The Utah Court of Appeals wasn’t persuaded by a former bus driver’s arguments — including the claim that video of him inappropriately touching young female passengers wasn’t sufficient evidence of the allegations against him — that they should overturn his convictions.
Carrell’s appeal was three-fold. The first and second arguments hinged on language used in the jury instructions, including whether it was appropriate to include touching a victim’s buttocks or otherwise taking “indecent liberties” with the victims as a basis for conviction.
The 3rd District Court jury was told to consider whether Carrell “knowingly or intentionally, touched any part of the genitals [or buttocks] .