A 19-year-old man accused City-County Council Vice President Zach Adamson of rape, an allegation that Adamson has strongly denied.
The incident was reported to the Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department on June 20, according to police records obtained by IndyStar. Documents indicate the alleged
incident happened last September.
"We are working with the Marion County prosecutor’s office on the investigation and any public comment will be released by the prosecutor’s office," said IMPD Lt. Rick Riddle in a statement.
Adamson also issued a statement denying the allegations.
“I’ve only recently become aware of accusations against me, which are completely untrue and without merit," Adamson said. “Unfortunately, it appears I’ve become a target of ridiculous accusations. These allegations of impropriety are false. I can’t say that any more strongly.
“Until it is resolved, I’ll refrain from further comment and refer all questions to my attorney, Kathleen Sweeney."First, let me just say I consider myself a friend of Zach's and I assume he considers me a friend as well. Knowing him, I have trouble believing that he has a dark, sinister side that I am not aware of. The fact that something like this was not reported until 9 months after it supposedly happens makes me doubt the accusation even more.
Contrary to what some may think, "victims" do sometimes make up stories. It is a situation I know all too well. Shortly after graduating from law school, I had a classmate who I'd been friends with for years file for a protective order against me with the bizarre claim that she was afraid I might attack her....though I had never once done so up to that point. It was the most bizarre thing I ever experienced. She testified under oath in a deposition she did not know me and had never been alone with me. It was completely false...we had been very good friends and had been alone together hundreds of times. Hearing her testify though sent chills up my spine - I think she believed every word she was saying was true and could have probably convinced any jury. The fact is she had had some mental health challenges, let's call them, and I foolishly did what I thought good friends did - try to be there to help her through her issues. I had no idea what she was capable of doing. None. A painfully long story made short, I got the court to order her to undergo a psych test. She decided to dismiss the case after her examination but before the psychologist could issue what I expected (I talked to the psychologist) would have been a negative report on her mental health.
From time to time, political enemies of mine will bring up this 26 year old lawsuit in an effort to try to smear my character. Of course, the story of the "victim" not knowing me and needing a protective order because I might suddenly attack her is, upon reflection, ridiculous. So they conveniently change the allegation to the more believable, but never asserted, "stalking." I have come to accept that there people who will jump at the chance to lie about what happened to tarnish my reputation. I'm confident there is a special place in hell waiting for those people who will do that sort of thing.
It is so easy to lodge allegations against someone in court. Even when those allegations are of a sexual nature, many times they are not true. That's why our legal system presumes people, with respect to all crimes, are innocent until proven guilty. My friend, Zach, deserves that same presumption of innocence, and the fact he is a public figure does not change that.
UPDATE: In early August, the Special Prosecutor appointed to review the evidence concluded: "I determined criminal charges were not merited based on the information we had." As a result, Adamson has been cleared of any potential criminal prosecution as a result of the allegations made against him. This is certain welcome, but certainly not unexpected, news. This is the link to the follow-up story I wrote about the charges not being pursued.
CORRECTION: The original headline talked about a "criminal charge" being filed. That was an extremely poor choice of words on my part. A private citizen filed a criminal "complaint" against Zac Adamson,, which simply involves filling out a form at the prosecutor's office and can be done regardless of what proof actually backs up those allegations. But it is the prosecutor who decides whether to file "charges," a decision that should be backed by some level of factual support. While lay people may inaccurately use the terms interchangeably, words matter, and I, as an attorney, should not have made that lay mistake in penning the story. I apologize to Zac and his family and to anyone who might have reached the wrong conclusion from the erroneous headline.