Opinion ID: 889893
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Post-Arrest to Sentencing

Text: ¶ 34 Douglas was charged with two counts of sexual intercourse without consent, two counts of incest, and one count of felony sexual assault. Nicole was charged with sexual intercourse without consent, accountability for sexual intercourse without consent, and accountability for incest. [3] Against the advice of counsel, Nicole insisted that she and Douglas be tried together. The District Court initially allowed the cases to be joined but later reconsidered and reversed that decision due to concerns that joinder did not appear to be in Nicole's best interest. Douglas's trial was held in March 2008, and Nicole's was held two months later. ¶ 35 Douglas remained incarcerated pending trial, but Nicole was released on bond. During the ensuing year and a half (between their November 2006 arrests and Nicole's May 2008 trial), the two maintained extensive contact with each other. Nicole wrote Douglas over 400 letters, they spoke on the phone for roughly four hours every day (at a cost of 19 cents per minute), and she visited him at the Sanders County jail. In addition, on January 19, 2007, they executed a declaration of marriage, [4] which they backdated to November 7, 2006 (the day after Douglas's divorce from Candace became final). ¶ 36 Dr. Robert Page conducted two forensic mental health evaluations of Nicole, one before her trial and the other before her sentencing. He also testified at both proceedings. Based on a variety of assessment procedures, Dr. Page found that Nicole does not possess any significant signs of psychopathology. In other words, he did not find any personality traits that would cause her difficulties in maintaining satisfactory day-to-day functioning. Nor did he find any signs of antisocial, narcissistic, or sadistic traits. He also found no deviant sexual interests, no prior history of criminal or sexually deviant acts, and no issues with drug or alcohol abuse. ¶ 37 Dr. Page did find, however, that Nicole tends to feel insecure and tends to be driven in her day-to-day behaviors and attitudes by a need for acceptance and gratification from others, especially those in authority. To avoid the criticism she anticipates for her feared shortcomings, she has become socially adaptable, willingly deferential to others, and ready to modify her behavior to gain their attention and approval. As a result, she is quite vulnerable to external influence and may act in ways which compromise her own internal values and morals in favor of obtaining validation and acceptance from others. ¶ 38 Since the test results did not suggest that Nicole is predisposed to sexually molest children or otherwise purposely hurt others, Dr. Page concluded that her commission of the charged offenses would likely have resulted from a strong desire to please an outside influence in order to gain acceptance and validation from that source. In particular, he found that Nicole's strong need for external validation is focused specifically on her significant relationship with Mr. Guill. One indicator of this was her insistence on being tried together with Douglas, despite legal advice to the contrary, which suggested that she may be unrealistically and irrationally bonded with him and willing to disregard her own well-being ... in favor of maintaining [that] bond. ¶ 39 Another indicator was the content of some of Nicole's letters to Douglas during his incarceration. Dr. Page noted that these writings appear tangential at times and have a religious or spiritual flavor. But more to the point, they are strongly suggestive of a very unnatural, unhealthy, bizarre bond. The most compelling piece of evidence is an October 2007 letter, which opens as follows: Hi my wonderful, splendid, exquisite, magnificent, brilliant, bright, glorious, majestic, marvelous, clean, pure, holy, loving, honest, kind, caring, heartful, thoughtful, giving, considerate, compassionate, so very special, wanted, needed, cared about, thought of, adored, cherished, worshipped, honored, honorable, trusted, missed, loved, one with me, one with Him, one-dear-ful, delicious, delightful, adorable, handsome husband who is all mine and I'm keeping always and forever and never letting go! The letter then proceeds, over the course of 15 handwritten pages, into what is essentially a stream of consciousness, [5] consisting of various passages such as the following:  I have my heart cuffs on you and I'm never letting go!  You are my absolute everything good, pure and holy! I love you with all of my heart, everything and much, much, much more my so very special, magnificent, bright, clean, noble, priceless husband that I'm keeping always and forever!  He wants us together, we will be together, there's no stopping His hand.  `They have everything backwards, they diagnosed wrong people and have wrong people in jail, they let the guilty go free, and they will pay, I will punish them.' (This statement is quoted in the letter as something that Nicole heard during prayerhence, the internal quotation marks here.) Dr. Page noted that these writings could suggest obsessive ideation, but he concluded that they were the product of Nicole's desire to please Douglas and maintain his approval. ¶ 40 Nicole was called by the defense at Douglas's trial. She testified that she had never engaged in any sort of sexual activity with Sarah and had never seen Douglas touch Sarah in any way that was inappropriate. [6] She denied that the incidents of violence and intimidation described by Candace and Sarah took place. She also denied that the bizarre incidents described by Cain and Phillips took place. She acknowledged that she and Douglas shared the same plate and ate off the same fork during meals, but she stated that this did not seem weird to her. She also acknowledged that they were together [a]ll the time, 24 hours a day, to the point of going to the bathroom together. But she explained that she enjoyed being with Douglas and, moreover, that she provided a protection for him, a witness, so that if others would say something about him that wasn't true, I could testify and say, I was there, that's not true. She maintained that Douglas never raised a hand to Candace, Sarah, or Jacob. In her view, the general attitude around the house was good and happy, and there was no sense of fear or intimidation at all. She denied being controlled by Douglas, being under a spell from him, or being worried that God would strike some sort of wrath on her if she displeased him. ¶ 41 At her own trial, however, the crux of the defense was that Douglas controlled everyone in the houseNicole included. Defense counsel elicited testimony to establish that if Nicole did, in fact, engage in the sexual misconduct as alleged, then it was because she was under Douglas's control, which was the result not of fear, but of love taken to an extreme. In this regard, counsel introduced testimony from Sarah that Nicole loves Douglas too much and might even hurt herself or take her own life if he asked her to. Also, counsel called Dr. Page, who testified that Nicole's hunger for external validation could make her susceptible to being controlled by someone with a stronger personalityDouglas in particular. Dr. Page agreed that being fed by Nicole (in the way described by Cain and Phillips) is an example of extreme control. He further testified that Nicole fits the profile of someone whose abnormally high need for validation overrid[es] any concern about the impact of their actions on others. In other words, the person has such a hunger to secure the validation from an outside source, other than the victim, that the victim would take a second place in their decision process. But under questioning by the prosecution, Dr. Page agreed that the need for external validation does not excuse a person for sexually abusing a child. Moreover, he agreed that Nicole had the ability to exercise free will, to make decisions, and to conform her behavior to societal norms. ¶ 42 During closing arguments, defense counsel argued that this case is about love taken to a place where it should never goi.e., that Douglas was able to control Nicole and direct her actions during their years on the Heron property because she loved him too much. In light of the second issue raised in this appeal, it is notable that counsel also asserted that even to this day, Nicole is controlled by Douglaswho, at that point, was in jail. The prosecutor countered that Nicole's abnormal need for validation from Douglas could not excuse her participation in and facilitation of his sexual abuse of Sarah for 14 years. The jury agreed with the prosecutor. ¶ 43 Nicole was found guilty of the charges on May 23, 2008, and was remanded to the custody of the Sanders County Sheriffs Office. That same day, the Sheriffs Office terminated all contact between Nicole and Douglas. Nevertheless, Rick visited Nicole in jail and attempted to relay communications from Douglas. The detention staff intervened and prohibited Rick from communicating any conversations from Douglas to Nicole. On May 27, Nicole was moved to the Mineral County Jail. ¶ 44 At the sentencing hearing, Dr. Page testified that other than the current situation which involves her relationship with Mr. Guill, [Nicole] has demonstrated autonomy and an ability to maintain herself as an individual. He observed that her commission of the offenses was driven by an external forcenamely Douglas, who influenced her to act in ways that I believe [she] otherwise would not have acted. In short, but for Mr. Guill we would not all be sitting here today. As to whether a no-contact restriction would aid Nicole's rehabilitation and protect society, Dr. Page agreed that it would. He noted that she is at a high risk for reconnecting in a vulnerable manner with others, and Douglas's influence is substantial enough that it would be an inhibitor in her ability to be treated and would increase her likelihood of recidivism. ¶ 45 Sarah, Jacob, and Candace submitted victim impact statements to the court. Sarah stated that Nicole is as responsible for what happened as my father. Sarah said that she feared Nicole only if [Nicole] is allowed to have contact with my father. She will do anything he tells her. Jacob recounted that he was treated like a prisoner by Nicole and that it hurt to see that she can come in, assist and allow this to happen, to me, my mum, and my sister. Lastly, Candace stated: I am angry that Nicole refused to step in and assist my children and myself. She had all the power, she could have made a difference in our lives. She hated my children and sometime[s] me. We were treated as less than nothing, only tolerated to cook, clean and maintain the home and business. As with Douglas nothing was ever done right, daily verbal abuse for eighteen years has taken a huge toll on myself and my children. I am hopeful that she is punished as well as given treatment. ¶ 46 Nicole spoke at the hearing and gave a lengthy statement, most of which was dedicated to singing Douglas's praisesthat he's a good man, an honest man, a man of integrity, and a man of impeccable character. She said that [b]y his behavior he has taught me by example to be the same way. She talked about how Douglas had cared about us and sacrificed himself and his health for his family. She stated that she was pleased, proud, blessed, honored, and thankful to be married to him. She asserted that a horrendous injustice had been done to them. She closed with the following remarks: The next time you wash your hands they won't come clean. That's the stain of innocent blood on your hands, my husband's and mine. And I hope and I pray to God that he does to you what you have done to my husband and myself. ¶ 47 The State asked the District Court to order that there be no contact between Nicole and Douglas. The prosecutors argued that, given Dr. Page's evaluations and testimony, this restriction is necessary for Nicole's rehabilitation and the protection of the victim and society. In this regard, they noted the high level of animosity shared by Douglas and Nicole toward the rest of the family, as reflected in her letters to him. Defense counsel objected to the restriction on the grounds that it is not an appropriate condition of sentence and that it intrudes on the right of privacy of a married couple. ¶ 48 As noted, the District Court sentenced Nicole to three concurrent terms of 25 years at the Montana Women's Prison with 10 years suspended. Of relevance to this appeal, the court ordered Nicole, as conditions of her suspended sentence, to pay restitution in the amount of $7,249.43 plus 10% (Condition 15) and to continue to be responsible for all counseling, treatment or therapy costs incurred by the victim (Condition 16). [7] As a separate restriction on Nicole's entire sentence, the court also ordered that [t]he Defendant shall have NO contact with Douglas Guill through any means including third parties including her brother due to Douglas Guill's demonstrated ability to control and direct her activities, thoughts and conduct as shown through the Defendant's own testimony, the testimony of her brother, Rick Christensen, and their deification of Douglas Guill. The only exception to this no contact order is if, and only if, the Defendant's therapist determines that limited contact for therapeutic purposes, under the direct supervision of the therapist, is in both community and the Defendant's best interest for her treatment and rehabilitation. Nicole now appeals Condition 16 and the no-contact restriction.