Convicting a Child molester. 27 February 2009

[chp5]

I'm not sure if this really belongs in the "What I Like Forum," but . . .

On 23 February 2009 (my birthday), I reported for jury duty pursuant to my jury duty notice. I’m a self-employed business attorney (I never go to court or litigate) and don’t get paid if I don’t work. Attorneys never get picked for juries, so I was irritated at losing a day’s work for no reason.

Sitting with 45 others in a large room, the court personnel informed us that the case was a felony child molestation case. The thought made me very uneasy. After two days of jury selection and questioning, I was ready to get back to my business. My jaw dropped when the clerk announced my name as a jury member.

For the first day and a half of trial, I did not see how the State could prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt. The woman who performed the initial forensic interview of the kids was VERY biased. In contravention to appropriate conduct, she used very leading and suggestive questions to get the kids to say something incriminating. The defendant was not a typical scumbag and seemed to honestly love his kids. He was married to the mother for eight years and had joint custody for years after the divorce.

The tide turned after lunch of the second day. The kids testified. Their therapist (who did not seemed biased like the forensic interviewer) testified at length. Their reports were consistent over a several year period and I came to see the damage done. There was no evidence to counter the accounts.

The defendant did not appear in court for the last day of trail. The judge later told us that he was out on bail and LE found his ankle monitor cut off and him missing. The judge allowed us to consider his non-appearance as circumstantial evidence.

I live in a conservative county north of Atlanta. Maybe it’s not representative of all of America, but I was very impressed with everyone on the jury. All were good people that took their job very seriously and understood the potential affect of our job on the family, kids and the defendant. After hours of deliberation, review of the evidence and discussion, we returned a guilty verdict on all counts.

Strange, but I have no doubt in my mind that the defendant loves his kids. He is a man with demons who let them out of the dark parts of his soul. Once released, those demons and his deeds will haunt him forever. I pray for the kids and for the soul of the defendant. He’s not been found as of today.

Edited February 28, 2009 by chp5

[SiG Lady]

Jury duty is one of those hard-core reality checks that some of us are handed when we least expect it. A serious responsibility, to say the least. Interesting case. Thank you for presenting it (and thank you for your service).

[Neomet]

Thank you for serving. While certainly not as important as criminal cases I oversee civil litigation for an insurance carrier. The standard joke (and fear) in the industry is that all to often the fate of individuals or companies lay in the hands of the 12 people who couldn't find a way out of jury duty and simply want to be done as quickly as possible. An engaged, analytical panel of jurors who will base a decision solely on the evidence presented and the law of the land is the least litigants should be entitled to. I applaud you for your rational approach even if your ultimate answer had been that the defendant was not guilty. Nicely done.

Edited February 28, 2009 by Neomet

[rupie]

I have been picked for two trials in the past and I enjoyed both cases, I wouldn't hesitate for a second to stand jury duty again. There are obviously cases that one might hesitate at like the one mentioned here but all thing considered I find it a honor to be able to serve in that way.

[mdstihl]

First, I feel bad for the accused family; can't imagine what that's like to know your spouse is a molester.

Secondly, I got called for jury duty last year. Couldn't get out of it, pissed me off, etc. Then, once at the courthouse and hearing the case being discussed, I wouldn't have minded at all being selected. (I wasn't) I'm self employed, so I really couldn't afford the time away, but seeing the system at work firsthand made me realize how extremely lucky we are to live in a country like this. The system isn't perfect and never will be, but at least we have the right to a fair trial.

Third, I'm glad the accused got convicted; evidence certainly seems to point to the correct ruling. I'm not a father, by choice. I don't hate kids, I just think they're a giant PITA. lol But abusing a child, or anything or anyone weaker than yourself buys you a special place in hell, IMO.

[AlamoShooter]

good for you, It bites my brain when I hear of good people trying to get out of jury Duty.

I am self employed too the jury I was on cost me more that two weeks pay.

Hours of deliberating. we spent over 3 days I watched the three three other that saw it as a clear Guilty, change to go with the crowd, the second day just to end it. I can be very stubborn when it mater's.

Edited March 2, 2009 by AlamoShooter

[chp5]

I'm still processing the lessons of this experience - there are many. I have a nagging, profound sadness for all involved.

Here are some that I can see now:

1. Quoting myself: "The woman who performed the initial forensic interview of the kids was VERY biased. In contravention to appropriate conduct, she used very leading and suggestive questions to get the kids to say something incriminating."

That situation could lead some innocent people to be indicted. That is scary and I'm glad that woman has moved on to another career.

2. Again quoting myself: "I was very impressed with everyone on the jury. All were good people that took their job very seriously and understood the potential affect of our job on the family, kids and the defendant."

That was uplifting and restored a certain amount of faith in my fellow man and our system of justice.

3. Again quoting myself: "Strange, but I have no doubt in my mind that the defendant loves his kids. He is a man with demons who let them out of the dark parts of his soul."

This experience would be easier if the defendant the incarnation of evil. He had not seen his kids for two years before they testified in court and he was moved at their presence. He loves them. People are complex and flawed. The potential for love and equally for vileness is within many people. We are the products of the totality of our choices in life. Protect and guard your (my) thoughts. Sometimes the further away you get from the things you care about - the less you care about how much further away you get . . .

4. Perspective. If I/you think we have challenges and problems, they are likely dwarfed by these issues. We've already hit the lottery . . .

[Duane Thomas]

That is scary and I'm glad that woman has moved on to another career.

How so? How did that happen? What new career? How do you know about this?

[G-ManBart]

Certainly not an easy thing to do, but it sure sounds like the jury did the right thing and now I just hope they find the guy before the trail gets cold.

Fugitives who aren't career criminals are pretty easy to catch if you get them pretty soon. After a while they get good at it and are much harder to track down.....for a while I had a case that went back to 1983

[JimmyZip]

I have a family member who was molested by the grandfather on her fathers side. (She is related to me through her mother) I met him many times and would never have guessed that he was the evil man he was. (He has since passed on)This has taught me that YOU CAN NEVER TELL! It's very often (more than not ) that the perpetrator of such crimes is a family member or a trusted family friend. That is evil. The other we see for what it is and can avoid. Htis we cannot and its pathology is what gets us. These people cannot control the demons they have and they hide among us. This is any parents nightmare. I have seen people deny their kids accounts initially because they just cannot beleive that said person would do such a thing. They feel tremendous guilt when they find they were wrong.

They hide in plain sight. You must be forever dilligent, and keep an open dialog with your children. I have no mercy for their type.

I applaud your service, thank you.

[chp5]

That is scary and I'm glad that woman has moved on to another career.

How so? How did that happen? What new career? How do you know about this?

Duane - she was qualified as an expert witness and they always give their work/career history on the stand. She now works for an insurance company. Don't know why she left that position. She only stated that she wanted to move on to other things.

Edited March 2, 2009 by chp5

[chp5]

Certainly not an easy thing to do, but it sure sounds like the jury did the right thing and now I just hope they find the guy before the trail gets cold.

My initial thought is that stuck a pistol in his mouth, but I guess he didn't need to cut off his ankle monitor for that.

[p99shooter]

My wife was a victim of sexual abuse from a family member. He molested multiple victims in the family.

Nobody new about it and nothing was done until one of the victims talked about the abuse with another family member that was a mandatory-reporter. The wounds will never fully heal, as I am reminded of every so often.

I'm glad you got the opportunity to put one in jail.

[downlow411]

When you steal someones humanity (especially a child) then after a fair trial, being found guilty, that person has the right to a quick and certain termination of all rights to A, repeat the offense and B, continue to breath. B insures A does not happen again.

[GentlemanJim]

I would donate the firewood and pitchforks

Jim

[Jack Suber]

I am tapped for jury duty at the end of April. Its been twenty years since I served on a jury. My county (Richland) is a very liberal county and the jury pools tend to be very slack. Conservative professionals are rarely selected and its hard to get a death penalty here. For example, the scumbag who murdered my cousin - stabbed him 72 times while trying to steal his car, then stood on his head while he tried to crawl away - only got life. The prosecutors did not even want to go for the death penalty because they said there was no chance of getting it. Anyway, I look forward to serving.

The last time I served I was selected for a strong-armed robbery case. The victim was jumped, punched, knocked out, and robbed. He could not accurately describe the attackers. One suspect was arrested shortly after based upon a description of his clothing by the victim. During the trial, the public defender did an outstanding job. I was convinced the guy was innocent and wrongly accused. Then, and I still can not figure out why, the public defender brought the defendant's brother out of jail to testify on his behalf (it seems the brother was arrested for another crime shortly after this crime). Anyway, the brother gets on the stand and testifies: "Naw!! He ain't did it. He ain't robbed him. All he did was hold him down while I took da wallet...He only hit him once..." The public defender couldn't shut him up. The defendant was yelling "Shut up, stupid Mother F**ker!!" I was in tears laughing as a majority of the court was. Yet, we deliberated for 6 hours because there were jury members that were not going to convict "no matter what..." After it was clear that those wanting to convict were not going to change their mind and were willing to come back the following day until a conviction was made, those opposed agreed to convict. Crazy.

[SA Friday]

Here are some that I can see now:

1. Quoting myself: "The woman who performed the initial forensic interview of the kids was VERY biased. In contravention to appropriate conduct, she used very leading and suggestive questions to get the kids to say something incriminating."

That situation could lead some innocent people to be indicted. That is scary and I'm glad that woman has moved on to another career.

Not trying to drift the thread here, but I have some experience in this area. Depending on the age and capablility of the child, open ended questions vs leading questions is a call that HAS to be made by the interviewer. It's imparative the interviewer use leading questions at times to get the child to a point where they can answer open ended questions or introduce new information to the interview. It can be tough, especially so with the younger children. Psychologists will use 6 to 12 one-hour sessions to do this. Child interviewers don't have that luxury. I hope they taped the interview and used that vs a transcript of the interview. Especially with children, watching the interview is vital to valadate the information.

Then again, I've dealt with more than my share of interviewers and investigators who were way too predisposed to be what I would consider open-minded. This isn't a problem with questioning, but more so a problem of attitude. Everyone has a limit to how much baggage they can carry. Once you reach that limit, it's time to bail. You are no longer objective enough. Sounds to me like her baggage was full.

I wouldn't hold it against her too much. It's pretty bag baggage.