Idaho Dispatch

Your Local Media Ally

Press Release: Aaron von Ehlinger

By • September 1, 2022

The following press release was sent out by the Ada County Prosecutor’s Office. Press releases do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of those at the Idaho Dispatch. Photo courtesy of CNN.com.

BOISE – On Wednesday, Honorable Ada County District Judge Michael Reardon sentenced 40-year-old Aaron von Ehlinger to 20 years in prison, with 8 years fixed before being eligible for parole.

The prosecutor’s office recommended a 40-year sentence with 15 years fixed before parole eligibility.

In September 2021, the State charged Mr. von Ehlinger with rape and forcible penetration. The victim was a 19-year-old woman. Following a four-day jury trial in April 2022, a jury convicted Mr. von Ehlinger of rape and acquitted of forcible penetration.

“I want to thank Jane Doe for the courage she has demonstrated in this case,” said Ada County Prosecutor Jan Bennetts. “I appreciate the tireless work done by the Boise Police detectives on this case, which allowed my team to ensure justice was served.”

16 thoughts on “Press Release: Aaron von Ehlinger

  1. Unbelievable. A slut regrets what she did last night and this is the outcome.
    By her own account she never told him no, never tried to physically stop him, but was “afraid” of the “gun” he owned.

    1. The decision by a jury of peers was that “she” was not the slut, and that “he” was a pervert to have invited a young intern working for the Legislature in which he serves as one of its “bosses” to his apartment at night. If it were my daughter in her position, we would have words over your too-easy use of the word “slut.”

  2. Nothing honorable about Judge Reardon and Jan Bennetts, who sent an innocent man to prison, thanks to the lies of a questionable female human being. (Aaron hired a lousy lawyer by the way.)

  3. His lawyer mr Cox is worthless. He should have called for a mis trial when the victim walked out of the courtroom on day one.
    No justice in Idaho and this can happen to any young man.I don’t know how these judges and prosecutors live with themselves.

      1. It’s the red who are the problem. The blues openly hate everything and announce their plans to tear it all down. The problem is the backstabbing reds who pretend they’re working for you.

    1. Agreed. How can a defendant cross examine a witness who makes an accusation then leaves the court? Crime may well have been committed but we will never truly know. And for Mr Bedke to make political gains from this tragedy is reprehensible!

  4. The hearing that kicked him out of the Legislature was available on line, and maybe it still is. This is before the trial that convicted him. By all means, listen yourself and decide for yourself. Defense against “she said, he said” seems very hard to do. I made a list of times of points of interest to me:

    Very long!! 5 1/2 hours. Ethics hearing against rep von Ehlinger

    https://insession.idaho.gov/IIS/2021/House/Committee/Ethics%20and%20House%20Policy/210428_heth_0800AM-Meeting.mp4

    https://www.idahoptv.org/shows/idahoinsession/ww02/

    In his opening remarks, the defense counsel said that NO felony or getting pecuniary (?) benefit to von Ehlinger, which his counsel says are the sole criteria

    time stamps of interest:

    .~=50 min: the questioning seems to destroy the point of ever having had a “confidential” hearing
    ~58 min: question about military rule against fraternization: THAT rule is because the superior has authority over the supposed inferior, and that
    does apply with subordinates in the work place but apparently not in his case, so why is this relevant.
    1:16 Suit and tie?????
    1:43 von Ehlinger followed a female lobbyist to the bathroom?? purse overturned and a GUESS and rumor that he was involved??
    1:51 why the repeated fuss about a tie?? Oh, OK, it’s the “unwritten rule” violation again.
    2:12 but, what ARE the enforceable rules of the House??
    2:19 von Ehlinger had passed polygraph tests, this is about Jane Doe saying Monks said she said vonE gave her money
    2:23 Oh, we are NOT investigating if the claims are false?
    2:25 Jane Doe to appear next, in hiding, from a concealed location in the building
    2:33 her lawyers prevent any questioning of her character and lifestyle: is this due process?
    2:48 the 19 yr old has a son??
    2:57 argument about “open” carry, trying to cause confusion??
    3:04 Jane Doe isn’t questioned at all on her veracity!!
    was there ever a criminal investigation before this House hearing?
    3:11 vonE has no authority over her, i.e. the “military code” seems not to be relevant at all
    3:12 is this argument by assertion?
    3:15 vonE’s lawyer gave up trying to question Jane Doe!!
    3:30 Once again, NO questioning of her credibility is being allowed!!
    3:35 So, the “respect for workplace” standards have NOT been formally adopted. Which official standards were in effect?
    4:06 rep Giddings: long and complex testimony about Jane Doe. Listen to it!
    4:24 Dorothy Moon called to testify, many minutes of recording. Listen!
    4:27 she thought Doe was flirting with vonE
    4:40 vonE’s lawyer called rep Judy Boyle
    she had “concerns” about Jane Doe, the prosecution tried to eliminate any “character” nature comments on Jane Doe when she was a page,
    they tried to find a rule against earlier behavior, but they had to stretch and disallow such questions
    4:46 other “consenting adults” had gotten together, she said
    Boyle said vonE has always been a gentleman
    4:47 called Mr Chip Morgan?? polygraph guy, VERY experienced
    4:52 he did three polygraph exams of von E
    5:00 no sign of deception by von E
    5:03 can’t find 2nd poly test, recess again to find and bring it
    5:24 resumed.
    polygraph #2,
    big argument about appropriateness!!
    the prosecutor only wants to allow two of four questions used in the polygraph, Jane Doe is totally protected, vonE has no chance of firing back
    5:30 vonE asserted: yes, Monks gave her money, yes, she said she’d make his life a living hell.
    nine tested questions, and the poly man said his tests showed no deception
    5:31 Miss Hayes, the prosecutress:
    $500 per three of tests, no pay for testimony, no discussion with vonE before testifying, no known way to cheat a test, could make a test inconclusive
    5:33 vonE’s lawyer and the inquisitor no further questions
    public deliberations set for the next morning
    5:34 recess

  5. Ada County court system is completely corrupt. All the judges and prosecutors need to be removed and replaced with a common law court system. Any ideas on how to accomplish this?

  6. Unless I missed something, it was the mother of the accuser who gave most of the testimony, from hear-say. The accuser ran out, which could be interpreted as guilt for something she was being pressured to do, or trauma from the rape? You got to kind of wonder about the mom…
    But you definitely need to stay away from the lawyer he hired!!!
    It cost Idaho two good freedom fighters. So I hope this he said she said trial was about justice, not politics…

  7. Doesn’t sound like rape to me. She never gave him any indication that she objected. Useless excuse for a lawyer on top of that.

  8. Unbelievable. A case shining light on the inadequacies of the broken system. A woman parading herself around as a domestic violence survivor before claiming rape by this man. She was the guest of honor at a domestic violence law enforcement event before any of this happened. How did that not raise red flags in her credibility? After all, it was a case based on no evidence, but hearsay from a second hand source. This is not justice. I pray that she gets help and comes clean about her past.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.