The conviction of a Lake Charles man serving a 99-year sentence for drugging and sexually abusing a woman he met at a local casino in 2021 will stand.

Stephen Douglas Cormier was convicted in 2023 of second-degree sexual battery, second-degree kidnapping and mingling harmful substances. He received a 99-year sentence for the battery charge, 40 years for kidnapping and five years on the mingling — all to run concurrently.

Video surveillance was shown to jurors during the trial that shows Cormier buying two shots from the bar. In the video, he can then be seen taking something out of his pocket, pouring it into one of the glasses and then mixing it. He then places the glass next to the woman, who proceeds to drink it.

In the video, the woman is shown shortly after unsteady and barely able to stand without Cormier’s help. The video then shows Cormier leading her from the casino floor out of the doors.

The woman’s then-boyfriend told jurors he attempted to contact her that day and after failing to do so drove to the casino to look for her. He said he found her car at the casino, which was empty, and went inside the casino but didn’t see her there. Later, the woman’s mother went to the casino and found her in the car, extremely lethargic.

The boyfriend told jurors the car was on the same level of the parking garage when the mother found it, but in a different spot than when he had found it.

Video from the casino’s parking garage shows Cormier leave in his car, return, leave in the woman’s car, return the car with her inside and then leave again in his car.

The boyfriend testified that he drove his girlfriend’s car from the casino and noticed the seat was pushed back in a way his girlfriend did not normally keep the chair because she wouldn’t have been able to reach the pedals or steering wheel.

The woman was subsequently taken to a local hospital and a sexual assault examination performed. She said she doesn’t remember anything between Cormier giving her the shot and waking in the hospital talking to law enforcement.

During the trial, it was revealed that Cormier had taken the woman to the house of a friend where he was cat-sitting while the person was out of town. There, Cormier took photographs of the woman naked from the waist down and sexually assaulted her. Photographs of the assault where recovered from Cormier’s phone.

Also during the trial, cell phone video was shown of Cormier appearing to sexually assault a second unconscious woman while he was driving. The video was recovered when photographs of the first assault were extracted from the phone. In the video, Cormier and the second woman are naked from the waist down and he digitally penetrates her as she sits in the passenger seat with her eyes closed and a straw hanging from her mouth.

In his appeal, Cormier claims that video should not have been allowed because it prejudiced the jury. He also claims the trial court erred in denying his motion for a mistrial because when the video was shown his defense team was unable to cross-examine the woman in the video. Cormier argued there was no evidence of mingling harmful substances regarding the second woman, no evidence of kidnapping and no evidence that she did not give consent and because the assault happened in his car and not someone else’s home like in the casino case, the situations are dissimilar.

Law enforcement testified during the trial that they located the woman, who told officers she remembered going on a date with Cormier, but had no memory of the assault and did not know about the video. The detective who testified did not repeat what the women said during their interview. He only testified to her reaction to the video.

The 3rd Circuit Appeal of Court has denied Cormier’s appeal, stating the video possesses probative value because it shows Cormier is willing to take advantage of an unconscious woman by sexually assaulting her, the very thing he was charged with doing to the woman he met at the casino.

“Given the similarity between what (Cormier) was alleged to have done to (the woman) in the present case, what he recorded himself doing to (the second woman) while she was unconscious, and the trial court’s instruction that (Cormier) may not be found guilty merely because he committed another offense, we cannot say the trial court abused its discretion.”

The court also stated Cormier’s inability to cross-examine the second woman is irrelevant because she did not testify.