The problem for the jury may have been the accuser was too articulate. Her memory seemed super-human.
Questioning by the niece’s mother could have unintentionally given the niece information about sexual touching that would have enabled her to describe the molestation in ways that a six-year-old could not do on her...Read More
During cross-examination of the son at trial the defense obtained a compelling example of the power of his imagination.
Compelling testimony of the physician the defense engaged together with testimony from the accused and persons who knew her helped win the case.
The defense’s careful investigation showed the son’s girlfriend had likely influenced the development of the son’s memory.
The defense showed through its interview of the son that his testimony was highly unreliable.
When interviewed by the defense, the daughter could not recount a single episode of abuse.
The defense’s insistence on a thorough investigation of the girl’s father was perhaps the biggest factor in winning this case.
On cross-examination by the defense, the State’s witnesses conceded false memories are a real danger when small children report they have been molested.
In a second trial, the defense focused much more on the accused’s long history as a man who took good care of children.