SYCAMORE | Tears were shed by Andrew Rifkin, former NIU police officer, as he was declared not guilty of sexual assault today succeeding a four-day criminal trial.

“It’s been absolute torture for five years—everything we’ve been going through,” Rifkin said. “…I feel revived.”

Rifkin had a consensual sexual relationship with an NIU student in October 2011 that involved two sexual encounters. The accuser claimed Rifkin forced anal sex upon her in the midst of their second consensual sexual encounter on Oct. 14, 2011.

The accuser reported the incident Oct. 28, 2011, after which NIU police delivered a letter of termination to Rifkin, as fraternizing with students is a violation of NIU Police Department policy.

Rifkin went to the NIU police department Oct. 31, 2011 in hopes of getting his job back and to write a report about the relationship, which he said resulted in a report created by law enforcement that falsely described non-consensual sex.

After being charged with a felony, a judge ruled that NIU police had withheld evidence in favor of Rifkin resulting in the dismissal of NIU Police Chief Don Grady in 2013. DeKalb County Prosecutors dropped the case against Rifkin, but he was later recharged when State’s Attorney Richard Schmack was elected in 2012 and chose to reinstate the charges the following year.

After receiving the results following the four hour deliberation today, Rifkin said he does not currently foresee pursuing any civil recourse and looks forward to starting fresh.

Trial: Day one

Jury selections were made Monday.

A jury of five women and seven men were selected to oversee the case. Two alternate jurors, a man and a woman, were selected, as well.

Judge William P. Brady was assigned to the case.

Trial: Day two

Opening statements were made Tuesday.

Testimonies were heard from three people: the woman alleging the sexual assault, a former NIU student who the accuser had been dating during the time of the alleged assault and an NIU police officer who worked with Rifkin in 2011.

Assistant State’s Attorney Stephanie Klein opened to the 12 jurors by saying Rifkin befriended the woman and took her to his home in Cortland to have sex.

“This time the defendant wanted something different,” Klein said to the jury. “…she told him no.”

Klein said during opening statements the investigation was not handled well and the jury would meet the accuser after the defense responded to Klein’s opening statements.

Defense Attorney Bruce Brandwein responded to Klein’s opening statements by suggesting the accuser had a motive of jealousy.

Brandwein led the defense’s response with a series of read discussions between the accuser and her friends from November 2011 regarding the sexual assault allegations.

“‘I’m gonna go get him fired, he’s not texting me back,’ ” Brandwein said.

He finished his closing arguments by recalling the consensual sexual relationship between the accuser and Rifkin, saying the jury should consider all evidence.

“I’m gonna ask you to listen to the evidence, what you hear and what you don’t hear in this case.” Brandwein said.

The woman alleging sexual assault was the first to give her testimony.

“[The anal penetration] felt horrible,” the woman said. “ I never felt that kind of pain before.”

She said it lasted for about a minute, and she stayed at Rifkin’s house because she had no way to get home.

“He tried to apologize,” the accuser said. “He said he shouldn’t be fraternizing with students. He said he would make my life a living hell.”

Trial: Day three

Rifkin testified Wednesday, detailing his sexual encounters with the accuser and explaining his interactions with NIU police.

During the testimony, Rifkin said he immediately removed his penis from the accuser’s anus when she said she didn’t wish to engage in anal sex.

“She said, ‘stop, stop, stop; it hurts,’” Rifkin said during his testimony. “[When she said that] I stopped and pulled my penis out.”

Rifkin also said that the statement presented to him by police Oct. 31, 2011 did not accurately represent his account of the sexual encounters with the accuser.

When he went to the police department, Rifkin filed an initial report in which he did not disclose any information about the sexual encounters.

Officers then prompted him to be honest about the relationship, after which Rifkin said he detailed the entire story. Rifkin said officers typed a summary of his account, which he read and approved.

Officers then printed a report of the relationship that Rifkin signed and initialed, despite not entirely reading it because he said he thought it to be the same report he had approved on the computer.

However, when reading the report later that day, Rifkin said he noticed the report differed from his account of the relationship.

“I skimmed the first two lines [of the statement printed by the officers],” Rifkin said. “[I skimmed the lines] because I assumed it was a summary of everything I had just told [the officers].”

Eight other people took the witness stand, including two of the accuser’s former floormates from Grant Resident Hall North, four officers that served on the NIU police force during the time of the alleged crime, a computer forensic expert and the former DeKalb County state’s attorney.

One of the accuser’s former floormates said during her testimony that she doesn’t believe the accuser was assaulted. She said the accuser told her about when Rifkin attempted to have anal sex with her, and said the accuser claimed Rifkin stopped right after she protested the sex act.

She also said the accuser appeared jealous when seeing Rifkin interacting with other women.

“She said she was upset because he was talking to other female students,” the floormate said.

Another of the the accuser’s former floormates on trial said she believes the accuser falsely reported the incident because Rifkin stopped responding to her text messages.

Both women wrote police reports claiming that no sexual assault occurred, although the reports were never submitted to defense or prosecuting attorneys.

Trial: Day four

Attorneys made closing arguments today.

Klein encouraged the jury not to blame the accuser for the way she handled the sexual assault during closing arguments.

The accuser should not be deemed a liar for reporting the incident two weeks after it occurred, as there is “no expiration date” for when to report an assault, Klein said.

She focused on what she argued was a lack of consent described in the testimonies of the accuser and the defendant.

“The defendant thinks that it’s okay to just stick his penis in her anus without asking, without talking to her beforehand,” Klein said. “Even in the defendant’s version of events, where is the consent?”

The defense also presented a closing argument, during which Brandwein attempted to persuade jurors of Rifkin’s innocence by claiming the accuser falsely reported the incident as an act of vengeance.

He supported his argument by referencing the testimonies of the floormates and discussing the delayed manner in which the accuser reported the alleged assault.

“[The accuser told the floormates] she was jealous; she was upset,” Brandwein said. “He’s not texting her back; I saw him with other girls.”

Brandwein also said Rifkin deserved to be fired, but he is on trial for sexual assault, not fraternizing with a student.

“My client was wrong,” Brandwein said. “He led this young lady on; he hurt her feelings, but he didn’t force anything on her. He was fired, and he should have been, but he didn’t force this girl into any type of sexual activity.”