Utah’s Senate president prompted law change that helped a teen charged with child rape

Last year, an 18-year-old Utahn was staring at the potential of years in prison, accused of having sex with a 13-year-old.

Plea bargain negotiations were at an impasse. Then the Utah Legislature — based on an initial suggestion from Senate President J. Stuart Adams — changed the law.

Two months later, prosecutors offered the 18-year-old, who is related to Adams, a plea deal. The teen would plead guilty to reduced charges, face no additional jail time beyond a week already served, and would not have to register as a sex offender.

The new law was not made retroactive, and the teenager was not charged with the new lower-level crime it created. But in court hearings, the judge, the prosecutor and defense attorney Cara Tangaro — who helped draft the bill language that was adopted by the Legislature — all acknowledged it was pivotal to resolving the charges against the 18-year-old.

“You saw the legislative change,” Tangaro told Judge Rita Cornish at sentencing. “We all agree that’s not retroactive, but the government did change their offer based on that.”

The change in the law created a new option for prosecutors in narrow circumstances, specifically in cases that involve 13-year-old victims.

[READ: ‘Do the right thing’: Utah Senate president who intervened in child rape case must resign, Democratic senator says]

Seventeen-year-olds who have sex with 13-year-olds face a third-degree felony charge of unlawful sexual activity; the new law now allows prosecutors to file that same charge against an 18-year-old — if they are an enrolled high school student.

Previously, as adults, 18-year-old high school students who had sex with a 13-year-old could face a charge of child rape, a first-degree felony. A conviction on that charge generally requires registration as a sex offender, while a conviction on the newly created lesser charge does not.

In a statement to The Salt Lake Tribune, Adams said the case stemmed from “a serious mistake,” but he was “surprised by the severity of the charges” that were initially filed. The original charges were two counts of child rape and two counts of child sodomy, all first-degree felonies, carrying the possibility of 25 years to life in prison and a requirement to register as a sex offender.

The Layton Republican emphasized that the new law was not retroactive and said he did not intend for it to impact the case; his intent was to help future students.

“Some have suggested this change was made to benefit the case I was made aware of involving the high school senior. That is simply not true,” he said. “While the sponsor of [the bill] was aware of the case, I did not request the legislation and did not intervene or give input on the drafting of the bill.”

The mother of the junior high school victim said in an interview with The Tribune that she was shocked to learn about the change to the law. “It was out of nowhere,” she said. “I felt like I was punched in the gut.”

She believes her child was an afterthought in both the legislative debate and the handling of the criminal case.

“I feel like a law is the law, regardless of who you are, but that wasn’t what was going on here,” she said. “I feel like [the 18-year-old] just got special treatment …and nobody was going to say anything about it.”

The Tribune generally does not name victims of sexual assaults and is not naming the 13-year-old’s mother to protect the child’s identity. It also is not identifying the 18-year-old, since The Tribune typically does not cover such cases. The mother of the 13-year-old victim agreed to speak on the record about the case.

The case highlights a larger issue that legal systems nationwide continue to grapple with: How should the criminal justice system respond when an older teen has sex with someone younger who can not legally consent?

In Utah, children under the age of 14 cannot consent. For older minors, the laws regarding consent vary based on the age of the person who is having sexual contact with them, provided that person does not use force or coercion.

For prosecutors to use the new lower charge in cases involving a 13-year-old victim, evidence must show the teenagers in a case “mutually” agreed to the activity, even though a 13-year-old cannot give legal consent.

Pam Vickrey, executive director of the Utah Juvenile Defender Attorneys, said it’s not unusual for 18-year-olds who are still in high school to socialize with their student peers, but when it comes to sexual contact with younger peers, they can be prosecuted as adults.

“Across the country, in the space of juvenile justice, everyone is struggling with what to do with … situations involving people who are too young to consent to sexual behavior,” Vickrey said.

An impasse and a legislative change

In 2023, the victim’s mother said, her 8th grader mentioned in a “random conversation” that the 18-year-old had had sex with the child.

“I just told [the child], ‘You understand what this is. [They’re] an adult and you’re not old enough to make these decisions,” the mother said. Her child “wanted me to report it,” she said, and she contacted police. A friend of the 18-year-old also reported the allegation to police hours later, according to court records.

The 18-year-old was arrested and charged. Plea negotiations on the four first-degree felonies filed against the teen dragged on for months, according to court records and statements in hearings.

That changed after the 2024 legislative session.

Ultimately, the new law that led to the plea deal was just a few lines included in SB213, a sweeping 49-page bill sponsored by Senate Majority Leader Kirk Cullimore, R-Cottonwood Heights. It adjusted a slew of criminal sentences, based almost entirely on months of meetings between lawmakers, the Utah Commission on Criminal and Juvenile Justice, the Utah Sentencing Commission and other stakeholders.

According to Sentencing Commission Director Dan Strong, the language dealing with 18-year-old high school students was not among the recommendations of the working group.

Cullimore said Adams had confided with him about the charges against the relative and asked him to look into the issue. Cullimore — who is a lawyer but doesn’t practice criminal law — said he consulted with a few criminal attorneys, including Tangaro.

“She said the issue is that normally prosecutors in these types of cases would consider the circumstances and offer pleas, and she said for whatever reason, this prosecutor is not,” Cullimore said. “And I said, ‘What would your ideal be in something like that?’”

Davis County prosecutor Tamara Basquez declined to comment on the plea negotiations.

Cullimore said there was no intention that the change to the law would impact the pending case. “We just thought it would be the best policy.”

Cullimore said that Tangaro drafted the language that would allow the lower-level charge to be filed against 18-year-olds still in high school and he shared it with legislative attorneys. The bill passed without much attention paid to the provision and Gov. Spencer Cox signed it into law on March 19, 2024.

Tangaro, who recently finished a year-long stint as president of the Utah State Bar, said that in her 24 years in the law, she “often worked with legislators to change or tweak statutes when a case arises that highlights unintended consequences or overly harsh or unfair outcomes.”

In her written responses to The Tribune, Tangaro said the change to the statute was small and “was not retroactive and did not directly affect this client’s case.”

Adams said that he “did not request the legislation and did not intervene or give input on the drafting of the bill.” He said no other legislator, to his knowledge, knew of his connection to the issue, “thus, that case could not have influenced their decision to vote in favor or against the bill.”

Cullimore, likewise, said Adams was aware of the language in the bill but did not weigh in on it. “He didn’t talk to anybody about it and I didn’t either,” Cullimore said.

Rep. Karianne Lisonbee, R-Clearfield, the House sponsor of the bill, said she was not aware of the impetus of the change for 18-year-olds or Tangaro’s role in crafting the language. The legislation passed near the end of the session when bills move quickly, she said, but she now opposes that change to the law.

“All of my other work in the criminal justice space underscores that if I had known that the proposed language was intended to potentially lower the penalty for the crime of rape of a child, I would have held or amended the bill to remove that section,” she said. “I will immediately add a repeal of that language to a bill file I have open.”

‘Once you’re an adult, you take responsibility’

In July 2024, Tangaro and Basquez informed Judge Michael DiReda, who at that time was presiding over the case, that they had reached a plea deal.

“Your Honor may not be aware, but there was actually a legislative change this last session, which changed … some of the things with this case,” Tangaro told DiReda, according to audio of the hearing. “Based on that, we came to a resolution.”

That resolution was that the 18-year-old would plead guilty to aggravated assault, a second-degree felony, and three counts of sexual battery, each a Class A misdemeanor.

DiReda cut short the hearing and called both attorneys back into his chambers. Two weeks later, the judge recused himself from the case and it was reassigned to Cornish.

A court spokesperson said that DiReda “is unable to comment beyond the written recusal order.” That order, which is two lines long, only states that DiReda was recusing himself and the case would be reassigned.

“He did not receive pressure, political or otherwise, to recuse,” the court spokesperson said.

In August, at the sentencing hearing, Basquez told the court that the victim’s mother — who did not attend — wanted the judge to impose additional jail time.

“They feel really defeated through this entire process, and I think that’s why they’re not here today. I just want to express to the court — this is not out of disrespect for the process — it’s just that the process, really, in their eyes, has failed them,” Basquez told the judge.

“She just feels like there’s no protection for the innocence of her [child] and that there’s a disregard for how it really has affected them,” Basquez continued. “They feel that there hasn’t been adequate consequences for the underlying conduct.”

Cornish acknowledged the challenging nature of cases in which teenagers have sex with one another — without allegations of force or coercion — and said the Legislature’s decision to change the law was indicative of that fact. But, the judge said, the younger teen was “legally incapable of giving consent to sex, period, full stop.”

Ultimately, the judge accepted the terms of the plea deal and sentenced the older teenager to no jail time beyond the week served after the initial arrest and the 420 days the teen spent on home confinement.

The changes to the levels of the charges meant the teen would not have to register as a sex offender, a requirement that Tangaro said in court had been a sticking point because prosecutors had held firm on that point. Cornish ordered the teen to serve four years on probation, complete sex offender treatment, pay a $1,500 fine and perform 120 hours of community service.

Adams said the fact the plea included a second-degree felony — rather than the third-degree felony allowed by the revised law — shows the legislation did not determine the outcome of the case.

“In Utah, and as a society, we believe in accountability, redemption and second chances,” Adams said in his statement. “This policy change in S.B. 213 reflects those values. … It is unfortunate that some have mischaracterized the situation without having all the facts.”

In her written responses to questions about the case, Tangaro said her client was deemed to be a very low risk to reoffend, and “fully complied with the legal process, accepted the consequences and continues to live with the serious and lasting impact of their actions.”

The victim’s mother said she regrets not attending the sentencing and speaking against what she saw as lenient punishment, “but it was just one blow after another after another and I was just tapped out.”

“I would like to have said: I have kids. I know this was a mistake, but there are consequences to actions,” she said. “It’s changed both of you, but once you’re an adult, you take responsibility.”

Basquez declined to comment on the change to the law or the outcome of the case, beyond what is in the court record. “I’m not involved in the making of the laws. I just enforce them,” she said.

A changing legal landscape

Vickrey, the juvenile defense attorney, said the Davis County case points to larger issues in how the criminal justice system deals with young adults.

Since 2017, Utah law has tried to strike a balance by having graduated levels of severity for what is termed “unlawful adolescent sexual activity,” as long as it does not involve force or other allegations that would support charges like rape, sodomy or sexual assault.

For example, a 17-year-old who has sexual contact with a 13-year-old could be charged with a third-degree felony version of that charge, while the same acts with a 14-year-old would be a Class B misdemeanor.

“What it really raises to me, [when it comes to] the 18- to 24-year-olds, should we be treating them differently?” Vickrey said. “Because what the research shows is that population — developmentally, brainwise — they’re at the same level of maturity as a 17-year-old, but all of a sudden we’ve drawn this arbitrary line of 18.”

Paul Cassell, a University of Utah law professor and retired judge, said lines regarding age often are drawn out of “administrative convenience.” Some 17-year-olds, for example, may be knowledgeable and capable of voting, but deciding those circumstances on a case-by-case basis is untenable.

When it comes to sexual conduct, lawmakers have created a “bright line” that is clear and easy to enforce, he said. But Cassell said he can see the logic in treating 18-year-olds in high school similarly to their younger peers and classmates.

“From a victim’s point of view, I think hard-and-fast rules may be more victim protective,” he said. “I don’t think we should be getting into a debate about, ‘How mature was this 13-year-old?’ … I don’t think we should engage in that because it can very quickly lead to victim-blaming.”

Roughly 30 states have laws on the books intended to take into consideration the circumstances of sex involving teenagers.

Texas law applies a three-year age allowance, provided both teenagers are over 14. In Michigan, the buffer is five years, provided they are both over 13. Arizona’s law applies to individuals over the age of 15 but younger than 19 and within two years of each other.

Donna Kelly, who spent more than three decades prosecuting special victims crimes in Utah, said it is true that young people’s brains aren’t fully developed. While a balance is necessary, she said, there is value in having consequences for teenage sexual misconduct.

“We know from all the research for many years, the younger we can intervene in the lives of sexual offenders, the better — the better the outcome, the less recidivism there is going to be,” she said.

Cullimore said Utah lawmakers have made other changes to treat 18-year-old high school students the same as their 17-year-old peers. In 2022, a bill sponsored by former Rep. Lowry Snow, R-St. George, sent 18-year-olds to juvenile court for committing certain crimes, mainly misdemeanors like smoking or speeding in the parking lot.

Snow’s bill was limited to crimes that happen during school hours on school grounds. He said the idea was to prevent saddling young people with an adult criminal record for lesser crimes and to let them avoid having to hire attorneys to represent them in court.

Cullimore said he proposed making 18-year-old high schoolers eligible for the lower, third-degree felony in that same spirit. “Kids who are still in high school, I don’t think it’s unjust to prosecute them with their 17-year-old peers just because they might turn 18 right before they graduate,” he said.

The mother of the victim said she understands the reasons for treating young offenders differently than older ones. But she added that being sexually abused so young changed her child, who she said has become more withdrawn and careful, and doesn’t want to be around friends as much.

Adams said he recognizes “the sensitivity and emotion surrounding these issues and want to acknowledge the pain and difficulty felt by those who have been harmed. Both my wife and I are deeply concerned for everyone affected and express our sincerest apologies to those who have been hurt.”

There is “no blanket rule,” said Kelly, the former prosecutor, for how people recover from being the victim of a crime.

“Here’s the thing I learned from 32 years of being a prosecutor of sex crimes: Every victim is different,” she said. “People have a misconception that the physical act itself is damaging, but that’s not what’s damaging. What’s damaging is the feeling of betrayal, the feeling that you can’t trust people anymore.”

Note to readers • The Salt Lake Tribune has turned off comments due to the sensitive nature of material included in this story.