Court Opinion

ID: 9884308
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-10-06 02:52:11.868897+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:48:37.608757
License: Public Domain

MR. JUSTICE SCHAEFER, dissenting: In order to find the defendant guilty of any of the offenses with which he was charged, it is necessary to believe beyond a reasonable doubt that early on a July morning when it “was not really dark outside,” but was “starting to get light,” the defendant used a small ladder to climb through a window into the home of a neighboring family, all of whose members knew him, and that once inside he walked through the house, moved the father’s trousers from the dining room to the kitchen where he threw them on the floor; that he then went into the children’s bedroom where he remained for ten minutes and performed the sexual acts upon Nancy while Cindy sat up in the same bunk bed and watched, and that when he left he stole the father’s watch and electric razor, as well as money from the wallets of both the father and the mother. The story is inherently improbable, and its improbability is underscored by the existence of serious contradictions in the testimony of the prosecution’s witnesses. Nancy testified that the defendant had never “done anything to her before,” and that on the occasions when he had served as baby sitter for her and her brother and sisters, he had watched television while they were in bed. She was then asked about the defendant’s brother, Robert: “Q. Has Robert ever done anything to you? A. Yes. Q. What did Robert do to you? A. Well, I went to call them and then the girls weren’t home, they went to the show. And he was home, and his sister, Sue, was down in the basement with her girlfriend. And he had a hold of my stretch pants between my legs. And he says ‘Why are you covering your legs?’ And I said, T have a cold.’ And he said ‘Let me see your peach,’ and I says no. Then he said, ‘Can I feel it?’ I said no. And then he did.” Nancy testified that she told her mother what Robert had done to her. But her mother denied that she had done so. Nancy testified that after the defendant left, “I just hollered ‘Cindy come down by my side and sleep with me.’ She said all right, and she did. We fell asleep.” But Cindy testified that she did not go back to sleep. And in response to the question, “Did Nancy go back to sleep,” she answered: “No. She said, ‘Stay up, Cindy, because there might be somebody in the house.’ ” When Nancy was asked, “**'* have you ever talked to your mother about what you were going to say here in court?,” she answered, “Not all the time.” “Q. About how many times would you say you have talked to her? A. Ten.” Nancy’s mother was asked, “Did you ever talk to them about what their testimony would be in court?” She answered: “No, I did not. I did let’s say ask them once or twice shortly after it happened, to see if they would come up with the right thing again, and they did not change their story.” “Q. To see if they would come up with the right story? A. If they were coming up with the right thing. Q. Now, did you talk to Nancy about ten times about what her testimony would be here in court? A. No. I wouldn’t say I did. It has been revealed [sic] [reviewed? - repeated?] in front of her. But as far as talking to her on it, no.” Even without considering the testimony of the defendant’s employer and the members of the defendant’s family, I am not satisfied that the defendant was proved guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of any offense.