West High School teacher Jose Bernardo Fanjul goes on trial June 2 for allegedly engaging in sex acts with a 16-year-old female student.

But unlike most defendants, Fanjul's fate will not be decided by a jury but by 3rd District Judge Ann Boyden, who will hear testimony, view exhibits and ultimately decide whether or not to convict the 46-year-old educator.

Fanjul's lawyers asked for a bench trial, or trial by a judge only, after the Salt Lake District Attorney's Office earlier this month filed charges against two other men who are witnesses in the case. They are accused of lying under oath about their sexual conduct with the same girl.

Fanjul's attorneys assailed this as "professional misconduct" and said it was an "orchestrated" move that wrecked Fanjul's chances of getting a fair trial.

The judge forbade both sides from talking publicly about the case and set a four-day bench trial.

Fanjul is charged with five counts of forcible sodomy, a first-degree felony, and five counts of forcible sexual abuse, a second-degree felony.

The trial may include information about the girl's truthfulness and detailed sexual matters.

Daniel Medwed, a University of Utah associate law professor and former defense attorney who has no connection to the case, observes that defense lawyers sometimes will opt for a bench trial when a case is emotionally charged and has been highly publicized.

Many times, the odds are better with a jury because it's possible to persuade at least one person in a group to acquit a defendant. Lawyers rarely look to a "single, Solomonic figure" to make such a decision, he said.

But there are times when taking a chance on a bench trial seems to be a wiser move from the defense standpoint.

"Usually, you will go with a bench trial only if the facts are particularly salacious and you're worried that the jury will react emotionally. You think you might have a better shake with the judge because, presumably, judges have seen it all before and will not be overwhelmed by salacious details and will react primarily on the evidence," he said.

Medwed said he and other defense attorneys he has known have great faith in the jury system. "It's just a question of how risk-averse a defendant is."

In certain types of cases, such as horrific child mistreatment or murder, there seems to be a feeling at times that juries want someone to blame and be punished for what happened. Things are more complicated when cases involve teenagers and claims of sexual misconduct by adults.

Medwed said trials involving teens and sex charges are less emotionally wrenching because the alleged victim is older and has a degree of free will, although not in a legal sense. However, there have been so many convictions of teachers who engaged in sex with students that "people have a heightened sensibility about these types of cases now."

E-MAIL: lindat@desnews.com