Court Opinion

ID: 9714737
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 05:44:39.654568+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:23:28.300370
License: Public Domain

JUSTICE STOUDER, dissenting: I dissent from the majority’s determination that the testimony of James Lybarger was corroborated, and I would reverse the defendant’s conviction. Although testimony regarding an out-of-court statement made by a child is admissible in prosecutions for sexual acts perpetrated upon that child (see Ill. Rev. Stat. 1987, ch. 38, par. 115—10), I find nothing in the decision or the record which has the legal effect of corroborating the child’s testimony in this case. The testimony of Investigator Constantine concerned a statement made by James many months after the alleged incident. James was removed from the defendant’s home on December 11, 1987. He related the details of the alleged assault to Constantine on July 27, 1988. The record indicates that he first related the incident to members of his foster family and a counselor around July 1, 1988. His statements to Constantine were made after James was seen by a social worker for DCFS, who had James “perform a play” of what occurred. In addition, the date of the alleged incident was extremely unclear. James testified that the incident took place in the summer, when his mother was “big” with his little brother, Chris. The record shows Chris was born on December 7, 1987. When James was interviewed by Constantine he stated that the incident occurred before the defendant met Ken Thompson. The record shows that Ken Thompson was the father of Chris. The absence of corroboration leads to the conclusion that the jury’s finding was based on speculation and should be reversed.