The jury’s focus tightens. A man like this—experienced and composed—makes them sit up and listen.
“Dr. Emerson,” I say, “did you review the toxicology report for Emily Westbrook following the incident on April fourteenth?”
“Yes, I did.”
“And what did your analysis reveal?”
He adjusts his glasses. “The blood alcohol concentration was measured at 0.03 percent.”
“Can you explain what that means?”
“For an adult of Ms. Westbrook’s weight, that level is consistent with approximately one standard drink. However, the screening also identified the presence of flunitrazepam.”
I take a deliberate step closer to the jury. “And what is flunitrazepam more commonly known as?”
He glances toward them. “Rohypnol. It’s a benzodiazepine sometimes referred to in the media and clinical literature as adate-rape drug.”
The jurors react in small ways—straightening and exchanging brief glances.
“Doctor, what effects does Rohypnol have on a person?”
“It is a potent sedative-hypnotic. It causes significant central nervous system depression. Effects include dizziness, confusion, impaired motor function, slurred speech, and short-term memory impairment. At a sufficient dosage, it can render a person incapacitated.”
“And based on your review of Ms. Westbrook’s blood sample, would the symptoms described by eyewitnesses—loss of balance, confusion, fatigue—be consistent with the effects of flunitrazepam?”
“Absolutely,” he says.
I hold the jury’s gaze for a moment before asking the critical legal question.
“And in your professional opinion, could someone exhibiting the symptoms you describe—confusion, impaired motor function, incapacity to maintain balance—be capable of giving consent to sexual activity?”
“No. At that level of sedation and impairment, the individual would lack the cognitive and physical capacity necessary for valid consent.”
I pause, letting the weight of the answer settle in the air.
“Thank you, Dr. Emerson. No further questions.”
Jon David approaches the witness stand with the ease of someone accustomed to commanding a room.
“Dr. Emerson, you’ve testified to years of experience in toxicology. We’re fortunate to have that expertise here.”
Suck up all you like, JD. Facts don’t bend.
“You would agree that the effects of flunitrazepam can vary based on individual factors?”
“Yes,” Emerson says. “As with many substances, the effects can depend on the amount ingested, as well as factors like metabolism, body weight, tolerance, and whether other substances are present in the system.”
Jon David nods, turning so the jury can see him. “So, a person who ingests flunitrazepam might experience marked impairment… or, sometimes, mild effects such as drowsiness?”
“In theory, yes, dependent on dosage and individual factors,” Dr. Emerson says. “However, significant impairment is a documented outcome.”
Jon David’s voice stays steady, almost conversational. “And flunitrazepam, in addition to its pharmacological effects, can be administered in different contexts, correct? There are controlled uses for certain patients under supervision?”
Dr. Emerson hesitates before answering. “In some countries, yes. But in the United States, its clinical use is limited.”
Jon David leans on the railing. “Can someone take it voluntarily without someone else’s involvement.”
Dr. Emerson exhales. “Well yes. Like any other medication, it can be ingested voluntarily if a person chooses to take it.”
