Hi, How Can We Help You?

Blog

State v. Mr. P (DMC No. 13467)

FELONY CHILD MOLESTATION (DCAC) NOT CHARGED – State v. Mr. P (DMC No. 13467) (Gilbert Police Department DR No. 2013-XXXXXXXXX): Mr. P was going through a particularly nasty divorce with his soon to be ex wife, and he was granted full custody of his 6 year old daughter under Temporary Orders. His daughter suffered from ADHD and was on the Autism spectrum. The mother had also been alienating the child from the father by talking badly about him.

Mother had contacted CPS and they had come and interviewed the child at school. Since that time, the child had been wetting her pants, touching her vagina and stating “it hurts”. After one of these incidents, the school nurse contacted CPS. The very next day, the child told her lunch teacher that her vagina hurt, and when asked why, she stated “my dad pushed inside too hard with a hammer”. Police were immediately called.

After the Police Officer received the initial information, he contacted a Detective to take over the investigation regarding potential Child Molestation a Dangerous Crime Against Children, charges per Arizona Revised Statute ARS 13-1410, and to work with CPS. It was then learned that the prior CPS contact was regarding allegations that Mr. P and his girlfriend would walk around in front of the child naked and have her sleep in their bed naked with them. These allegations were brought forth by the mother.

The child was then interviewed at Child Help by a forensic interviewer. The child indicated that her dad had touched her crotch with a hammer inside of her panties. A physical examination was then conducted by the Doctor which did not reveal evidence of acute or healing injury. She also put in her report that “this does not preclude the possibility of sexual abuse, as most sexual abuse cases are not associated with physical abuse”. As the Detective was heading to the Police station to meet with and interview Mr. P, he called in and stated that he was going to consult an Attorney first.

The next day Mr. P retained our services. After that, our Pre Charge team met and we put together our strategy to (1) contact the Detective in order to buy some time to gather all the facts and leave the door open for a “free talk”, (2) conduct a polygraph on Mr. P, (3) gather and review his divorce records and information showing that his wife was coaching the child and, (4) obtain an Affidavit from the paternal grandmother regarding information that the child had made up the allegation.

We then called the Detective and indicated we would be in contact later with a potential interview of Mr. P. We did obtain an Affidavit from the grandmother in which she stated that the child told her “while at her mother’s house, a 5 year old friend hit her on the vagina with a hammer”, and that she had “made a mistake but nobody would listen to her”. In addition, we had Mr. P submit to a polygraph test which showed that he had not committed any crime against his daughter. We then forwarded all of this evidence to the Detective. She prepared a supplement in which she detailed the polygraph results and the Affidavit that we sent her. She finalized her report by stating “this case is being inactivated, due to the lack of evidence or independent witnesses to substantiate the allegation of molestation of a child”.

Call Now Button