In a strongly worded court brief, the appeal attorney for Michael McClish of Ben Lomond has criticized the state Attorney General’s Office for its support of the prosecution in McClish’s 2007 sexual assault trial.
“Nothing (the attorney general) has said in this brief justifies his extravagant confidence in the integrity of this prosecution,” Mark Greenberg wrote in response to an attorney general’s brief that was filed earlier. That brief defended Superior Court Judge Robert Atack’s admission of some evidence and refusal to permit other evidence.
“Every manner of collateral sexual allegation against (McClish) had to be mustered to make (the victim) look even colorably plausible,” Greenberg wrote, “(and) a substantial amount of material impeaching her credibility and involving false accusations against boyfriends and other casual intimates had to be suppressed.”
The appeal is based primarily on the argument that evidence was ruled inadmissible that could have cast doubt on the victim’s charges and that testimony from other women was inappropriately admitted.
A jury convicted McClish of raping and sodomizing a San Lorenzo Valley woman and threatening her with a hatchet. He has professed innocence in that incident as well as a double homicide in which he is awaiting a preliminary hearing.
Greenberg filed the latest brief in April. The Attorney General’s Office will respond in at least one other filing before the appeal reaches the judges.