Anna Stubblefield, The Rutgers Prof Accused Of Raping Diaper-Wearing Man, Defends Her Actions

Anna Stubblefield took the stand in her defense on Thursday, September 25.

The 45-year-old Rutgers University philosophy professor — accused of raping a non-verbal, diaper-wearing man with cerebral palsy — claims their relationship was completely consensual and that she did not rape D.J., whom prosecutors call her “34-year-old victim.”

Stubblefield described in graphic detail this relationship, with the cross-examination portion of the trial even including a part about how she “allegedly pulled down D.J.’s diaper to perform oral sex on him,” the Daily Mail reports.

D.J.’s family is furious with her for taking advantage of their family member, and they are reportedly suing her in addition to the criminal trial in which Anna Stubblefield has been charged with two counts of aggravated sexual assault.

So how can someone justify sex with a person in D.J.’s described condition?

Well, according to the professor, they communicated through a process known as “facilitated communication.”

It’s worth noting here that the court would not allow expert testimony on this topic because it is “not a recognized science.” Nevertheless, it was “recognized” enough for the philosophy professor to justify the physical relationship that she had with D.J. on two occasions.

Here’s how facilitated communication works, as described by Anna Stubblefield.

Essentially, Stubblefield used her hands to help D.J. type out his wishes on a keyboard, and if he ever felt like he wanted to stop having sex with her, he could simply bang on the floor of her office, where both encounters allegedly took place.

According to a separate report from NJ, Stubblefield claimed D.J. was the one typing the messages, pointing out mistakes he would sometimes make while also conveying information she could not interpret.

“It was very clear he was the author of his words. He certainly wasn’t letting me call the shots or push him around in any way,” said Stubblefield on the witness stand. “He wouldn’t let me do anything that he didn’t want me to do.”

Essex County Prosecutor Eric Plant pushed back on the facilitated communication defense, noting that studies “have repeatedly demonstrated that facilitated communication is not a scientifically valid technique for individuals with autism or mental retardation,” and quoting a policy statement to that effect issued by the American Psychological Association (APA).

D.J.’s legal guardians are his mother and brother. His brother introduced the two, and Anna Stubblefield convinced the family to let her work with him to see if she couldn’t make a difference in his communication abilities.

The fact that D.J. is an adult by age, Stubblefield pointed out, meant that she wasn’t thinking, “Hey, let’s go ask our moms if it’s okay.”

In the Daily Mail report, Stubblefield’s daughter spoke out in her mom’s defense, calling D.J.’s family “money-hungry idiots,” who were only going after her because she seemed like a wealthy white lady and they were poor. (Also African-Americans, the news site points out.)

It isn’t known — if D.J. is fully incompetent — how he was able to communicate the details of his sexual relationship with Anna Stubblefield, but he reportedly did, and that’s when his mother and brother pursued action.

While they believe their family member was raped by the professor and that’s why there were not “Stop” messages typed out or banging on the floor, the professor maintains that D.J. was “very happy” with their interactions, and he didn’t see a need to stop.

What do you think about this case, readers?

Are there any details missing from the reports going around that you would need to know before commenting on the validity of this sexual relationship, or did Anna Stubblefield knowingly and willfully rape a helpless man? Sound off in the comments section.

[Images of Anna Stubblefield via Rutgers University]