Hi, How Can We Help You?


State v. Mr. T (DMC No. 14012)

FELONY SEXUAL CONDUCT with A MINOR (DCAC) NOT CHARGED – State v. Mr. T (DMC No. 14012) (Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office DR No. 13-XXXXXX): Mr. T was accused of having sexual intercourse with his 12 year old adoptive sister, a felony Sexual Conduct with a minor (Dangerous Crime Against Children) per Arizona Revised Statute ARS 13-1405. At the time of the allegations Mr. T was 15 years old. Allegations came to light when the victim disclosed to a school friend that her brother “put his private parts in her private parts.” The school counselor was informed and a report was immediately made to Child Protective Services. Child Protective Services then informed the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Department. There was never an interview of our client, however there was a very problematic recorded conversation in which our client’s mother was crying and she claimed that our client admitted to molesting the 12-year-old victim. She said that was why our client moved out of state.

We were retained on the case and immediately advised the investigating Detective of our representation. Our Pre-Charge team began working on the case to develop a strategy to prevent prosecution. Among other things, we explored the possibility of a Psychosexual Risk Evaluation and a polygraph. Those tools are not appropriate in every case and in this case we determined that those would not be appropriate due to our clients age and mental state. Our investigation showed that the complaining alleged victim had been adopted into this family because of substantial abuse she had received from her biological family. This abuse included sexual abuse and exposure to sexual behavior. One of the tragic consequences of that exposure was the hyper-sexual behavior of this little girl. Unfortunately, the victim had been so sexualized that she continually acted out in very sexual ways. This included openly masturbating herself while in public. Our client’s parents had attempted to stop this behavior unsuccessfully. Our quick involvement and investigation in this matter produced information showing that prosecution was unlikely to be successful. Among other factors that had to be considered, was the tragic reality that this previously abused, hyper- sexualized 12-year-old, attempted to initiate sexual contact with our client who was also a juvenile. The slightly older juvenile, our client, was not involved at all.

We pointed out some of these factors in a letter provided to the investigating Detective. This letter was provided specifically to request the information be provided to the grand jury should one be impaneled. The case was “turned down” and the final report from the investigating Detective stated “the Maricopa County Attorney Juvenile Crimes Division declined filing charges in this case stating there is no reasonable likelihood of conviction because of practical and/or legal impediments. The mother retained an attorney in this case.”

Call Now Button