Girl Dies After Running Punishment (Read 1321 times)

I know an individual who was accused of child molestation.  I'm not revealing all the sordid details on the internet but I know all parties involved and, due to that and the supposed timing of events I know it is impossible that it ever happened.

 

The accusors were two young sisters and also levied allegations that the defendant had abused 3 other girls.  After investigation, the police/DA determined that the 3 accusations beyond the original accusors were not true.  Now, you would think that if your ONLY evidence was the word of these two sisters, and it was determined that they were lying on at least 3 of the accusations, perhaps (or even probably) they were lying about all of it.  However they took it to trial.

 

The accusors gave four VERY different accountings of events -- in the original interview, with CPS, in the deposition, and on the stand.  In front of the jury, the public defender (accused could not affortd an attorney) detailed....for hours....question after question on which the accusors had given conflicting answers and changed their story.

 

At the end of the day the jury was hung....11-1, they were ONE VOTE from convicting.  The public defender got the opportunity to ask the jury foreman whey they had thought he was guilty.  The response?

 

"Oh, we didn't think he was guilty.  But since a child was involved we figured, you know, send him to prison, better safe than sorry."

 

In other words, 11 of 12 average citizen were willing to send a man they believed more likely to be innocent than not to prison and destroy his life.

 

The failures on the part of the police, the DA, the public defender system (who pressured him to plead guilty just to get the case off their books), and most disturbingly THE JURY were eye-popping.

 

And to BoilerTom's comment, the jury was never allowed to hear that the accusors had been kicked out of two schools for...LYING, and had a long history of behavioral problems.  Or, that 3 additional accusations had been made by the same kids which were deemed to be untrue.

 

My wife and I had actually cut off contact with the accusors and their family a year prior...because these grade-schoolers scared me (it was quite apparent that they had no consciences) and I actually told my wife I was afraid they'd get mad at me for something and accuse me of molesting them or something (which is exactly what ended up happening to someone else).

 

 

This story is terrifying. 

How did the parents not know how their kids were liars and just choose to not pursue a criminal case? 

Also, what happened to the guys life after the trial?

I also recall the one time,not that long ago when I served on a jury. After we reached our decision, the judge and attorneys asked if anyone was interested in sticking around to ask more about the case and the process. I stayed because i found it very interesting.  

 

We found out some things after the fact that if I had known would have completely changed my decision on the case.    I went from being somewhat of a believer in our judicial system to very skeptical.  I also left with the opinion that it was just a game for the attorneys on whether they win or lose the case, or how many points of the case they win or lose.   

 

Well, given that my husband is a prosecutor, I have a somewhat different view of it. I don't see a lot of attention to earning 'points' but a good deal of concern for ensuring that justice is done. No grandstanding or game playing just a hell of a lot of gut- wrenching work, much of it routine, but a good bit is truly tragic.

My husband is the Deputy, not the elected attorney, so even I don't get I vote for him. : ) a bit of a thread hijack here, but I think people often don't appreciate the power of the role for social justice. The defense lawyers obviously fight to protect their clients' rights, but the prosecutors are the ones who make the charging decisions and work closely with the police. They have real power to ensure fairness. (note: my sister is a public defender so I have personal reasons to think well of that side too.). I while I am an academic researcher, I work clinically as a forensic nurse conducting exams on sexually assaulted adults and children, and some child abuse as well. So I'm pretty invested in the fairness of the system myself.

Absolute scariest passage I have read on the internet in weeks.

 

I do believe we have the best system, but even this system has some flaws. 

 

JOOI do you mean best as in "better than anyone elses system" or "better than any other possible system" ?

I think it's pretty rare that a prosecutor charges someone that they don't believe is actually guilty.  The bigger danger are the ones that rely on their "gut" about guilt, rather than just the evidence.  I think that's what leads to much of the prosecutorial misconduct or questionable charging decisions.  An "ends justifies the means" kind of reasoning.

 

Spaniel, I suspect that your friend's PD suggested that he plead guilty wasn't so much to move the case off the docket as much as because the PD was afraid that what actually happened would happen -- that the jury would hear "molester" and just convict.

 

Also, if you ever get charged with a crime and qualify for the PD, take it.  A PD is almost always better than anybody you can afford to retain if you are broke enough to qualify for the PD.  (Other non-PD appointed counsel can vary; some states/localities have decent non-PD appointed counsel, others are terrible.)