Bladine: Inside elements of David Jubb cases

Waves generated by the alleged sexual transgressions of former Linfield University Trustee David Jubb evolved into a tsunami of controversy, recriminations and, ultimately, positive changes at Linfield.

In November, Jubb’s plea bargain and light sentence shocked many people, including an N-R reader who submitted this post online:

“Mr. Jubb was able to convince the DA’s office and an experienced judge that he could sexually assault college age girls and not only avoid any jail time, but also avoid ever even having to admit any guilt. Can you imagine … if he had been a regular joe without prominence in the community and without the money to buy expensive, high-powered, out of town legal representation? We’ve still got a long way to go as a society.”

Only insiders to the criminal and civil cases understand the Jubb settlement, and no one is talking. But here’s a possible explanation based on an unreported piece of the legal process and a believable story of back-room negotiations.

Jubb’s future looked bleak when his May 6, 2020 indictment listed eight alleged sexual crimes – five involving three Linfield students in 2017, and three more charges involving one Linfield student in 2019. All were misdemeanors except for one alleged felony from 2019, but taken together they appeared to show a guilt-inducing pattern of behavior.

In June, Jubb’s attorney submitted a scholarly 15-page motion to sever the 2017 and 2019 incidents into two separate trials. That motion seemed destined to win, putting the more serious 2019 charge at risk from a she-said-he-said trial with no underlying pattern of behavior in evidence.

That motion was left unanswered in court records, but clearly it jump-started an extended plea bargaining period. And that’s where the believable story comes in.

A source with inside ties said an imposing member of the judicial system pulled together attorneys from multiple related criminal and civil cases. When the dust settled, one Linfield student gained a financial settlement; Jubb received a costly and stern hand-slapping perhaps beyond what might have resulted at trial; and all parties, including Linfield, avoided two costly, contentious, very public trials.

So, the Jubb criminal and civil cases are resolved, leaving only a potential payoff for the Linfield professor who lost his job during the on-campus storm that evolved in the aftermath of the Jubb indictment.

Efforts to gain justice, as these cases showed, don’t always paint a pretty picture; the secret elixir is what we do with the results.

Jeb Bladine can be reached at jbladine@newsregister.com or 503-687-1223.