Sexual assault and abuse awareness is a cause we can never give enough attention to, and that is why I was especially horrified that no charges were brought against Ald. Brian Solomon, District 10. District Attorney Shelly Rusch had valid reasoning for not bringing charges, but she should take her cues from the plaintiff. If Assistant City Clerk Elena Berg was brave enough to report the alleged assault, the DA should be brave enough to move forward with the charges. Furthermore, dropping the case against Solomon now could lead to much more serious problems later.
The Badger Herald reported that the alleged incident last April after a group of city employees went out for a drink after a City Council meeting. Berg, a previous victim of sexual trauma, accepted a ride back to her house from Solomon, and they engaged in some consensual kissing before falling asleep fully clothed. Allegedly, Berg awoke at about 5 a.m. the next morning to find, as reported in the DA’s recent letter, Solomon penetrating her with “two or three fingers,” which she said “really hurt.” Later that morning, employees at the City County Building saw the two and noted that Berg was “tipsy” but that they were mutually affectionate. It took Berg until the following January to report the incident, and she had remained anonymous until just this past week.
Solomon has been on City Council since 2007 and represents constituents from the Regent and Monroe neighborhoods. The State Journal reports that he found the allegations to be, “really horrible” and furthermore added, “I feel like I’ve had noble and honorable motives for everything I’ve done.”
Rusch, on one hand, has expressed in her letter that she “absolutely [believes] Ms. Berg’s account of what occurred when she awoke in her bed the morning of April 14, 2010. … There is no doubt in my mind that Ms. Berg did not consent to the defendant’s digital penetration.” Evidence to support this claim includes that coworkers described Solomon as “romantically obsessed” with Berg and Solomon’s own statement about the assault. She said it was uncomfortable. Solomon, on the other hand, “describes his digital workmanship as producing not one, but two orgasms, in a woman who suffers from sexual trauma on the morning after an excessive atypical drinking binge. He further, incredibly, claims that Ms. Berg thanked him for respecting her boundaries.” It sounds like Solomon is not only lying to the public but also to himself, and as Rusch points out, a story like that “stretches credibility to its limits.”
On the other hand, there are several issues that could cause a jury reasonable doubt that are preventing Rusch from bringing charges. Rusch states in her letter that Berg accepted a ride home from Solomon even though another co-worker offered her a ride. She was drunk. She invited him in and they kissed. She didn’t loudly and forcefully say “no” when she realized the attack was taking place. Since employees saw them together the next morning, maybe she had “buyer’s remorse” or consented to the activity and then cried assault because she wished it had not happened. Finally, the factor that weighed most on Rusch’s mind was the fact that Ms. Berg had previously been a sexual assault victim, and bringing the case to trial would necessitate the opening of her sealed therapy records and disclosing them to the court.
None of these things matter more than getting justice. It does not matter that she let him drive her home, that she was drunk or that she let him sleep over. It does not matter that they kissed, and it especially does not matter that, allegedly, she did not tell him no. “Coming forward is one of the scariest things I’ve ever done,” the State Journal quoted Berg as saying. She had fears about everything, from losing her job to how her co-workers would view her. However, Berg stood up to her fears to try and make sure justice was served not only for her, but for other women Solomon might come across. “My conscience would not allow me to silently stand back and risk that what happened to me could happen to anyone else,” Berg said.
Solomon is innocent until proven guilty, but by the looks of it, he will not even be tried unless there is further misconduct to put before a jury. Rusch said, “This investigation is especially important for future reference in the event Solomon is again reported for similar conduct.” But must we wait for there to be another incident? Even though there may be cause for a reasonable doubt, bringing Solomon before a jury has the possibility of preventing another woman from suffering the same injustice if he is guilty. Furthermore, if the DA waits until another problem arises, Berg’s will only have been acknowledged in retrospect. Prosecuting now can show her that the DA takes all allegations of such abuse seriously the first time.
When it comes to support, no amount is too much for an assault victim, even if his or her case will not stand up in court. Whether or not Solomon is guilty, what is most important is that the event that transpired made Berg uncomfortable enough to risk so many things on reporting it. If she was brave enough to come forward, the DA should be brave enough to give her her day in court.
Taylor Nye ([email protected]) is a junior majoring in human evolutionary biology, archaeology and Latin American studies.
