Opinion ID: 2184368
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Statements recounted by the mother and police officers.

Text: Pierce contends the testimony recounting K.D.'s statements to her mother and to Dickerson and Rice failed to exhibit sufficient indications of reliability as the statute requires, and therefore was erroneously admitted. [10] The morning of the trial, the court conducted a combined competency and admissibility hearing. After finding K.D. incompetent competent to testify, the court found that K.D.'s statements as reported in the police officers' and mother's testimony were sufficiently reliable to be admitted under the statute. Specifically, the court concluded that these statements were spontaneous and occurred a very short time after the alleged molestation. The court found that K.D. was still excited when the statements were made and that there was no time for an adult to plant a story in her head. This Court has observed that [p]erhaps the greatest weakness of children as prosecuting witnesses may be their susceptibility to leading questions.... Miller v. State, 517 N.E.2d 64, 69 (Ind.1987) (Miller I). The trial court's finding that K.D.'s answers were not prompted or suggested is supported by the record. Officer Dickerson testified both at the admissibility hearing and at trial that K.D. interrupted his interview with her mother to tell the officer what Pierce had done to her. K.D. repeated essentially the same account to her mother and Sheriff Rice shortly thereafter. The mother, who was the only person alone with K.D. between the events reported and K.D.'s spontaneous statements, was available for cross-examination at the hearing as to the potential for any implantation or cleansing of K.D.'s story. The trial court made a judgment call based on its overall assessment of witness credibility and the substance of the mother's and the officers' testimony. We see no abuse of discretion. [11]