Opinion ID: 792192
Heading Depth: 6
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Additional Misrepresentation of the Evidence

Text: 70 In his rebuttal argument, the prosecutor also made another clear misrepresentation in his effort to discredit defense counsel's closing argument: 71 Mr. Nagy also said that Consuela was being investigated by Children Services. I didn't hear that in this trial. I don't know where that came from. I don't know why he feels he has to unfairly damage her reputation now, but apparently he does. 72 J.A. at 184 (final closing argument by prosecution). However, Fenn testified that she had in fact been investigated by Children Services: 73 Q. Prior to this particular incident, madam, had you had — had you been investigated by Children Services about your conduct with your children? 74 A. Right. 75 Q. When was that, approximately? 76 A. I don't know exactly, but I know it was after it had happened. 77 Q. After this happened? 78 A. Right. I don't know exactly — 79 J.A. at 363 (Test. Consuela Fenn). The prosecutor's statement to the contrary was plainly inconsistent with the testimony presented at trial. 80