NOT CHARGED | SEXUAL CONDUCT with a MINOR NOT CHARGED – State v. Ms. G. (DMC No. 9436) (Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office Investigated): Ms. G. was 27 years old and had dated a 37 year old man who had a 17 year old son. After they had broken up, her ex boyfriend accused her of sleeping with his 17 year old son. He stated that he had called the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office and they were now investigating her and for Sexual Conduct with a Minor under Arizona Revised Statute 13-1405. We then contacted the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office and indicated that we represented Ms. G. and that she would not be answering any questions as to whether had or had not slept with the 17 year old. Ultimately, no charges were brought against Ms. G.

NOT CHARGED | CHILD MOLESTATION (DCAC) – State v. Mr. K. (DMC No. 9395) (CPS Investigated): Mr. K. acted as a mentor for special needs kids who lived in a group home. He mentored a young man who was 14 years of age who was being vetted during the adoption process. The couple who was trying to adopt the child were denied the adoption and made allegations that Mr. K. been molesting the child. CPS became involved and were ascertaining whether charges should be forwarded regarding Child Molestation as a Dangerous Crime Against Children under ARS 13-1410. We had Mr. K. take a polygraph test, in which he passed showing there was no molestation. In addition, we had CPS interview the child directly. The child stated that Mr. K. had never molested him, however the child stated he was molested when he was 5 years of age by somebody different. Ultimately, no charges were ever brought against Mr. K. and he was allowed to continue as a mentor to at risk youth.

NOT CHARGED | 2 COUNTS of SEXUAL CONDUCT with a MINOR – State v. Ms. K. (DMC No. 9376) (Phoenix Police Department Investigated): Ms. K. was a 37 year old high school teacher at Fairfax High School in Phoenix Union School District. She had engaged in inappropriate communications on Myspace with two of her students (age 17 and 16). She had also shared a cigarette with the students but had done nothing else. The students then claimed that they had sex with their teacher, and the Phoenix Police Department began investigating. They were looking into charging Ms. K. with 2 counts of Sexual Conduct with a Minor pursuant to ARS 13-1405. We were able to explain to the detectives that this was the fantasies of two students, and that there was no physical evidence or truth to the statements. Although Ms. K. was initially facing incarceration and the loss of her teaching certificate, no charges were brought against her.

NOT CHARGED | SEXUAL CONDUCT with a MINOR – State v. Mr. B. (DMC No. 8228) (Yavapai County Sheriff’s Office Investigated): Mr. B. his cousin and his cousin’s friends were all driving to Prescott when they pulled up next to a girl’s car while driving. She exchanged phone numbers with them and they invited her to their party. She went home, got a friend and went to the party to meet the men. She was 16, yet told them she was 19. Mr. B. was 20 years old and he engaged in consensual sex with the young lady. She then engaged in sexual conduct with other men at the party, and Mr. B. became upset and called her various names and left the party. Her friend then took the young lady to the police station and claimed she had been sexually assaulted. The Yavapai County Sheriff’s Office then began investigating Mr. B. for Sexual Conduct with a Minor pursuant to ARS 13-1405. During the investigation, the young lady admitted that his part was consensual and that she told him she was over the age of 18. Based upon those factors, we convinced the Yavapai County Attorney’s Office to not bring charges against Mr. B. They, however, were still investigating the other men for possible charges of Sexual Assault.

NOT CHARGED | CHILD MOLESTATION (DCAC) NOT CHARGED – State v. Mr. S. (DMC No. 9381) (Phoenix Police Department/CPS Investigated): Mr. S. was a 17 year old who was accused of having sexual contact with his then 13 year old sister. Approximately a year and a half after the alleged incident, the sister began having counseling for depression. She told the counselor about the alleged sexual incidents and the Phoenix Police Department and CPS were immediately contacted. An investigation for Child Molestation as a Dangerous Crimes Against Children (DCAC) under Arizona Revised Statute 13-1410 was then started.

We became involved and we had Mr. S. take a Psychosexual Risk Evaluation, and enter counseling. We also invoked his rights to remain silent, and no statements were provided by Mr. S. Because there was no physical evidence, along with a lack of confession and the fact that Mr. S. was seeking treatment no charges were brought against him. This was the family and the alleged victim’s wishes.

NOT CHARGED | CHILD MOLESTATION (DCAC) – State v. Mr. Z. (DMC No. 9652) (Pinal County Sherriff’s Office Investigated): Mr. Z. had been married and had two young children who he is raising as a widower. Both children were under the age of 12, and his deceased wife’s parents were trying to gain legal custody of the two children. They began making accusations that Mr. Z. (a Doctor who was an African National) had been molesting the children. Mr. Z. took and passed a polygraph (under our direction), and this was forwarded to the Pinal County Sheriff’s Officer who was in charge.

She still forwarded her report to the Pinal County Attorney’s Office, and we met with them and provided evidence which prevented charges from being filed for Child Molestation as a Dangerous Crime Against Children (DCAC) under ARS 13-1410. If Mr. Z. would have been charged he would have been incarcerated without bond and would have immediately been suspended from practicing medicine. In addition, if he were convicted he would have spent a minimum of 10 years in prison per allegation (i.e. 20 years plus) and his life would have been ruined.

NOT CHARGED | CHILD MOLESTATION (DCAC) | State v. Mr. B. (DMC No. 9680) (Surprise Police Department and CPS Investigated): Mr. B. had gone through a very nasty divorce with his wife, and he had primary custody of their 5 year old daughter. Mr. S. had filed a Petition for Review regarding child support, arrearages and also wanted to modify sole custody. The wife then retaliated by claiming that Mr. B. was molesting the daughter. We had Mr. B. take a polygraph test in which passed with flying colors, and then we then contacted the Surprise Police Department Detective to inform her that these allegations appeared manufactured. As to the CPS investigator, that proved to be a little more difficult. The children were interviewed separately and Mr. B. was also interviewed without the presence of an Attorney (at their request). Due to the fact that these were false allegations, he spoke with CPS and then we followed up with our information thereby stopping all charges from being filed. Mr. B. was also allowed to keep his children. Because his ex wife wanted him charged for Child Molestation, a Dangerous Crimes Against Children (DCAC) per Arizona Revised Statute 13-1410, he could have been facing a minimum of 10 years in prison if he was charged and convicted.

NOT CHARGED | 6 COUNTS of SEXUAL CONDUCT with a MINOR – State v. Mr. W. (DMC No. 9684) (Phoenix Police Department Investigated): Mr. W. was a 21 year old man who was dating his 17 year old girlfriend for several months. After he broke up with his girlfriend, she became upset and went to her mother and told her that the two of them had been sleeping together. She then called the Police in order to have Mr. W. charged with 6 counts of Sexual Conduct with a Minor, under ARS 13-1405. Because there was no physical evidence and we invoked Mr. W.’s rights to remain to silent to the Police, the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office declined to file charges against Mr. W. If he would have been charged and convicted it is possible that he would have to have done prison time and his future employment chances would have been greatly diminished.