“So as she stood before the jury that August day in 1997, Harris, 32, did something risky: She acknowledged all of her victim\u2019s flaws. Yes, the young girl had lied to the police about being forced to enter the Oakland home where she was raped. Yes, she also lied about her age and the clothes she was wearing. She was, in Harris\u2019 candid estimation, \u201cdifficult to deal with,\u201d \u201cemotionally immature, and probably not very developed.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cBut the law does not say that you have to like the victim in order to decide that she should be protected,\u201d Harris continued. \u201cThe law does not say that she had to grow up in a normal family, whatever that is, grow up under the normal circumstances, whatever that may be, in order to be protected by the law.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
It was a bold strategy, one even veteran prosecutors might have thought twice about, but it displayed Harris\u2019 early aptitude for performing well in high-stakes battles fraught with obstacles. \u201cThe truth isn\u2019t always how you picture it \u2014 rosy and everyone\u2019s happy and everyone comes from a great background and it\u2019s easy,\u201d said Ken Mifsud, who was in the same intern class as Harris in 1988 at the Alameda County District Attorney\u2019s Office.” <\/p>\n\n\n\n
…<\/p>\n\n\n\n
“Harris herself asked the victim a crucial question: Why did she lie to both the police and at the preliminary hearing about being forced into the house where she was raped?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cBecause I was scared that if I had told them that I would go there willingly,\u201d the girl replied, \u201cthat it was not rape.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Harris followed up with why she eventually decided to tell the truth. \u201cBecause I had talked to you guys and understood how important it was,\u201d the girl said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I called one of the preeminent authorities on child witnesses to get a sense of how unusual Harris\u2019 strategy was. Gail Goodman, the director of the Center for Public Policy Research at UC Davis, is widely credited as the founder of the modern scientific study of child victims as witnesses. \u201cThat is unusual, in my experience, that a prosecutor would do that,\u201d Goodman told me.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The girl, Harris told the jury in her closing statement, was the \u201cperfect victim\u201d for the men to go after. Would a girl who was healthy and secure enter that apartment, thinking that the men in there would \u201ctalk her through her problems at the group home\u201d across the street? No, she would not.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cAre you to believe that [she] went through this entire process of testifying, of being cross-examined in that manner, of being physically examined, because she\u2019s just making it up because she wants to manipulate?\u201d Harris asked the jury. \u201cIs she that complex? No.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cShe is that vulnerable. And they knew it, and they raped her.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The jury believed the girl on the most important question. They found the two men guilty of rape. Evans was sentenced to 18 years in prison and Lee to 14 years. When the victim heard the verdict, she \u201cmelted in front of us,\u201d according to O\u2019Malley.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cNobody ever stood up for her,\u201d O\u2019Malley said. \u201cNo one ever spoke for her. \u2026 Kamala made her feel like she was the only important person in her life. She focused on her. She empowered her.\u201d (Years later, O\u2019Malley reconnected with the young woman, who she said turned her life around. She was married with kids and was \u201cvery happy.\u201d)”<\/p>\n\n\n\n