Nearly five years after a Newport Beach, California, doctor and his girlfriend were accused of drugging and raping multiple women in a criminal case that quickly became enmeshed in political battles, courtroom testimony over the past week has for the first time painted a clearer picture of the charges Dr. Grant Robicheaux and Cerissa Riley now face.
Having significantly pared back the high-profile criminal case to focus on two alleged victims rather than the seven women Robicheaux and Riley were initially accused of sexually assaulting, prosecutors from the California Attorney General’s Office spent five days of testimony in a Fullerton courtroom over the past week outlining the evidence they hope will persuade an Orange County Superior Court judge to allow the case to proceed to a jury trial.
According to investigators, the two women both described meeting Robicheaux and Riley at Newport Beach restaurants, having drinks bought for them by Robicheaux and waking up later at the Robicheaux’s Balboa Peninsula home. The women said they felt as if they had been drugged, and they believed that Robicheaux and Riley were attempting to sexually assault them.
But aggressive questioning by Robicheaux and Riley’s attorneys about apparent contradictions in the alleged victim’s stories and the quality of the investigation carried out by the Newport Beach Police Department and the Orange County District Attorney’s Office made clear the challenges prosecutors will face should the case proceed to jury trial. The defense attorneys have described the couple as “swingers” who took part in consensual sex and drug use with other women and have denied that they took part in any criminal wrongdoing.
On July 9, Orange County Superior Court Judge Michael Leversen is scheduled to rule on whether there is enough evidence for the case to proceed to trial. The standard of proof during the current phase of the court process — known as a preliminary hearing — is lower than that of a jury trial, with the judge required to find probable cause rather than the “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard of a criminal trial.
Unlike in a jury trial, investigators during the preliminary hearing were allowed to essentially testify on behalf of the alleged victims, who did not take the stand.
Newport Beach police Detective Marie Gamble testified as the lead investigator for the accusations brought by the first woman, who was referred to in court by the pseudonym Jane Doe 1.
Gamble testified the following:
On Oct. 2, 2016, Jane Doe 1 was out drinking and dancing with a roommate at Baja Sharkeez when Riley introduced herself to the pair. Riley introduced Jane Doe 1 and her roommate to Robicheaux, who offered to buy drinks for the two women. Jane Doe 1 took a few sips of her drink and then “blanked out.”
The next thing Jane Doe 1 recalled was waking up feeling “loopy” in a state of undress next to her topless roommate on a bed in a dark bedroom in what turned out to be Robicheaux’s home. Unable to wake up her roommate, Jane Doe 1 got up and encountered Robicheaux in a bathroom. When she asked him what was going on and how they had gotten to the home, Robicheaux grabbed her arms and told her, “You wanted this, you wanted to come back here.”
Gamble alleged Robicheaux tried to kiss Jane Doe 1 and she tried to pull away, kicking off a struggle that led to him hitting her as she fell to the ground. After Jane Doe 1 screamed, Riley walked up and told Robicheaux, “It is going too far, it is not worth it.”
Jane Doe 1’s screams were heard by neighbors, who called 911. She told responding officers that she had woken up to Robicheaux and two other unnamed people hitting her and denied being sexually assaulted. Gamble testified that Jane Doe 1 later told her that she had lied to the officers because she felt uncomfortable, believed they were laughing at her, and she just wanted to go home.
Attorney Philip Cohen, who represents Robicheaux, repeatedly asked Gamble why she hadn’t pressed Jane Doe 1 to explain inconsistencies in her story that came up during the three interviews the detective conducted with her. Those apparent inconsistencies included whether Jane Doe 1 was nude or partially clothed when she woke up, whether Robicheaux allegedly began to hit her before or after she fell to the floor and whether Robicheaux had a “demonic look on his face.” The defense attorney also noted that Jane Doe 1’s roommate — with whom she has apparently had a falling out — told investigators that “(Jane Doe 1) tends to think everyone is trying to do sexual things to her.”
“One of the critical questions in this case is did this guy or this lady drug her or did she drink too much and black out?” Cohen said of Jane Doe 1.
OCDA Investigator Jennifer Kearns testified on behalf of the second alleged victim — identified in court as Jane Doe 2 — who met Robicheaux on a dating app while visiting a friend who lived in the area.
Kearns testified the following:
Jane Doe 2 was surprised when Riley showed up with Robicheaux on their Easter weekend 2017 date at Nobu Newport Beach, but after a few cocktails the woman agreed to go with Robicheaux and Riley to a local bar.
Jane Doe 2, Robicheaux and Riley had more drinks at the bar, and Jane Doe 2 ingested cocaine Riley offered her in the bar bathroom. Her next memory was walking up the stairs to Robicheaux’s bedroom.
Jane Doe 2 has struggled to piece together the rest of the night, but recalled Robicheaux and Riley touching her and taking her shirt off, Robicheaux handing her a drink he had put some sort of substance into, and crying hysterically while Riley tried to console her. The woman was able to lock herself in a bathroom until she could find an Uber to get back to her friend’s home, but recalled Riley at one point pleading with her to unlock the door, allegedly telling Jane Doe 2 that Robicheaux would hurt them if she didn’t and adding, “He makes me do this.”
“She was scared, she felt she was not safe, she wasn’t quite in control of her body,” Kearns said.
Cohen repeatedly questioned why Kearns had not looked into other alcohol-related incidents involving Jane Doe 2, specifically a drunk in public arrest outside a Laguna Beach bar and a DUI arrest on an Orange County freeway. He also noted that she only reported the alleged incident after the other allegations against Robicheaux and Riley received widespread media coverage.
“The driving force behind (Jane Doe 2’s) version of events, and how it changed over time, is based on what she saw on social media and the fear it created,” Cohen told the judge.
The defense attorney also noted that Kearn’s own employer — the Orange County DA office — has accused her of leaving key information out of reports and exaggerating evidence during the Robicheaux and Riley investigation. Kearns is suing the county, accusing DA leaders of colluding with the defense to dismantle the case.
A police search of Robicheaux’s home allegedly turned up cocaine, GHB and MDMA, according to testimony during the preliminary hearing, as well as two unregistered assault weapons.
The case was first announced in 2018 by then-District Attorney Tony Rackauckas, who alleged that the couple had met a series of women in bars and restaurants, drugged them and lured them back to Robicheaux’s home to sexually assault them. After unseating Rackauckaus, current-District Attorney Todd Spitzer moved to dismiss the charges and apologized to Robicheaux and Riley, accusing his predecessor of mishandling the case.
Attorneys representing the women fought back, noting that seven women who had never met and who lived far away from one another had made similar allegations against Robicheaux and Riley.
A judge denied Spitzer’s request to completely dismiss the case, refusing to sign off on what the judge described as a “back-room dismissal” in a case that had been “infected” by politics. Instead, the judge took the rare step of removing the DA’s office from the case and turning it over to the state Attorney General’s office.
A different judge dismissed charges related to two of the alleged victims, after they decided they no longer wanted to be involved in the case, feeling they had been “grossly mistreated” and “dragged through the mud.” A third judge agreed to a request by the State Attorney General’s Office to dismiss the charges related to three additional women. That leaves the two remaining women.
———
