High School Rapist Who Dodged Jail May Face Stunning Twist

You've got anything to say to the. victims, Jessie? Why did you rape them, Jessie? Why did. you rape the victims, Jessie? Why did you rape those girls? Why'd you. strangle them, Jessie? That's Fox 25. capturing teen rapist Jessie [music]. Butler getting heckled as he enters into. court to see if he's complying with the. terms of his probation. Yeah, the guy. who was charged with rape and. strangulation and sexual battery [music]. after brutally assaulting two girls, he. got to walk free. But we have a new. development that may change his future.

Could he wind up in prison? Welcome to. Sidebar, presented by Law&Crime. I'm. Jessie Weber. By the way, real quick, it's the holiday. season, got to talk about this. If. you're looking for a deal on maybe the. perfect gift for yourself or somebody. else, got to tell you about ChefIQ Sense. Smart Meat Thermometer, right here. This. is the secret to stress-free, flawless. cooking. So, whether you're a seasoned. chef or you're just starting out, this. smart thermometer, it guarantees perfect.

results every time. There's no more. guessing, there's no more overcooking. You just insert it, select your food, cooking method, your preferred doneness, you relax. Your app's going to alert you. when it's time to flip, remove, rest. Perfect food every time. So, from. holiday turkey to prime rib, wings, brisket, salmon, it works for the oven, grill, a smoker, air fryer, and more. You cannot mess this up. It is the gift. that makes cooking stress-free and fun. Isn't that the point of it? And with my. code sidebar, you can save 30% off.

sitewide at chefiq.com. Do you remember we talked about Jessie. Mac Butler, the teen rapist who got a. slap on the wrist basically out in. Oklahoma, avoided significant prison. time? Maybe I should say for now, cuz we. got an update that we got to talk about. He was charged with 11 counts. We're. talking rape, attempted force oral. sodomy, sexual battery, strangulation, and there were more. And this came after. two former girlfriends, they came. forward about the abuse that they.

suffered. He was charged as an adult. initially. By the way, this is a. sampling of the accounts as they were. laid out in affidavits about this. baseball player. LS reported she yelled. and told him no repeatedly and tried to. push him off of her, but was unable to. overpower him. LS reported Butler told. her he was sorry for what he had to do, but he had to do it. Or how about this? LS told Butler she needed to get home, but Butler pulled her on top of him and. told her, "You're not going until I'm.

finished.". Then there's this. KS explained she. learned what to do and not to do to. avoid being hurt by Butler. According to. KS, Butler would pin her down, and she. was physically unable to get him off of. her. KS stated this would often lead her. to hyperventilate, which Butler thought. was funny. And we also played you body. cam footage of when he was arrested and. his mom watched on. Yeah, and I actually have a copy of the. warrant, so I'll get that to you. I'll just take this out to you in a. minute, that way I can give it to the. dispatcher.

Yeah. I'm shaking. 24 Central. 24. 10:15. So, my attorney told the police Oh, my. bad. that we would bring him in. So, you. didn't get that message? >> I did, and I called back, and I never. got a call back from him.

When did you call him? Cuz he's called. you several times, too, he said. I've. only had one voicemail from him, and I. called him back after that. Um sorry, I'm trying to get you a copy of this. warrant. Um and I haven't received anything from. him, so. Other than that one phone call. And that was several months ago, probably like. Probably his. the attorney? Yeah. >> No. No. There would be no reason for me to tell. him. Um.

But he left you several messages about. Jessie. Um he left me one message. And I. returned his call, and he didn't call me. back. So, that I took that generally, that's I don't want my client to talk to. you, so. When I return the message and. then it's not he doesn't make any effort. to call me back, that's kind of what I. have to go with. Okay. Oh. This is just a copy, but you can have. that. Okay. So, it has the charges listed and the. bond and the case on there. Okay.

All right. Thank you. Okay, you're. welcome. This is what got the. community's blood boiling. He enters a. no contest plea over the summer to the. charges. But then there is this sudden. reversal in court, which meant that the. now 18-year-old wouldn't face nearly 80. years in prison like everyone thought, which was a possibility. Instead, the. judge gave him youthful offender status, switching his punishment from jail time.

to probation and mandatory therapy. Now, Butler's exact treatment plan, it's. sealed in the court records, but USA. Today reports that the DA's office. released this statement where it says, "The youthful offender sentence imposed. against Jessie Butler requires him to. complete his rehabilitation plan. successfully, including an aggressive. schedule of therapy with a specialist in. sex offender treatment, and should he. fail, he faces reclassification. as an adult and a sentence of 10 years. in prison." Now, I mentioned that there.

is this recent hearing, right, where he. comes into court and he's heckled by a. protester. The reporting indicates that. in that hearing, it was determined he is. complying with the terms of the youthful. offender deal. This is all shocking, by the way. It's. shocking. The change in punishment, it. sent shock waves throughout the. community. It had devastated the two. girls who had gone to school officials. to report what Butler had done to them. A mother of one of the victims told the. outlet Tulsa World that the families. were completely against youthful. offender status from the very beginning,

said that it was their understanding. that the prosecutor trying this case. wouldn't accept a deal like that. There. have been calls for the judge who. approved Butler's deal, special judge. Susan Worthington, to be reprimanded or. removed for signing off on this. One of. the victims' parents, so KS's parents, sat down for an interview with ABC's. Good Morning America. The mother saying, "Community service and counseling. doesn't equate to what he did to her.". Her father saying, "I'm just hoping that. his name will be out there, that.

somebody will know that he's capable of. this, and just anything we can do to. prevent other harm." And the family. attorney, Rachel Busset, told Nightline, "I think there should have been a period. of incarceration, and I think there. should have been an admission of guilt. of what he did.". Now, why am I saying all this? Because. it brings me to a new development. There is apparently a legal push, and. we'll see if it'll be successful, a. legal push to change all of this, essentially, to maybe change the future.

of Jessie Butler. Ms. Busset, this attorney, filed a very. important piece of paperwork with the. court on behalf of KS and her parents. So, I want to do all this, I want to go. through this document piece by piece, and I want to bring on Rena Paul, former. federal prosecutor, going to explain all. of this to us. Uh thank you so much for. taking the time. First, before even get. into this, cuz you and I haven't really. talked about this case, is it unusual to you that somebody who. is facing these charges and pled no. contest, have you ever seen a situation.

where this is their sentence? They're. reclassified and they get probation. status considering what he did to these. two girls. I mean, have you ever seen. anything like this in your experience? From what I understand from the news. reports, what happened here is that this. is a youthful offender question, right? So, in this case, the question is for. the prosecutor in the first instance to. determine whether or not they want to. [snorts] charge this. now adult who wasn't under aged under.

18, I think he was 16 and 17 at the time. of the alleged incidents, and the. question for them on the first blush is. are they going to charge him as an. adult? In In Oklahoma, it seems once that. happens, then there's a second question. of whether the judge is going to accept. a motion from the defense. about whether the judge will then treat. it as a youthful offender treatment or. not. So, I mean, yes, this is a statute. that is used, and this is one of those. cases where the question it begs the. question, how serious does the crime. have to be for it to have a.

discretionary look under the youthful. offender statutes? Sure. Is what would be a rational, reasonable. um explanation for why this should be. the punishment? I mean, we I'll talk. about it in a little bit cuz they cited. but like, you know, minors who commit murder are sometimes, and a lot of times, charged as adults. This was a brutal attack on two girls.

Yeah, I mean, so if the question is. should this should this warrant uh. non-youthful offender treatment, I think. there's a lot to get into to talk about. I mean, I think this. this also begs the question of what a. sexual assault case entails for a person. who is making a report, what it means. for them to go to trial, how those. decisions are taken into account by. prosecutors to put somebody on the stand. uh who is. in this case, two women on the stand or.

young girls on the stand, what that. means, and plea decisions are made uh. with those those considerations in mind. in sexual assault cases. Mhm. And yeah, I think we could have a a long. discussion about how what the difference. is between how murder cases are viewed. and how sexual assault cases are viewed. and why those decisions get made. So, let's keep that in mind as we go through. this, because this is essentially the. argument from this motion, okay? This. filing from the attorney who represents.

one of the victim's family members. Essentially, the argument is is that. Cass's rights were violated and that. under the law, there should be a new. hearing scheduled and hopefully, this. according to them, hopefully Butler's. youthful offender plan would be. modified. It says, quote, "The victim. received no meaningful or timely notice. or consultation regarding the state's. agreement on Butler's certification as a. youthful offender. The defendant's. conduct was not a single youthful. indiscretion, but a pattern of. escalating violence over approximately.

11 separate incidents during a 7-to-8. month period. The state's entry into a. plea agreement without meaningful victim. consultation violated Marsy's Law, depriving Cass of her rights to. reasonable notice, to confer with. prosecutors, to be heard at critical. stages, and to be treated with fairness, dignity, and respect. Butler took no. responsibility for his conduct, did not. acknowledge or admit to what he did, and. ultimately pled no contest to all. charges, including the violation of the.

protective order, and was not sentenced. to incarceration. The victim was not. meaningfully notified of ongoing plea. negotiations and was unaware of the no. contest plea and its terms of. non-custodial disposition until. immediately before going into court and. was subsequently accepted by the court. on August 25th, 2025. The victim now. moves this court to enforce Marsy's Law. and set aside the plea agreement and. reset this matter as an adult. prosecution or alternatively, if the.

court determines that it should remain a. youthful offender, to require the. defendant to allocate. Okay, lot there, Rina. First, let's start here. What. exactly is Marsy's Law and what are the. legal and maybe moral responsibilities. of a prosecutor in communicating with a. victim or a victim's family during the. criminal process? So, Marsy's Law is an was a national. movement is a national movement I guess. that aims to ensure that victims of. crime have constitutional rights in the. system. And.

Oklahoma passed their version of this in. 2018 and it it gives rights to crime. victims. Some of the rights we're. talking about, timely notice of. hearings, the right to be present at. proceedings, some proceedings, key stages, uh the. right to confer with prosecutors, and. you know, there's a list and depending. on the state and and the way that the. law is uh interpreted in that state. So, it does just most basically it gives. rights for crime victims to to be heard. and be present during the process. And.

and let me be clear, this is probably. going to be a factual dispute cuz I'll. get into what the DA's office says, but. assuming for argument's sake that they. weren't properly notified, even though. the DA's office will probably say, assuming they weren't notified, they. didn't know what was going on, is that. an egregious violation where there could. be a change in what happens to Jesse. Butler? And we'll get into a little bit. more. of the specifics in this motion, but. generally speaking, have you ever seen a. situation where.

rights there is allegedly an egregious. violation of their rights, they're not. informed, and there's actually a change. in the disposition of what happens to a. criminal defendant? Yeah, well, I want to back up just to to. talk about something fundamental that is. worth talking about when you talk about. rights, right? So, it and when when. someone comes to me and says that that. they are considering. what they want to do after being. assaulted. The and they're talking about the. criminal system. One of the first things.

to understand is that in the criminal. system, when you make a report, you are. no longer you are a witness, right? You. are not any longer in charge of what. happens to that case. You are a witness. And that means that the prosecutor, that's because the prosecutor has the. responsibility not to victims or to. defendants, but to both. And that is that is the way our system. works. Um and as somebody who does. represent.

uh has been a prosecutor and has does. represent people who have been victims. of such crimes, I mean, that's a really. serious question for someone to consider. when they walk into the system. Okay. Um so, talking about that, when. you think about that from that. perspective, the prosecutor ultimately. makes a decision. It really isn't for. the victim to decide anymore. The rights. of the victim are about notice and about. what they are the window that they're. given into the case, but it's not that.

they are given all windows into the case. or decision-making power. So, that's an. important piece to understand, too. They can't decide whether or not a deal. should be given or accepted or. something. Okay, but if they are if. their rights were violated, okay, for. argument's sake, can it be. I'll tell you what, let's let let's I'll. let's hold that, whether or not cuz I'll. go through it about whether or not their. rights rights were violated in such a. way that there could be a significant. change, a new hearing, something happens. with Jesse Butler. Let me let me go. through this. So, first they talk about.

enforcement of Article 2, Section 34, Oklahoma Constitution, Marsy's Law. Pursuant to the Oklahoma Constitution, the rights of a victim shall be. protected by law in a manner no less. rigorous than the rights afforded to the. accused. It says, "This section delineates and. mandates that a victim has absolute. rights to be informed prior to any. negotiations, plea agreements, and. hearings in advance of any plea. negotiations and hearings. There's a. provision that also requires the state's. attorney to confer with the victim prior.

to a final disposition occurs to any. plea agreements or proposed pleas. If. these rights are violated, the. constitutional protections and. safeguards under Marsy's Law. specifically allow or expressly. authorize the victims to have standing. and to assert and enforce these rights. The victim's constitutional rights were. violated in every provision outlined and. delineated in the preceding paragraph. because there was not any degree of. notice as to the modified certification. regarding the youthful offender status,

nor a nolo contendere plea and dismissal. of multiple charges or counts. Although. the defendant committed numerous heinous. crimes causing great bodily harm that. was nearly fatal, the victim was not. given meaningful notice of the plea. negotiations or an ample opportunity to. talk with the prosecutor about the deal. before it was locked in or made behind. closed doors, and not fully heard nor. interviewed as required before the judge. approved the sentence, which are all. constitutional or Marsy's Law.

violations. Rina, is that accurate? I'll tell you what I stick on because. I'm lawyer and lawyers stick on words, right? So, I I listen to the words. meaningful, ample, and fully in there. A. meaningful opportunity, ample time, fully and I I don't remember the what. that modified, but here's the question. The question is that's going to be what. it comes down to. I think the answer is. there I'll give you a lawyer's answer, too. It could change the course of it, right? So, then the question the. the considerations of that are going to.

be about what what does it mean that it. was meaningful, uh how meaningful was. the opportunity for them to weigh in. And what would the prosecutor say about. that? Were they informed? What does that. mean? It may not feel, and I don't know. specifically, of course, in this case, just generally speaking, does it feel. the questions you ask are does it even. if it doesn't feel meaningful for the. victim, was it meaningful under the law? Did they have the opportunity under the. law? And that is really a question of. the way that prosecutors interact with.

crime victims, which is kind of the. genesis of this whole law to begin with. But different prosecutors do things. differently and the way that they. notify, when they do, how. trauma-informed it is, uh how trained. they are in those kind of practices, those are the things that you think. about when you want to ask the question. of what was done here and whether it's. going to make an impact to the to the. bottom line of this case, but certainly. from this this motion you can tell, at. least from the perspective of the. victim's attorney, that it made an. impact to her. Let's uh let's keep. going. It says, "The only notice or.

consideration that was given to the. victim consisted of approximately 10. minutes prior to the plea bargain. agreement, and she was never given an. opportunity to be interviewed or. supplement the pre-sentence. investigation report with her victim's. impact statement, nor was she afforded. an opportunity to be privy to any other. information outside of forensics prior. to the closed or private agreement, which goes directly against the policy. that is aimed to promote and protect the. victim's rights. The victim was also.

misled on the court's role in. prohibiting this from moving forward as. an adult charge. The DA has the sole. authority to decide whether to file the. charge as an adult. Furthermore, the. plea agreement was directly contrary to. the victim's consent. The victim. vehemently disagreed and objected to the. plea agreement and the correlating. leniency or mitigation as part and. parcel of the youthful offender status, which allowed the defendant to avoid. time in custody. So, Rina, again, you. see this new this additional set of. allegations about.

you know, how much time they were given, being part of the pre-sentencing report, uh your take. Let's let's talk about. just the. process of what generally happens to. talk about how they're this motion. motion is saying that they deviated from. the process. So, typically what happens. is once the plea is taken, there's a. pre-sentence report that is made by the. probation department and the victims. have a right to weigh in at that time. and weigh in in the form of oral. testimony or written statement or. something, so that the probation.

department or whoever is writing up that. report can have their take on what they. think and then present that to the judge. who can consider it. So, when they are. referencing in this motion supplementing. the pre-sentence report with their. statement, it's unclear to me from. reading that whether or not they did do. that already or not. If or it was that. they wished to supplement it further. than they had on the initial. go around with it, if that makes sense. So, I you know, that's one piece of it. And then as far as them being privy to.

information about the way that these. decisions are made, certainly as I said. before, I mean, it is not. there's a difference between notice and. taking into account what the victim. would want. and the bringing them inside of the. decision-making as the prosecutor, which. is not typically what is what happens. Certainly most prosecutors will ask for. the take of the victim, will want to. know what they want, uh and understand where they're coming. from, but that doesn't mean that they're.

going to do what they want. Mhm. Well, this is what they're hoping. for. It says, quote, "As a result of. these direct violations, the moving is. requesting that the defendant's plea or. final disposition through sentencing be. vacated. Alternatively, the victim seeks. formal recognition that her rights were. violated during the plea and sentencing. process, a new fully compliant hearing. at which she may be genuinely heard, and. such modification of conditions and. terms as the court in its discretion and. within statutory bounds deems necessary.

to restore fairness, protect public. safety, and to give effect and. compliance to the victim's. constitutional and statutory rights as. required." So, Rena, if I'm. understanding. and this is by the way part one, we'll. get into part two. They're saying, "Okay, can can you resentence, like. throw the sentence out? Let's have a. hearing where I can properly be heard, or can you modify his parole his. probation conditions in a way?" Are any. of those realistic possibilities, whether you've seen it in this state or. other states?

I mean, I think anything's possible, right? This is a constitutional right. So, the question is if if who's going to. make this decision, which is the. district court, and how egregious was. this, and what are the conditions? So, the the first question that's going to. be answered is were the rights violated, and that goes back to the nuance of what. the rights are, which are pretty broadly. stated in the Marsy's Law, and how they. were done here, um or complied with here. And then the. second is, okay, if it would if it's. true that they were violated in any way, what's the remedy? And you know, that's.

it sounds like for that would be in the. discretion of the court that's deciding. it and how whether they would send it. back to redo, whether it would be. vacated completely, I think that would. be up to the court who's there filing. this motion to. And. certainly anything's possible when it. comes to violating a right like that. Let's move to a similar argument, uh. that she's entitled to relief or. enforcement through the Oklahoma. Victims' Rights Act. Says, quote, "These. statutory requirements also mandate. compliance of victims' rights and duties.

to be informed and provided with. adequate notice and an opportunity to be. heard. Similarly, the Oklahoma statutory. provisions guarantee the victim's right. to notice, consultation, and. participation, and imposes corresponding. duties on prosecutors." And she makes. the argument that there is nothing under. this statute that prevents a court from, quote, "reconsidering its acceptance of. a plea agreement before final judgment. or sentencing, or vacating or modifying. an unexecuted sentence in order to. remedy ongoing violations and to afford.

the victim a meaningful opportunity to. exercise her rights." So, two questions. I have here, Rena. One, um why also include this section? And B, does this also provide a. realistic avenue for there to be a. change in Jesse Butler's status? Yeah, well, I so I'm I don't practice in. Oklahoma, so I'm learning about Oklahoma. from from reports, but I'll tell you it. seems that there is another statute that. predated the Marsy's Law in Oklahoma. specifically. So, you know, there's. federal statutes and state statutes, and.

this state statute seems like it existed. prior to also the Marsy's Law. It seems. like it overlaps a lot of the same. considerations of the Marsy's Law. So, it has a lot of the same things to say. about what victims can do. And when. they, you know, to enforce your rights, you file a motion like this, you ask the. court to do something about it. So, it. would be the same the same deal as the. Marsy's Law uh violations. And they they. they would use it because they're they. would use any law that would, you know,

Right. if a good lawyer would use any. law that they would that's possibly. relevant to to make this motion, right? So, that's why I would imagine that. they're both in here. I want to go to. this argument. I thought it was. interesting that reverse certification. isn't allowed, right, to go from an. adult to a minor when you're dealing. with rape one with a rape one charge or. attempted rape one. So, they say, "Jesse. Butler was 16 and 17 when he committed. the acts against the victims LS and KS. Under the law, he may be charged as an. adult or a youthful offender." This. section mirrors the language, and this.

is a an indifferent statute, which does. not allow reverse certification for a. murder one charge by a 15-17-year-old. So, they're comparing it to that. This. is colloquially referred to among. prosecutors and defense attorneys as the. straight-to-jail provision of the law. "Had the DA maintained the prosecution. under this statute as she originally. filed it and as the victims wanted, Butler would more likely than not have. gone to prison or at least had a record. as a convicted sex offender upon the.

entry of a plea of conviction. Instead, the victims were led to believe that. this was not a possibility and that the. court held all the power. The district. attorney retains the sole. decision-making authority on how to. charge and either misunderstood or. misled the victim on the court's. authority to reverse certified Butler as. a youthful offender.". "The DA charged him as an adult and. retained that discretion to keep the. charge. KS and family were led to. believe that was outside the DA's. control and within the control of the. court when that is an incorrect.

application of the law. This violates. the victim's rights." So, this is a big. part. They're basically saying, "This is. not allowed, can't do this re re reverse. certification, but also the DA either. doesn't know the law or they misled us. on what should happen here. They should. have told us what the court can do or. what they can do." This a big allegation. here. Yeah, the one thing that I did not. see in the news reporting clearly was. what the prosecutor's. decision was after the court decided to.

proceed as a youthful offender, whether. that was a plea agreement that they. consented to or whether or not it was. over their objection. And that was not clear. Maybe that's. what's being referenced in this motion. It was not clear to me from the news. reporting, but yeah, this is this would. be about. the necessity for prosecutors to. communicate effectively and clearly to. crime victims. And listen, it's very. challenging to be in that position.

because you have a heightened emotions, a very sensitive issue, and you are not, as I said before, you are not the. representative for the victim. You are. the representative for the state. And. that puts you in a different position. And you are also dealing with a person. who is a witness, right? Now, Right. just to think taking it out of. sentencing, just more broadly as just a. a talking point that's interesting is. that when you think about that as a. prosecutor, when you're speaking to a. victim, you don't want to say something. that may impact the way that they would. testify should they ever end up on the.

stand. You want them to to preserve. their own experience, and you don't want. to to put anything into their mind that. may change, you know, or impact the way. that they relate to it, right? So, when. you're speaking, you have this kind of. dual function as a prosecutor that makes. those communications tough. And you. know, I I hear it from this motion that. that at least it through the attorney. for them that they were not feeling that. they understood. And. yeah, I mean, that's that is that's. difficult. Yeah, and and they go into again, uh you. know, under this provision how they.

believe their rights were violated. during the sentencing process and the. plea process. And it goes back to this. question of what's the relief. It says, quote, "A corrective hearing at which. the victim, through counsel, is fully. heard regarding the plea, the youthful. offender disposition, public safety, and. the impact of the offenses as necessary. to restore integrity to the process and. to give effect to Marsy's Law. requirements in this case. We believe. the corrective action is required under. both constitutional and statutory. provisions, which would require a. hearing based on a complete record that. includes the victim's input, interview,

and consideration. At that time, the. court may consider modification of. existing conditions or the imposition of. additional supervision requirements, no. contact orders, unsealing the victim's. protection order, ordering a permanent. victim's protective order, and other. safety-related terms that are consistent. with the youthful offender statutory. framework and the interest of justice. Set this matter for a new sentencing. hearing. to allow the victim to be fully heard, informed, briefed, and conferred with. through the attorney for the state.". Rena, this can't be ignored. What do you.

think the court is going to do here, um. because I will tell you this much. Let's. just end on this point. The district. attorney's office told ABC News that. they did in fact consult the victims'. families throughout the process, warned. them that this could happen. In fact, in. a statement to ABC News, Payne County. District Attorney Laura Austin Thomas. defended the actions of the office, saying, "The three young people involved. were all 16 years old at the time of the. alleged crimes. Each of the allegations. was reported to have occurred during. consecutive dating relationships, and.

none of the allegations was reported. until after the relationships had both. ended. These circumstances do not. justify criminal behavior or minimize. victim trauma, but they do impact the. evidence available for a prosecution, and they also impact potential defenses. We discussed these factors at length on. multiple occasions with each family, including advising them from the. beginning that this matter would likely. end up as a youthful offender. prosecution and could even end up in. juvenile court." So, you're seeing two. different narratives here. Rena, let's. talk about what we can expect. Is a.

hearing going to be set up where you. have their arguments, and you have the. DA's arguments about who was consulted, were their rights violated? Is that. going to happen? And that could. necessarily determine what happens next. to Jesse Butler? I mean, I don't have a. crystal ball, but I don't think if I had. to if I had to give my best guess, no, I. don't think that such an extensive. hearing is going to happen. I you know, the question about remedy is. one of what was the violation. This. isn't the remedy isn't about undoing the.

prosecution or the decision-making. The. remedy is about the violation of the. victim's rights. So, what would remedy. those rights? And just kind of. colloquially, I don't think that. necessarily taking apart the entire. decision-making process publicly is. going to be something that would be. a court was going to decide as the. remedy for that violation. But, whether. there would be some sort of scrutiny or. some sort of look at it it is a. different question. I mean, you know, I.

think it depends on how egregious it is. But, listening to what you said about. the the DA, which I had not read, you know, that that's a different. question and that's really at the heart. of where we started about the difference. between a homicide prosecution and a. sexual misconduct prosecution or. assault. And it gets down to the. references there about you know, dating. violence, consensual relationships that lead to. this. to behavior that is assaultive. And what. do we or what are we as a society, as a. media, as the justice system able to do.

with cases like that? I mean, we all. just went through and lived through. watching the Diddy case. happen on TV and the the course of. aspects of that being talked about in. the media in every which way. So, that's. really the question that I think this. case begs is about what what do we do. with sexual assault cases, especially. teen sexual assault cases, and how do we. look at those and why in in at least in. under the state statutes, it seems like. in Oklahoma murder is different than. that. Because in the state statute in.

Oklahoma, it seems like murder is just. plainly as as an adult, but but a. violent sexual assault is a. discretionary call. So, beyond this. case, I think that's the question that. this case begs. That that's [snorts] a. very fair breakdown, a very fair. assessment of what we can expect. For. anybody who's following this and anybody. who just maybe watched to the end of the. video to get the main conclusion. For. those who are saying, "Okay, Rina, Jesse, tell us. Is Jesse Mack Butler. going to prison?" Your answer would be?

Even if we evaluate even if what you're. suggesting this the hearing was. evaluated, as I said, I don't think that. the the the remedy for this violation, if it was a violation, is going to be a. change in what the outcome is. Rina Paul, thank you so much. Appreciate. it. Thank you. And that's all we have. for you right now here on Sidebar. Everybody, thank you so much for joining. us and as always, please subscribe. [music] on YouTube, Apple Podcast, Spotify, wherever you should get your. podcast. You can follow me on X or. Instagram. I'm Jesse Weber. I'll speak.

to you next time. >> [music].