witness. She testified that her husband routinely demanded sex two to three times a week and violent sex once a week. Shealso said that her husband frequently kicked and hit her. On 10 October, shewoke at 9:00 a.m. and did housework while her husband, a student, slept until the afternoon. Upon waking, he demanded that she have sex with him. Greta refused, saying she had to get ready for work. He began to chase her, she recalled. "I was afraid of him. He was very angry. I'd never seen him that angry."
She testified that her husband had said, "You are my wife. You should do whatI want." There was a physical fight, in front of their two-year-old daughter. When John ordered the child to leave the room, she obeyed, but Greta couldhear her daughter crying, "Mommy, Mommy!" Finally, having been beaten and hitespecially hard in her jaw, Greta gave in.
Afterward, Greta continued, her husband dragged her to the bathroom and forced her to look at her bruised face in the mirror. He told her, "This is what you'll get for not cooperating from now on." He also threatened to tell lies about her if she went to the police and said that if he were ever arrested, "I'll find you and that will be the end of you."
During the prosecution's presentation of its case, the jury also heard the tape of Greta's call to the police on October 10, and visited the couple's apartment.
John was the only defense witness. His excuse was, "She hit me first." He admitted to hitting her, but testified that he had apologized, saying "`Greta, I'm sorry. I didn't mean to do that.' She said it was all right," he continued, and then they kissed and had "voluntary" sexual intercourse.
Lose One, Win Some
On 27 December 1978, after three hours of deliberations, the jury found JohnRideout not guilty. A member of the jury, Pauline Speerstra, told the press afterward that the validity of Oregon's law had not been an issue in reachingtheir verdict. Rather, she said, since "we didn't know who to trust," the jury had reached its verdict based upon a finding of reasonable doubt.
Although John was acquitted, the publicity his trial afforded Oregon's law made many feel, as one newspaper editorial put it, that "an end to the common-law notion that rape is permissible in marriage is long overdue. A society that considers it a crime for a man to beat his wife should certainly consider it a crime for him to assault her sexually." By the early 1990s, only four states retained marital exemptions for rape.
Many recall that the couple reconciled two weeks after the trial. What is often forgotten is that the Rideouts separated three months later and finally divorced. Moreover, John Rideout later broke into Greta Rideout's home and received a suspended sentence. Continuing to harass her, he later went to prison.
Related Cases

• Shaw v. Shaw, 17 Day Conn. 189 (1845).
  
• Packard v. Packard, 27 FAM LQ 515 (1864).
  
• Michael M. v. Superior Court of Sonoma County, 450 U.S. 464 (1981).

Spousal Rape
Spousal or marital rape occurs when a husband forces a wife to have sex withhim when she is unwilling to do so. Most states have some kind of marital-rape statute, though many of these laws tend to be lax, or to apply only in situations of separated couples. There are no marital-rape laws on the books in Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Illinois, Kentucky, or West Virginia, and in the case of Alabama and West Virginia, neither a husband or a man who lives in state of "cohabitation" with a woman may be charged with rape.
Cohabitants cannot be charged with rape in Montana, Nevada, Delaware, or Pennsylvania. In these four states, along with 21 others, a husband cannot be charged with marital rape if he and the wife are living together; only in casesof legal separation is marital rape a punishable offense. Informal separation, as opposed to legal separation, marks a threshold for situations in which marital rape can be charged in six states: Oklahoma, Wyoming, Ohio, Louisiana,Virginia, and Maryland.
Only 12 states have firm marital-rape laws which govern situations of marriedcouples living in the same house. These are mostly states with more liberaltraditions, including California, Washington, Oregon, Iowa, Minnesota, Florida, New York, New Jersey, and all of New England except Maine.
Sources
Fast, Julius, and Timothy Fast. The Legal Atlas of the United States.New York: Facts on File, 1997.