Danny Masterson Claims Lawyers’ Mistakes Led to 30-Year Prison Sentence, Now He Is Trying to Overturn It

Danny Masterson is blaming his trial lawyer for a weak defense as he tries to overturn his rape conviction. The former That ’70s Show actor is currently serving a 30-year sentence at the California Men’s Colony in San Luis Obispo after being convicted of two ra*** in 2023.

In a habeas corpus petition filed Monday, Masterson’s appellate lawyers said his trial attorney, Philip Cohen, did not call key witnesses and failed to challenge the prosecution’s claims about Scientology. The petition states that Masterson “implored (Cohen) to present at least a minimal modicum of defense evidence, but counsel refused.”

The charges date back to 2003, involving two women at Masterson’s Hollywood Hills home. A third rape charge ended in a hung jury. At his first trial in 2022, the jurors also could not reach a verdict but were leaning toward acquittal on all counts.

Scientology was a focus in both trials. Prosecutors argued that the women were discouraged from reporting Masterson because of the church.

Two of the women said they were threatened with excommunication if they went to police. During the retrial, former Scientologist Claire Headley testified that the church requires special permission to contact authorities.

The petition says church lawyers suggested calling Hugh Whitt, a longtime Scientologist, to counter that testimony. While Whitt was listed as a defense witness, Cohen chose not to call him. Instead, Cohen’s strategy was to downplay the role of Scientology. “Why have we heard so much about Scientology? Could it be there’s problems otherwise with the government’s case?” he asked during closing arguments.

The petition argues that Cohen avoided presenting a full defense and relied mainly on cross-examining the prosecution’s witnesses.

This approach nearly worked at the first trial, but the retrial featured stronger evidence and a more aggressive prosecution. According to the petition, Cohen did not adjust his strategy and did not interview several potential witnesses who could have challenged the accusers’ statements.

“In sum, the jury saw only the tip of the iceberg of available defense evidence in the form of the complaining witnesses’ inconsistent statements while the wealth of directly exculpatory evidence went unused for no viable tactical reason,” the filing states.

Masterson’s lawyers also filed a separate appeal in December, challenging multiple court rulings. The habeas petition focuses on evidence that was not presented at trial. Appellate attorney Eric Multhaup said, “The jury heard only half the story – the prosecution’s side. Danny deserves a new trial where the jury can hear his side as well.”

Have something to add? Let us know in the comments!