Cafe owner faces sexual assault allegations
A Davis cafe owner accused of sexually assaulting a woman inside his downtown business will appear in court Wednesday to seek a reduction in his bail.
Ashot Manukyan, 58, was arrested last week on a warrant charging him with three felonies — penetration with a foreign object, assault with intent to commit penetration with a foreign object and false imprisonment — as well as misdemeanor sexual battery, according to the Yolo County District Attorney’s Office.
The owner of Cafe Mediterranee, 113 D St., is being held at the Yolo County Jail in lieu of $250,000 bail, a jail spokeswoman said Monday.
Manukyan’s attorney, James Granucci, could not be reached for comment.
Steve Pierce, assistant chief of the Davis Police Department, said Manukyan’s arrest stems from an alleged assault that was reported on Feb. 1 by a 22-year-old woman.
The woman told police that “there was some kind of sexual assault that occurred on the (cafe) property” the night before, Pierce said. “It occurred in an office.”
Pierce declined to release additional information about the alleged incident, including whether the woman was an employee of the business. She did not require medical attention, he said.
Detectives conducted a two-week investigation in the case, then forwarded the case to the District Attorney’s Office, which issued a warrant for Manukyan’s arrest on May 9, Pierce said. Officers arrested him two days later at the D Street cafe.
A bail hearing for Manukyan, who was arraigned Friday, is scheduled for 8:30 a.m. Wednesday in Yolo Superior Court.
— Reach Lauren Keene at lkeene@davisenterprise.net or (530) 747-8048. Follow her at www.twitter.com/laurenkeene
Short URL: http://www.davisenterprise.com/?p=45431
Posted by Lauren Keene
on May 16 2011.
Last Login: Mon 21 May 2012 04:26:23 PM PDT
Filed under Crime, Fire + Courts. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback to this entry
This is outrageous! From what I know about the owner of this wonderful place, he would never attempt such an act. It probably some money hungry female looking to get rich quick.
This comment is outrageous! From what I know about Greg Stone only from his incredibly offensive statement, he has absolutely no respect for someone who finds herself/himself in the awful – but very real – situation of being sexually assaulted by an outwardly nice man. It probably some ignorant man with a guilty conscience looking to protect himself lest he is accused next (and unable, even with the help of the article above, comments below, and theoretically a lawyer, to understand the difference between a criminal prosecution brought by the district attorney on behalf of the people and a civil suit brought by the victim for potential money damages.)
I am a friend of the owner’s and this allegation is completely out of character for Ashot. How could the DA and police believe a 22 year old and send a businessman to jail? If I was the family I would be outraged.
Anyone under 22 deserves less protection under the law than a businessman? Or only when it comes to serious felonies? Or only when it would “outrage” his family? Or merely any time the charges seem “out of character” from the viewpoint of those who know and like him? I’d like to know.
I know for a fact that Ashot Manukyan is innocent. He is probably the sweetest person I know. Me and my husband dine there all the time and he is always courteous. He also has a beautiful wife, why would he try and rape someone? This accuser needs to be brought to justice for the lies she has been spreading around. What a dirty scoundrel.
Either you spend every hour of every day with this man, or you are confused about what it means to know something “for a fact.” You may be “very convinced” that he is innocent. Regardless, I am very thankful for the voir dire process in jury selection, because you are an idiot.
Judging from both of your replies, and correct me if I’m wrong, you’re leaning toward a guilty verdict, no?
I apologize if I made it seem as if I had an interest/opinion about the actual outcome. Whether or not this man is guilty is entirely dependent on evidence produced at trial, and entirely independent of the opinions of strangers to the case. My outrage is directed only at the ignorant comments made by patrons/friends of the accused and slamming the accuser. These comments are indicative of a culture that protects sexual predators and shames victims who are strong enough to come forward (often primarily to protect future victims).
Just to reiterate – I am not leaning toward to a guilty verdict, because I have absolutely no information about the case from which to form an opinion about this man’s guilt or innocence (a very serious question), but I do explicitly reject any statement that precludes the conclusion that a person can be guilty of sexual assault and also present himself as a nice, polite, reasonable business owner.
Nice one J. Lawyered.
The Davis Enterprise should be ashamed of publishing such a false story and these baseless allegations. As a UCD student I am ashamed to call Davis my home and read something like this in our newspaper. I frequently go to this wonderful restaurant and have always received nothing but superior service. The staff, especially the owner and his wife, are so caring and attentive to their customers.
Instead of writing a story that the women’s attorney fed them I suggest that next time the Enterprise does their research!
I am the sister in law of the victim and I am amazed at the ignorance being displayed. Her attorney? You don’t know what you are talking about!!! Right now she is feeling the pain all over again.. I woke her up to this morning when it hit the news and had to inform her everything would be okay. If you want to blame anyone BLAME ASHOT…
I drove her to the Police Station to file charges what he did to her was WRONG and No woman should feel ashamed to speak the truth.
I truly hope nothing like this happens to anyone in your family.
I am really disappointed in the comments here that are focusing on smearing the victim (as well as sharing the name of the victim, which is a violation of privacy). I don’t know the history of this woman but rape is rape whether or not someone has a sexual history. It is this exact victim-blaming culture that prevents women from reporting their sexual assaults.
Also, just because someone is “courteous,” has good service at his restaurant and “has a beautiful wife” doesn’t make him innocent. Most family and friends of criminals will all have the same line: “He’s just the nicest person ever, I can’t believe he would ever do something like that.” Well, guess what. Most of them did.
My question is, why did it take more than three months for him to be arrested when the investigation only took two weeks?!? That scares me.
I do agree that blaming the victim is a horrible part of our culture, especially when a young college student is drunk at a party and is taken advantage of by another drunk college classmate.
However, I have heard of WAY too many false allegations raised against men to believe someone is guilty before hearing all the facts. It is common sense to know that many women cry “rape” or “molestation” without it happening. If you want a recent case, look at what happened to the Fairfax, VA teacher when his student was pissed at him, so she made up a story about him touching her. Or a case in Canada in which four drunk college girls went to police saying a cab driver touched them inappropriately, because he wouldn’t let them smoke inside his cab (luckily, he had a video exonerating him from such deceit). Unfortunately, this happens. So until I know more, I’m suspecting he’s innocent until proven guilty. Too many mens lives are DESTROYED by false allegations, and too many women’s lives are DESTROYED when rape actually does occur.
MEGAN: “I am really disappointed in the comments here that are focusing on smearing the victim (as well as sharing the name of the victim, which is a violation of privacy).”
Your comment exposes a double standard in our criminal justice system which benefits the accuser at the expense of the accused at this point in the process.
The Enterprise and other papers will matter of factly publish the name of the person accused of rape, knowing full well that even if he is found not guilty or even if the charges against him are dropped, he will never be able to fully recover his good name. In this man’s case, the bad publicity may end up ruining his livelihood, even if the charges are completely false.
But at the very same time we protect the accuser by hiding her name from the public. So even if some months down the road if the DA decides the evidence is too weak to win at trial and he drops the charges, her identity and reputation are protected.
In my opinion, the best solution to this imbalance of justice would be for anyone accused of a serious crime of this nature have the right–as they have in many countries, including Canada–to have his name kept out of the press and out of the public sphere until a jury finds him guilty.
Our Constitution is written with the belief that it is in the best interest of those accused of crimes that their cases be publicized, so that the government will be unable to try suspected criminals in secret. However, in cases such as this–I have no bias in favor of the accused or his accuser–where we conspire to hide the name of the accuser, the accused should be afforded the right to decide if he wants his name exposed in this case or not.
“… to have his name kept out of the press and out of the public sphere until a jury finds him guilty.”
Correction: “… until he is found guilty by a judge, jury or his own plead.”
So, what I think you are advocating for, is complete secrecy. This is a drastic example, but theoretically that would mean nobody would ever know that O.J. Simpson was accused of murdering his wife because he was found not guilty.
Also, it is not illegal to publish victims’ names. In fact, SCOTUS struck down a law against it. But it is in poor taste.
Yeah, I suppose there’s a “double standard.” But the two parties aren’t in the same position, so I don’t see why there SHOULD be identical standards applied to each.
The reason to publish names is found in the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution:
Amendment 6 – Right to Speedy Trial, Confrontation of Witnesses. Ratified 12/15/1791.
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
The operative word is ‘public.’ The founders felt that disadvantages of publicity were outweighed by the need to avoid prosecutorial misconduct. Please refer to the Trial of William Penn, 1670, to see what worried them: . A more recent example is the ‘Duke Lacrosse Trial.’ Then, of course, there’s the 14th amendment:
(in part…)
No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
This having been said, you could probably get away with withholding any publicity until an indictment is final, if you did it equally for all parties.
First of all, this is not a lawsuit being brought by a young woman. It is be brought by the People. The article set forth the accusation but did nothing to take any stance on the guilt or innocence of the accused. Apparently, the journalist attempted to contact the attorney for the Defendant in the case, but received no response. The District Attorney’s office provided some foundation information which formed the basis of the allegation, which was set forth in the article.
People are innocent until proven guilty. However, the slander going on above, calling some young woman a whore, etc. is just plain nasty and inappropriate in this forum. As a woman and a parent I am offended by such language. If this man is innocent, his attorney should be able to bring in character witnesses and evidence to demonstrate it.
The woman involved (whoever she is) is not the one bringing the lawsuit. This is criminal court. She gets nothing, but possibly the humiliation of talking to a room full of people about something really frightening that may very well have happened. Who really knows, until it all comes out in open court.
This discussion has gotten off track. I understand that a community member and business owner is being charged with a serious crime, and that’s going to make a lot of people upset.
Nevertheless, I’ve taken down two comments, one that names the alleged victim in the case, which we don’t do, and another calling her some choice words.
This is unacceptable behavior no matter how hot tempers flare.
As for accusations that the Davis Enterprise is “publishing such a false story and these baseless allegations,” that simply isn’t true. I don’t know a lick about this case, but the District Attorney has brought the charges against Ashot Manukyan, and that’s what we as a news organization reported.
Your beef “UCD student” is with the Yolo County District Attorney Jeff Reisig. Feel free to call him to discuss the charges. His number is (530) 666-8180, his email is jeff.reisig@yolocounty.org and you can find the DA’s website at http://www.yolocounty.org/index.aspx?page=510
Sincerely,
Jonathan Edwards, online editor
Jonathan: explain why it is fair in an allegation of rape for The Enterprise to publish the name of the accused but hide the name of the accuser?
You don’t need to explain why you are hiding the name of the accuser. I understand that. You are protecting her privacy as an alleged victim of rape. By protecting her you are providing a public service so that other rape victims will not feel too ashamed or otherwise harmed by coming forward to report alleged crimes.
However, tell me how your publishing the name of the accused (who is legally innocent at this point) does not cause him grievous harm?
Another way of putting this question: If you were accused of rape, would you want your name exposed in this manner you have exposed this business man’s name? Do you not agree that his reputation, regardless of the facts of this case, have been harmed by your decision?
Dang, is Rivkin no longer nailing his column for the Enterprise? Rivkin is furious here, no?
Larry, I am not an Enterprise employee. I write my column as an outside contributor. I have no say in what The Enterprise chooses to publish or not. And FWIW, I am not furious. However, I am sympathetic to people whose reputations are harmed when it remains a distinct possibility that they did no wrong. As such, I don’t think The Enterprise or any other publication should expose the name of the accused in a case like this, unless the accused authorizes them to or until he has been found guilty. (I should add that in cases where the accusers name is made public–say someone alleges he was the victim of theft–then it seems reasonable to publish the names of both the accuser and the accused.)
Thank you..
I am sad a very good family I know well is being victimized by a woman of questionable character as described by those who know her. I am equally angry at the manner The Enterprise has chosen to report the matter in its pages. My anger focuses on the top level of the paper who make such decisions; but the writer and cameraman also take a lithesome way to victimize both the restaurant as well as the owner and family. Their presentation is ruthless, and not worthy of being considered anything else but sensational, yellow journalism.
The restaurant occupies an obscure location outside the normal flow of downtown traffic. The owners have built a small, successful business by virtue of good food well presented, and at reasonable prices. There is no journalistic reason to show a picture of this small, picturesque building along with the charge (which I deem is false until proven otherwise) against the owner. It’s as though the journalists wish to accuse the business along with the owner, a circumstance that I consider offensive and not up to standards of ethical journalism. I say, shame on the people in the higher levels of The Enterprise for not teaching or holding their writers to the ethics of reporting, distinguishing the business from the owner.
I look forward to seeing your mouth drop at the trial when the tapes are played my friend.. you better wear a diaper.
Megan is right on the money! I ask why so many haters? If this had been plain “John Q. Smith”, no one would care. We don’t know all the facts to the case and they will hopefully come out in court during the trial process where a jury of 12 men and women will decide. Until then chill.
Seriously? You’re going to proclaim the restaurant owner innocent because you’ve met him at his place of business?
When did so many people living in Davis, supposedly so enlightened and progressive, become so hostile to women and so irrational in their thought process?
Wow, I can’t believe some of these posts, especially the ones that were pulled — naming the victim?! Are people so ignorant to think rapes are committed only by unsuccessful businessmen who are rude to their customers and have ugly wives? No, people, perpetrators can be the ones “you least expected,” just as victims can come from the seediest backgrounds.
I cannot judge his guilt or innocence before the trial — the only thing I know about him so far from his supporters posting online is that he’s surrounded by some pretty ignorant friends. It’s ridiculous to think you can declare his innocence simply because you know the man, his family and/or his business (good customer service means he’s not a rapist?!!). Unless you were there that night, you simply cannot know.
I shudder to think this is how our “educated” town would treat possible rape victims from any walk of life. Let them both have their day in court.
And to the person angry at the Enterprise for reporting the charges and printing the restaurant photo . . . The allegations are newsworthy regardless of who the suspect is. But they are especially so because he is (according to all his customers and friends posting here) a prominent busineessmen, which makes him a public figure and so of particular public interest.
I bet supporters Michael Lyon (Lyon Real Estate) felt crushed first when they saw their well respected friend “smeared” in the papers, then once again when the allegations turned out to be true. Same thing with Bill Clinton. So please, think about it before you do what you accuse the paper of doing by trying to re-victimize the alleged victim in this case.
Oh, and the other reason to print the photo of the restauant is because that’s where the alleged assault occurred. I see nothing unethical about the reporting in this case. It’s name-calling the alleged victim and posting her name that is an outrage. Despite his suppoters’ intentions, these types of tactics don’t improve Mr. Manukyan’s reputation.
The large numbers of comments from friends seems well-organized–and the accusations against the Enterprise baseless. Charges have been filed; that’s news. Period. I had no opinion about the case until I saw the large number of comments from people who seem to have little understanding of sexual assault or the American judicial system. Trying to spread rumors that the alleged victim is of “questionable moral character”? That’s shameful.
Bottom line…..$250,000 bail is no joke. Detectives and DA must have interviewed the accused and decided to pursue charges. The court system will decide if he is truly innocent or guilty…
very bad system. alleged rape cases should be handled differently at DA level and not be released to the Press. Whether innocent or guilty, such a story is very costly to a business’ reputation. And to jail the man?
He was arrested on an arrest warrant, meaning both the DA’s office and a judge felt there was probable cause to believe he had committed one or more felonies. $250,000 bail is hefty… and not uncommon for serious violent crimes.
None of that means that he actually did it, but it does mean there’s significant evidence pointing toward him.
The people attacking the victim should be ashamed of themselves. There’s a reason California and most other states have passed rape shield laws keeping evidence of rape victims’ character out of the courtroom. It used to be that defense attorneys would call the victim–usually the only eyewitness, supported by physical evidence to show that the sex act occurred but nothing pertaining to consent or lack thereof–to the stand, lay out her entire sexual history, and paint her as a whore. Once that picture has been painted, a horrifyingly large portion of our society is perfectly willing to commit the moral and intellectual suicide necessary to assume that because she’s had sex with multiple men, it’s impossible for her to have *not* consented in this case.
Sexual assault is sexual assault, be by a vagrant or a successful businessman, upon a prostitute or a saint. If there was no consent, it was wrong.
None of that is to say Ashot actually did anything–I’m in no more position than anyone else here to know that. But the reactions in these comments are reprehensible. And the Enterprise didn’t print anything about his guilt or his innocence, only about his arrest and bail–both factual issues. Unless someone’s contending that he wasn’t arrested, or the arrest was upon different charges, or the bail information is incorrect, the Enterprise hasn’t done anything but print a newsworthy story about an arrest for some very serious allegations.
The bail is automatically set by the charge. It has nothing to do with the truth of the allegations or strength of the evidence. Look here: http://www.yolo.courts.ca.gov/Criminal/FelonyBailSchedule.html
Also, the warrant is issued by the DA, not by a judge. No judge has yet examined these charges or even decided whether there is sufficient information to let the DA pursue the case. That happens at a preliminary hearing.
You’re correct that there are guidelines, but they aren’t binding. The magistrate who signs the arrest warrant determines the bail amount, per Penal Code section 815a. It’s true that the default amount is that prescribed in the bail schedule, though.
You’re incorrect about the warrant. An arrest warrant can only be issued by a magistrate (i.e. judge) upon finding probable cause that the offense has been committed and reasonable cause to believe that the subject of the warrant is the one who committed the offense. The finding is based upon a criminal complaint or allegations brought by law enforcement officials which must be sufficient for the magistrate to independently judge the persuasiveness of the facts, i.e. not merely stating a conclusion. See U.S. Const., 4th and 14th Amends.; Penal Code sections 813-817; People v. Sesslin (1968) 68 Cal.2d 418.
Thanks for the link, interesting. Do you feel that a $250,000 warrant was issued solely on a persons word? I feel at some point, a judge was involved to sign a search warrant to gather evidence. Like, his business, home, cell phone records, personal/work computers etc. I am not sure but I think a judge needs to sign off for that ?
“Some kind of sexual assault the night before…in an office…no medical attention needed.” This is going to be difficult to prove, unless there is a witness. I will definitely withhold judgment until there is more information.
I agree the timeline is suspect at best. Especially a warrant being issued and it took 2 days to arrest a well known businessman? But to “judge” anything at this time would be premature. I personally don’t have a connection to this story, but I hope justice will prevail either way.
Shame on those who criticize the newspaper for truthfully reporting the fact that a member of our community has been arrested based upon allegations of a serious crime. And shame on those who feel qualified to pass judgment on the merits–one way or the other–of a criminal case that has not gone to trial. Good job Enterprise for reporting the news accurately and without bias.
Oh my gosh, Rivkin’s anger is burning my computer screen! Can’t Richard Rivkin understand that The Enterprise has a job to do? They MUST run the story and print Manuker’s name– otherwise, what are we doing, Rivkin?
Could you, “the supporters of Ashot” were any more obvious! Geeez, why not wait a little while between your posts. It would make is seem more real. Probably by the same person or couple of people. This is all hear say. I can’t believe how low people will go! The guy is an egotistical a-hole who thinks his s#^t doesn’t smell, just ask all of his ex employees.
The only thing obvious is that you are a disgruntled ex-employee.
I am really disappointed that the Enterprise would publish such a story as it will undoubtedly smear the Cafe’s good name. Releasing the name of the accused was unwarranted. I have known this family closely for 15 years and know they are people of impeccable character. This gives the muckraked manukyans no opportunity to defend their good name. I would have hoped for better reporting from the Enterprise.
The Davis Police Department releases some of the names of people who are arrested for various offenses, on a daily basis.
The only thing obvious here is that you are a disgruntled ex-employee.
Shame Shame
I hope he didn’t do this disgusting viscous act. I guess the truth will come out at some point.
Otherwise this is all rhetoric. Only two people really know what happened and forum jive won’t change that.
Really People?, I agree with you, the truth will bring much clarity to this situation, but your name calling is helping the situation, thats all.
One reason to publish news that someone has been charged with a crime is so that other possible victims and witnesses can be alerted and can come forward for collaboration.
Publishing the names of those charged with a serious crime is not unusual so I am having trouble understanding the outrage here.
Kaw you have an excellent point. Whoever has information about this case should come forward.
“Publishing the names of those charged with a serious crime is not unusual so I am having trouble understanding the outrage here.”
It is common; and yet it is unfair when you are hiding the name of the accuser. Either both names are published or neither. Since we want to protect alleged victims of rape, we should also want to protect the reputations of those who might be innocent yet are accused.
Your point that publicizing this charge could bring forward other victims is correct. But the same public benefit could be achieved by waiting until the case is resolved. If he is found guilty, the case can be publicized and other alleged victims, if any could step forward without fear. If he is found not guilty or the charges are dropped, no one needs to be harmed.
Unless he’s found not guilty because they didn’t get the evidence that was readily available from other victims who didn’t get the chances to come forward because it was kept under wraps.
I understand your argument and I know it’s well-intentioned, but you’re overlooking one major difference between the victim of a crime and the person who’s been arrested for it: while the accused has not yet been found guilty, both a prosecutor and a judge have looked over the evidence against him and determined there’s probable cause to believe the alleged crime was committed and reasonable cause to believe he’s the one responsible. A warrant’s actual name is Warrant of Probable Cause for Arrest.
By the time an arrest warrant issues it’s probably not just a he-says-she-says where the victim and the accused are on equal footing. Here, there have been 3 and a half months of investigation followed by the issuance of a warrant.
Publishing the name of the accused is less of an infringement on his rights than arresting him and locking him up, subject to a quarter million in bail. Publishing the name isn’t done until the procedural safeguards preceding an arrest have already been carried out. If it was a situation where the police said they’re investigating so-and-so for rape, that would be shady. Here, he’s received due process constitutionally sufficient (presumably) to justify an end to his liberty pending prosecution of the case. It’s hard to argue that that’s not also sufficient for a lesser infringement on his rights.
The article fails to note whether a grand jury returned an indictment against Mr. Manukyan. Arrest is neither indictment nor conviction. DA Reisig is a conscientious prosecutor. But note that in California, you can take ‘he says she says’ to trial, and that the Yolo County DA’s office has done so. These points are not clarified in the article, and Mr. Manukyan deserves to have them pointed out.
No, this case has not been taken to the grand jury. That rarely occurs in Yolo County.
Is Yolo County exempt from the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, then? Interesting.
see Hurtado v. People of the State of California, 110 U.S. 516 (1884)
I follow their argument, but don’t agree that all rights are preserved under the abbreviated procedure. Harlan dissented. Bringing the law of Henries VII and VIII into the discussion of the Law of Commons was a nice touch. In France, under the Code Napoleanic, an examining magistrate with the power of subpoena must agree for a case to go to trial. (On the other hand, they don’t honor the Great Writ.) Would an arraigning judge here have the authority to perform his own investigation if he or she thought it necessary? Can a judge issue subpoenas of examination on his own behalf, and as a practical matter, is this ever done? Thank you for the interesting reference.
Grand juries are federal…this is a state crime. That’s the gist of it.
Actually, counties also have grand juries, which sometimes are convened to hear evidence in a criminal case. But it doesn’t happen very often.
The fact that the majority of this man’s supporters say things like “How dare anyone side with some young woman over this respectable businessman” and “Well, being accused of rape is worse than rape” and “Because he was polite to me, he can’t have ever been bad to anyone, ever” is pretty damning in itself. It speaks of entitlement, a man surrounded by misogynistic friends with contempt for women that made him think that he could get away with rape because he knew that all his friends would blindly support him.
Student, you should revisit your comment and see if there is a touch of hypocrisy. I have no bias regarding this article nor do I know either of the parties involved. I noticed that you began your statement by condemning the supporters of the accused and yet you engage in the same conduct only to support the accuser. I just wanted to respectfully point out the (unintentional) duplicity taking place. A suggestion to those who don’t favor either side: when commenting, be as balanced and objective as possible–then there will be less bickering among individuals.
1.) If you want to make your point look better by using formal speech, be good at it. Otherwise you just come off as circular and not speaking clearly.
2.) There is no hypocrisy in pointing out that the comments were misogynistic and steeped in privilege, and that those two things are generally what is used to justify rape. It’s just what is.
3.) Nothing in the original comment mentioned the accuser, much less supported her.
Student, you seem like a very embittered individual. Who knows, maybe you were raped. Just be a good ‘student’ and listen to the teacher–you could learn a thing or two.
This is slander. When Ashot Manukyan is found innocent, I hope he sues The Enterprise and this stupid girl for tarnishing his reputation and for $ lost at his business.
I am not making light of a serious alligation, but anyone can make a claim. I have known him (and his family) for many years and this is completely out of character.
First, what you’re accusing the Enterprise of is libel, not slander. Second, there is no libel in the article above. Unless, of course, he wasn’t arrested, he wasn’t accused of the things it says he was accused of, etc. Which factual statement in the article are you saying is false? I’m sure the Enterprise staff would like to fix it ASAP.
If the alleged victim lied, that’s slander, but I *highly* doubt you know any more than the rest of us whether that’s the case.
First, I believe you mean libel, not slander. Second, a paragraph-by-paragraph examination of this article for anything remotely libelous:
“A Davis cafe owner accused of sexually assaulting a woman inside his downtown business will appear in court Wednesday to seek a reduction in his bail.”
Nothing but reporting facts there. He is a Davis cafe owner. He is accused of sexually assaulting a woman inside his downtown business. He (will) appear(ed) in court Wednesday to seek a reduction in his bail.
“Ashot Manukyan, 58, was arrested last week on a warrant charging him with three felonies–penetration with a foreign object, assault with intent to commit penetration with a foreign object and false imprisonment–as well as misdemeanor sexual battery, according to the Yolo County District Attorney’s Office.”
Again, still just a statement of facts. His name is Ashot Manukyan (I will not go into whether his name should be published, as that is not the intent of this comment). He is 58 years old. He was arrested last week, and there were three felony charges and one misdemeanor charge. That information was obtained from the Yolo County District Attorney’s Office.
“The owner of Cafe Mediteranee, 113 D St., is being held at the Yolo County Jail in lieu of $250,000 bail, a jail spokeswoman said Monday.”
That is the name of his business, and its location. He is being held at the Yolo County Jail with bail set at $250,000. That information was obtained from a jail spokeswoman on Monday.
“Manukyan’s attorney, James Granucci, could not be reached for comment.”
James Granucci is his attorney, and was not able to be reached for comment. Fairly straightforward.
“Steve Pierce, assistant chief of the Davis Police Department, said Manukyan’s arrest stems from an alleged assault that was reported on Feb. 1 by a 22-year-old woman.”
He was arrested after an alleged assault was reported. That was reported on Feb. 1 by a 22-year-old woman. This information was obtained from Steve Pierce, who is assistant cheif of the Davis Police Department.
“The woman told police that ‘there was some kind of sexual assault that occurred on the (cafe) property’ the night before, Pierce said. ‘It occurred in an office.’”
A continuation of explanation of what was reported on Feb. 1 by the woman.
“Pierce declined to release additional information about the alleged incident, including whether the woman was an employee of the business. She did not require medical attention, he said.”
A statement that no further details of the alleged assault were going to be provided by Pierce, except to say that she did not require medical attention. It was apparently asked of Pierce whether the woman was an employee of the business, but he gave no response.
“Detectives conducted a two-week investigation in the case, then forwarded the case to the District Attorney’s Office, which issued a warrant for Manukyan’s arrest on May 9, Pierce said. Officers arrested him two days later at the D Street cafe.”
More statements of facts as told by Pierce. An investigation was begun. It lasted two weeks, at which point it was forwarded to the District Attorney’s office. The DA’s office issued an arrest warrant on May 9. Two days after that, Manukyan was arrested at his cafe.
“A bail hearing for Manukyan, who was arraigned Friday, is scheduled for 8:30 a.m. Wednesday in Yolo Superior Court.”
And a final statement of facts. His bail hearing was scheduled for 8:30 a.m. Wednesday in Yolo Superior Court. He was arraigned Friday.
So I fail to see how the Enterprise can be accused at all of “slander” (libel). This was merely a reporting of a collection of facts. The Enterprise did not state that he committed any crime. This article explains that a report was filed with the police, an investigation followed resulting in an arrest. He was arraigned on Friday and was scheduled for a bail hearing this morning.
If you feel the accusation is false, fine, be angry at the accuser. But accusing the Enterprise of libel is ridiculous.
You must either work for the enterprise or you simply have to much time on your hands. You sure put a whole lot of effort in to that post, what’s your cut?
Considering most of that was cut and paste, it took almost no time at all. I don’t work for the Enterprise, I just get irritated when people get angry at things or situations that either don’t exist or are based on a misunderstanding of the circumstances. get angry if you want, just make sure that you’re getting angry for the right reasons.
Ignorance is thinking because you know someone for years that they are innocent on that fact alone. Stand by ASHOT you will surely be disappointed when the facts come out and then what will you have to SAY? As a family we are STRONG and nothing that his”FRIENDS” or “FAMILY” say on here will detour the JUDICIAL PROCESS.. Trying to SHAME a VICTIM is WRONG…
Should she sue you for calling her STUPID? Get a life and get the FACTS. As far as his business I hope it goes bankrupt and as far as him being innocent that is BULL#%^$. His reputation is your concern? He is DISGUSTING and needs to go to PRISON… The fact is he had a CHOICE and unlike the victim..
Once charges are filed, the name of the accused is public record. The paper is just reporting what is already available to anyone who wants to see it. And the DA brought the charges, not the girl. The DA’s name is widely available and whether or not the guy is guilty, they obviously feel that they have enough evidence to prove that he is.
I don’t know the guy at all and have no problem with people who know him defending him in a public forum, but I don’t understand why people have a beef with the way this is being handled by the newspaper. When the DA files charges against a known member of the community, that is news, period. It would be irresponsible to know about it and NOT report it. It’s not like the Enterprise has pronounced him guilty.
As for all of the comments about the girl, I have a close relative that I believe was wrongly convicted of a sexual offense because of a vengeful and untruthful witness. Yet even this experience hasn’t jaded me to the point where I don’t understand the purpose of shielding a potential rape victim’s identity and the fact that there are very real pressures that rape victims face that other victims don’t. The comments in this forum is a perfect example of those pressures. If he actually committed this crime, how bad would all of you people feel who are calling this girl names before you know any facts?
Like I said, if you know the guy and don’t think he could have done this, feel free to speak up and say so. But this criticism of the Enterprise for simply reporting what is already public record and responsibly withholding the name of the girl is misguided.
It is very interesting to see the response this article has gotten. If you have ever been a part of, or know someone close to you who has, ever been involved in a court case, then you know that what is reported is only a very vague description of what occurred.
The ‘victim’ here is not the one who arrested him. If the DA thought there was enough evidence in order to file charges, and the judge thought that the evidence was sufficient enough to justify a $250,000 bail, then there is a reason for that, and not just hear-say.
Yes, this man may be a nice guy, and as a business owner he should be courteous and friendly to his patrons, that goes without saying. Does that mean he is innocent? certainly not.
The reason the “investigation” took weeks is because they needed to build a case. That case consisted of recorded phone calls and conversations and such in which the accused apologized and tried to make ammends.. admitting to wrongdoing. THAT is why the DA pursued it so aggressively and THAT is why the judge set such a high bail.
Sorry folks, but there IS a case, it is not just an accussation. If you have time I encourage you to go to the trial and see and hear the facts, and then you can post your opinions. There is SO much that wasn’t reported.
Whether we like it or not- if you want the charges dropped, or you want him to burn in hell, makes no difference. There will be a due process of law, and the outcome will be determined by the people who DO get to view all of the facts of the case and, God willing, make the right decision.
Yo here is my take on this thing. Everyone has some clump of evil in them. So here is something to ponder…..let’s say a certain man, goes to to a church on the very outskirts of town…yes, that cult one…i can see him getting a bit stressed. They have to disclose their earnings and are forced to tithe…if you read the bible, later on in the new testament it says to give from a loving heart, not a coerced heart. And they force each other to marry only people in the church! Where is that in the Bible? Get the point? Too much stress……..but they will find some one word to prove their point….That is not God’s love…go to any other church in Davis and you won’t find this forced subservient…so imagine how those people learn from this, then model it…”bow down to me”….
Thaddeus, I am so confused by your post, and I’ve had a cup of coffee. I presume you are referencing Grace Valley? I just don’t get the connection between this article, the many comments above, Grace Valley and your comment. Can you elaborate?
Duhh…the man has friends that will stand by him no matter what because they are all brainwashed from that church. Oh no, this man, could never do such a thing they say, or could he? It’s like the moms who say their son could never do some violent crime. I am only saying everyone can fail or have a breakdowne.
Thaddeus, you are responsible for possibly the most flawed logic used in any comment related to this article.
Using allegations to express resentment for a church is simply pathetic.
Should she sue you for calling her STUPID? Get a life and get the FACTS. As far as his business I hope it goes bankrupt and as far as him being innocent that is BULL#%^$. His reputation is your concern? He is DISGUSTING and needs to go to PRISON… The fact is he had a CHOICE unlike the victim..
Calling someone stupid and calling someone a rapist is very different. Elena – do you know the girl who was allegedly victimized? Why are you so certain she is telling the truth?
Yes, I do know her. She is my sister in law. I am disgusted with this entire matter. Sexual assault victims rarely come forward for the following reasons:
1. They have been violated in a way that No one should ever be PERIOD whether they are male or female.
2. They are scared, humiliated, fearful, traumatized… the list could go on with the emotional aspects.
3. The thought of having to tell strangers each and every detail of what they ENDURED is Painful..
Then the horrific thought that it is in the NEWS and then to have your name blasted all over the website with people defending this Horrible MAN..
There is no SHAME in telling the TRUTH. There is no SHAME in COMING FORWARD.. But there is SHAME in trying to SHAME a VICTIM…
If you angry be angry for the right reasons. Don’t attack my sister in law.
Yes, those are definitely reasons that people who have been abused often don’t come forward. I agree that there is no shame in telling the truth, but what makes you so certain your sister-in-law is telling the truth? That question was in no way an attack toward your sister-in-law, it was simply a question.
Ever thought that the victim is just as irritated that this is in the news as the accused’s supporters? When it comes down to it, though, his name is a matter of public record, Enterprise or not, his name could’ve been found.
If you don’t make arrests a matter of public record, then you may wind up with Pinochet’s Chile or Iran, where the arrested just handily disappear without a trace. Then everyone’s just so sorry, but they can’t figure out what happened to your sister. Oh, so so sorry.
I am very dissappointed in the people of Davis and the comments here. It is very obvious that Davis has become and elitist insulated community that makes snap judgements about people. Having two daughters who attend UCD, I had thought a lot more of the community.
The polcie and DA did a 3 month investigation, it was something that was pbviously taken very seriously as the suspect in this case has a good reputation, but so did Ted Bundy before he was arrested. After 27 years in law enforcement the one thing I know for a FACT is that “Anyone is capable of anything, given the right circumstances,” that goes for each and every one of us, we are all human and capable of making poor choices or having serious lapses in judgement. To assume someone is innocent, solely because they are a ncie person is flawed and naive judgement.
The three month investigation shows that this was taken very seriously and fully vetted. In the end I am sure that all of you will find that the victim made a pretext phone call to the suspect and the suspect admitted or apologized for his actions while beiong recorded on the phone call. This is legal hard evidence in sex cases, I am also quite sure that the DA would not have endorsed the arrest without this type of evidence in the absence of good solid physical evidence (DNA).
So the moral is let the system work, it is the best system (even with its flaws) of justice in the world.
As for me, my third daughetr will nto be attending UCD, she will go to a much safer and open minde community and attend UCLA. Shame on the people of Davis.
I am very dissappointed in the people of Davis and the comments here. It is very obvious that Davis has become and elitist, insulated, close minded community that makes snap judgements about people. Having two daughters who attend UCD, I had thought a lot more of the community.
The polcie and DA did a 3 month investigation, it was something that was pbviously taken very seriously as the suspect in this case has a good reputation, but so did Ted Bundy before he was arrested. After 27 years in law enforcement the one thing I know for a FACT is that “Anyone is capable of anything, given the right circumstances,” that goes for each and every one of us, we are all human and capable of making poor choices or having serious lapses in judgement. To assume someone is innocent, solely because they are a ncie person is flawed and naive judgement.
The three month investigation shows that this was taken very seriously and fully vetted. In the end I am sure that all of you will find that the victim made a pretext phone call to the suspect and the suspect admitted or apologized for his actions while beiong recorded on the phone call. This is legal hard evidence in sex cases, I am also quite sure that the DA would not have endorsed the arrest without this type of evidence in the absence of good solid physical evidence (DNA).
So the moral is let the system work, it is the best system (even with its flaws) of justice in the world.
As for me, my third daughetr will not be attending UCD, she will go to a much safer and open minded community and attend UCLA. Shame on the people of Davis.
In your 27 years of law enforcement, how many false rape claims did you encounter Mr. Disappointed? Probably more than you could count if what you say is true. You are absolutely right about one thing though–”Anyone is capable of anything, given the circumstances”–this young woman is fully capable of becoming embittered towards her employer, while being in financial need, she fabricates an elaborate story. Through criminal court she gets her revenge and through civil court she gets his money. But since you have 27 years of experience you already know all this right? Wrong. Meter Maids are not law enforcement.
UCLA is far safer than UCD. This article proves it:
http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/120954
Trifecta:
All I can say is “–”Anyone is capable of anything, given the circumstances”–this OLD MAN is fully capableof becoming embittered towards his exemployee, while believing he is entitled to SEXUAL ASSAULT a WOMAN, he enlists his FAMILY members to fabricate stories and SLANDER the VICTIM. Through the Criminal Court system he gets his punishment and EVIDENCE so DAMNING is presented that only REFLECTS his TRUE CHARACTER. But since you know him so well you ALREADY know ALL THIS RIGHT? RIGHT….
By the way this LAW ENFORCEMENT INDIVIDUAL is ON POINT…
If your so confident in your statements why the TRIFECTA name? Could it be your to ashamed to take accountability for your WORDS..
Sometimes the TRUTH is HARD to ACCEPT… I look forward to being at each and everyone of his court appearances and praying for the REAL VICTIM not the MONSTER you CHOOSE to DEFEND.
Trifecta – Cheers to your comment! I agree with you 100%.
meter maid… haha
oh PLEASE! UCLA is “safer” than davis??? laugh-a-ble
I looked up the Clery Reports for UCLA and UCD. For 2009, here are some of the numbers:
Aggravated Assault: UCLA -23, UCD-9
Burglary: UCLA-165, UCD-84
Sex Crimes: UCLA-18, UCD-18.
Now, one of my kids is a CSO at UCLA, and they do a good job. But Westwood isn’t Davis, and the numbers confirm what I expected, the key crime rates are a little higher in LA. So if you are really convinced that Westwood is safer, you should be prepared to back up your assertion.
To “Disappointed in Davis”. I’m not here to circle my wagon around Ashot Manukyan. The case is none of my business and I only know what everyone knows as to whether he might be innocent or guilty. Of course I am totally against sexual assault — who wouldn’t be?
That said, where did you get the idea that our “system” is the best system of justice in the world? I’m not even sure whose system you mean, California or the whole United States or what. Either way, our system is far more punitive and dehumanizing than what most countries in Western Europe have — California has more people in prison plus jail than France, Italy, and Germany combined. And yet the US also has a high homicide rate. If you say that ours is the best system of justice in the world, how much do you really know about the others?
Davis has become elitist? Who would have guessed? I’ve been here off and on since the early 50s.
You’re comparing Ashot Manukyan to Ted Bundy? You’ve got to be kidding. FYI – Davis is a wonderful place to live. Get off your high horse buddy. The only thing you said right is that the justice system is flawed.
I would say the Enterprise is more interested in character assassination and business assassination than reporting truth. After 7, yest, 7 days, this story is still a “Featured Story.” Leaving it up 5 days after court and now 7 days after first reported only perpetuates the assassination of all involved and the business. How about reporting current events!!! rather than guilty even before court.
My guess is that the featured stories are based on what’s a hot topic, i.e. page hits and/or comments. So, hey, way to go! And one thing you guys keep bringing up but have never supported: WHERE ON EARTH HAVE THEY SAID HE’S GUILTY? The only thing they’ve reported is that he was arrested and what he’s accused of. Point to something, anything, indicating otherwise.
The fact that all ASHOT’s buddy’s have decided to back him, doesn’t and won’t change the facts. Just because you know him doesn’t mean he is a stand up fellow. I have seen him yell at people all the time. I don’t know him personally, but from what I have see, he is mean man! Does that mean he is guilty?
The facts as we know them are:
The newspaper reported a crime (big deal, they do that everyday)
The rest will come out when it comes out.
I have a question for the moderator:
Can’t one person send more that one response from the same i.p.? Using different names?
I question some of these comments as legitimate.
I agree — I seriously wonder how many of these supportive comments came from the same person. I do know that it is possible to post under different names on the same IP.
Whatever the outcome of this case, please remember that the restaurant is not guilty. Being a patron of this restaurant, it appears to me that the lion’s share of the work is done not by the accused, but by the rest of the extended family who are very hard-working people, very pleasant, and who are not accused of any crime.
I am going to make it a point to eat at this restaurant because I really love the food, and I don’t want people the hard-working people who are not accused of any crimes to suffer because one individual has been accused.
I think “citizen” makes a very good point. I hope this bad publicity does not harm the prospects for the restaurant, but I fear it will. It’s tough enough to survive in normal times, but far harder in light of these circumstances.
Anyone interested in how I think the media should handle a case like this can read my column here:
http://www.davisenterprise.com/opinion/charges-forever-tarnish-a-reputation/
—————————–
NOTE: Rich Rifkin is not a Davis Enterprise employee. He is an outside contributor. His opinions are his own and they do not necessarily reflect the views of The Enterprise or its management.
unfortunately, if the “restaurateur” is accused of rape, it’s probably gonna have a bad impact on the establishment…
Judging from the by-line, I infer that this same story, with this same picture of the restaurant, has been a “featured” story on this website for nine days.
Why?
Citizen — We feature stories based on how many readers are checking out a particular post and how much they’re engaging with it, especially in terms of comments. This was the second most popular story yesterday (the next most popular was a distant third), despite being more than a week old. And readers such as yourself have been commenting a lot.
Cant wait for you all to see the truth. we also have no problems with the resturant , simply the “man’ who owns it.. the victim also believes that the names of both parties should be released.. but is following instructions and not giving her name . she also wishes that people were not so judmental and waited to hear the facts of the case before responding in such a negative manner. it was just as horrifying to her to wake up to the news papers and news reports , show compasion and understanding for both sides of the case no matter which side you believe in. At the end of the day its between her him and the judge. god bless you
This shouldnt have happened PERIOD. Noone deserves this ever. FOR REAL.
(Boss)