4
On appeal, Carr admits that the presence of his DNA inside Williamson’s
body is sufficient evidence to support a third-degree sexual abuse conviction.
However, he asserts there was no additional evidence from which the jury could
have found that he murdered her or caused her “serious injury”
1
and that the
court should have granted his motion for judgment of acquittal on both the first-
degree murder and the first-degree sexual abuse charge. We disagree.
Most significantly, Carr admitted the jury reasonably could have concluded
he sexually abused Williamson.
2
The evidence, including the fact that Carr’s
semen was found in Williamson’s dead body, clearly supports this. Keeping this
in mind, we believe the jury reasonably could have concluded that Williamson
was killed by the same person that sexually abused her. This conclusion is
supported by forensic evidence that Williamson likely was thrown into the river,
while still alive, shortly after the sexual assault. She was unclothed from the
waist down and a mattress, from which her body apparently was dragged, was
located close to the body. Moreover, Erica Ng testified that in examining the
vaginal swab taken from Williamson, she observed sperm cells with the tails
intact, explaining that when a sperm cell begins to degrade the spermatozoa will
first lose its tail. This indicated to Ng that the sex act had taken place “not too
long ago.” Accordingly, because the evidence indicates a likelihood that
Williamson’s sexual abuser was also her murderer, sufficient evidence supports
the jury’s findings of guilt.
1
The jury was instructed that in order to find him guilty of first-degree sexual assault, it
had to find that during the commission of sexual abuse Carr caused Williamson “serious
injury.”
2
Defense counsel stated in his opening statement that the jury would “only find him
guilty of sex abuse in the third degree.”