Man whose sex predator case went to Supreme Court charged in ra

KANSAS CITY, Mo. -- It took a defense lawyer three years -- and appearances in front of both the Kansas and U.S. supreme courts -- to free Michael T. Crane from confinement in the Kansas sexual predator program.

Less than 18 months later, Crane is charged with raping a woman in her car March 22 outside a Kansas City, Mo., apartment.

Crane, 41, of suburban Blue Springs, was arrested Wednesday and charged with three counts of forcible sodomy and one count each of forcible rape, assault and kidnapping.

He was released from the Kansas sexual predator program in January 2002 after doctors concluded his mental condition had changed and he was no longer a threat.

Johnson County, Kan., prosecutor Paul J. Morrison, who helped write the 1994 Kansas sexual predator law, said he was extremely frustrated when he heard about Crane's latest arrest. But he wasn't surprised.

"We have spent the last 10 years, almost continuously, battling to keep Michael Crane in prison," Morrison said. "When I heard about this rape in Missouri, everyone down here was not the least bit surprised. We view him as a very dangerous person. You can't help but feel very badly when you feel the system has failed."

Crane was convicted in 1994 in Johnson County for a 1993 attack on a Leawood, Kan., video store clerk. He was sentenced to 35 years to life on convictions for kidnapping, attempted rape and attempted sodomy.

The Kansas Supreme Court overturned the conviction on technical grounds in 1996. The following year, Crane pleaded guilty to the reduced charge of aggravated sexual battery and was sentenced to three to 10 years in prison.

As he was approaching release, the state sought to have him kept in confinement, and a jury determined him to be a violent sexual predator. The Kansas Supreme Court overturned that finding, but Crane remained confined while the state appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The Kansas court had said the state would have to show that inmates totally lacked control of their behavior, but the U.S. court ruling said it was enough to prove "serious difficulty in controlling behavior."

Three days after that ruling, Crane was given conditional release from the predator program. That meant he was free, but he had to continue to see a therapist.

Authorities said DNA from semen in the March attack matches Crane's, which is in a national database of convicted felons. The charges against Crane carry a penalty of up to life in prison if convicted.

Morrison said when the 1994 law was being written, it wasn't meant to apply only to people who couldn't control their conduct.

"That law was designed for people like Michael Crane," he said. "If you're raped by a sexual predator, it doesn't matter whether he could control his impulses or not," he said. "You're still a rape victim."

Laura Howard, deputy secretary of health care policy with the Kansas Department of Social and Rehabilitation Services, said of the 89 people who have been committed to the sexual predator program since its inception, only two -- including Crane -- have been released from the program entirely.

John C. Donham of Olathe, Kan., who was Crane's attorney during the Kansas and Supreme Court proceedings, said Crane's convictions in Kansas and the subsequent sexual predator rulings have nothing to do with the latest rape accusations.

"Statistics indicate that any person who's done this before will do it again," Donham said. "That is a prediction of future dangerousness. The U.S. Supreme Court clearly stated in the past that the government cannot involuntarily commit someone to a mental hospital because he's proven to be dangerous. You have to prove someone is both mentally ill and, as a result of that illness, dangerous."

As for political implications of his former client's arrest, Donham predicts an overreaction by legislators in their attempt to make a mental illness out of something experts in the field don't consider as such.

"I'm sure someone will introduce a bill here in Kansas to try to do that," he said. "As a result, the state of Kansas will spend a whale of a lot of money going through the appellate process again. It gets votes, and it makes people who pass legislation feel good."