Forgot password
Enter the email address you used when you joined and we'll send you instructions to reset your password.
If you used Apple or Google to create your account, this process will create a password for your existing account.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Reset password instructions sent. If you have an account with us, you will receive an email within a few minutes.
Something went wrong. Try again or contact support if the problem persists.
Image by RedCarpetReport, CC BY-SA 2.0.

‘That ’70s Show’ star Danny Masterson just lost the appeal of his 2023 conviction, leaving him to serve 30 years to life

A California appeals court has denied the appeal filed by former That ’70s Show actor Danny Masterson regarding his 2023 conviction on rape charges, which keeps his 30-years-to-life prison sentence in place. According to PEOPLE, the California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, rejected all challenges Masterson brought forward regarding his trial, including arguments about evidentiary rulings and the statute of limitations.

The three-judge panel reportedly issued an 89-page ruling that unanimously found Masterson failed to show that the lower court made errors that would require a new trial. NBC News reported that the court also denied a separate petition filed by Masterson that claimed he received ineffective assistance of counsel. Masterson, 50, is currently serving his sentence at the California Men’s Colony in San Luis Obispo and will not be eligible for parole for more than 20 years.

According to PEOPLE, Masterson was charged in 2020 with forcibly raping three women in separate incidents between 2000 and 2003. His initial 2022 trial ended in a deadlocked jury, but the 2023 retrial resulted in a conviction on two counts of forcible rape involving women identified in court as J.B. and N.T. The jury could not reach a verdict on a third charge involving a former girlfriend, identified as C.B.

Masterson based his appeal on bias and handling of evidence

Masterson’s appeal mainly focused on the inclusion of testimony about the Church of Scientology. According to PEOPLE, Masterson’s attorneys argued that the trial judge, Charlaine Olmedo, showed bias against the religion. The appeal claimed that admitting evidence about the church’s beliefs violated his constitutional rights. However, the appeals court concluded the judge’s statements showed “no animus or departure from neutrality regarding Scientology.”

The court reportedly noted that the evidence was relevant to explain why the victims, who were all members of the church at the time, delayed reporting the assaults to law enforcement. Per NBC, the women claimed that church officials told them that what happened to them wasn’t rape and that going to the police was against church policies. The church has vehemently denied this.

The panel stated, per PEOPLE, “The jury in this case was not asked to determine the truth or falsity of Scientology doctrine or beliefs.” Thus, they wrote, the admission of this evidence did not violate the First Amendment.

PEOPLE reported that in his appeal, Masterson’s legal team claimed the trial was compromised by improper rulings. A statement included in the appeal argued that the trial was “rife with erroneous judicial rulings that skewed the jury’s view of the evidence against him,” and claimed that there was “a stunning amount of exculpatory evidence” that the jury had never seen.

Throughout the legal process, Masterson has reportedly maintained his innocence, with his defense arguing that the sexual encounters were consensual. Prosecutor Reinhold Mueller previously stated that the actor was “consistent in the manner in which he forcibly raped each of his victims.” Mueller added in a 2023 interview with PEOPLE, “He surreptitiously drugged the victims using an alcoholic beverage as the vehicle for administration, and then forcibly raped them as they became incapacitated.”

According to Variety, Masterson’s appellate attorneys, Cliff Gardner and Eric Multhaup, plan to take the case to the California Supreme Court. Gardner stated, “Danny is serving a life sentence for crimes he did not commit. No one in California, not defendants and not victims who have actually been the victim of a sex crime, is safer by virtue of today’s unfortunate decision.”


Attack of the Fanboy is supported by our audience. When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn a small affiliate commission. Learn more about our Affiliate Policy
Author
Image of Jaymie Vaz
Jaymie Vaz
Jaymie Vaz is a freelance writer who likes to use words to explore all the things that fascinate her. You can usually find her doing unnecessarily deep dives into games, movies, or fantasy/Sci-fi novels. Her current obsession is Dungeon Crawler Carl. Or You will find her having rousing debates about how political and technological developments are causing cultural shifts around the world.