Based on nothing more than a child's note to a teacher, this man has had this hanging over his head for a year. I do agree with his attorneys comment: "The problem for him is that in a criminal trial, no one is ever found 'innocent,' but they are found 'not guilty.' The accusations will always be out there, and it's going to be difficult for him because of the stigma just from being accused."
If the standard is "Innocent until proven guilty", then it should be "innocent" not "not guilty." It is time the presumption of innocence meant that we really do presume innocence. The way things are, however, the attorney is correct: this will always be hanging over Mr. Russel's head.
Innocent of child sexual abuse
A Levy County man was found not guilty of the sex crimes filed against him in 2007 after a Levy County jury deliberated for about 40 minutes at the end of a two-day trial last week.
Dennis Harold Russell, 45, of the Bronson area, was charged in 2007 with lewd and lascivious behavior with a child under age 12 and participating in a sex act involving a child in custodial care.
The charges were made after the alleged victim wrote a note to a teacher making accusations against Russell.
Russell's attorney, Geoffrey R. Mason, said the jury believed the testimony given by Russell and other witnesses at the trial on Thursday.
"There was a lot of conflicting evidence and not much supporting evidence for her version of events," Mason said. "He testified this never happened, and she claimed it happened almost every day for nine years."
Mason said the alleged victim may have been motivated by her desire to distance Russell from her family, with whom he had a long-term relationship.
Russell had been serving as president of the Bronson Youth League and as Otter Creek's town clerk and chief of the Otter Creek volunteer fire department when the charges were made.
After he turned himself in on the charges in October 2007, Russell was removed or resigned from those positions.
Russell was initially held without bond at the Levy County Jail in Bronson but has been free on bond awaiting trial.
Shortly before being charged, Russell sold his tire businesses, said Mason of Gainesville, and has supported himself over the past two years with the proceeds of those sales.
"My advice to him (after the verdict) was to 'go be the person you were before these charges were filed,' " Mason said.
"The problem for him is that in a criminal trial, no one is ever found 'innocent,' but they are found 'not guilty.' The accusations will always be out there, and it's going to be difficult for him because of the stigma just from being accused."
Russell, who has continued to live in the Bronson area, could not be reached for comment on Monday.
Link:
http://www.ocala.com/article/20090901/ARTICLES/909011008/1402/NEWS?Title=Levy-County-man-found-not-guilty-in-2007-accusations-of-child-sexual-abuse
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
37 comments:
http://www.bostonherald.com/news/regional/view/20091001officer_cleared_of_sexual_assault/srvc=home&position=recent
Police: Largo woman in relationship triangle falsely claimed rape
http://www2.tbo.com/content/2009/oct/14/police-largo-woman-relationship-triangle-falsely-c/news-breaking/
Thanks anon(s) for the links. They are set to run.
Here's how it goes down when a child accuses.
http://www.paulstuckle.com
The Elimination of Constitutional Rights
Prosecutors and the child saving industry have convinced the legislature that merely creating hysteria is not enough to insure conviction for those accused. In addition, rights originally created in our constitution to protect the criminal defendants must be eliminated.
The Rules to Have Changed to Secure Convictions
All across our nation, state legislatures have supported child advocacy special interest groups. The following illustrates how constitutional rights have been taken away in child sexual assault trials:
No Right to Confront Your Accuser:
Criminal law codes have been rewritten to where in many cases, the child accuser does not have to appear in court and face the accused. Instead, the state can offer the child’s testimony through a video tape made by agents of the prosecution.
“Hearsay Evidence”:
Hearsay is defined as “a statement, other than one made by the declarant while testifying at the trial or hearing, offered in evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” (Tex. Rules. Evid. 803 (2)). In Layman’s terms, “Hearsay” evidence is when a witness testifies about something they do not personally know, but were told by someone else. Hearsay is considered unreliable and is normally inadmissible as evidence against an accused. In child abuse cases however, hearsay evidence is admitted as evidence of guilt. A so called “outcry” witness can testify as to what a child supposedly said to them regarding the alleged abuse.
“Syndrome Evidence” Is Admissible Against the Accused:
In most states, the prosecution can have an expert witness testify that the child is suffering from “Child Sexual Abuse Accommodation Syndrome”(CSAAS). This psychological “mumble jumble” is an unscientific theory of supposed traits of abused children. The psychologist who came up with this syndrome many years ago has since indicated that this theory is not reliable evidence in a court of law. Prosecutors do not care! This junk science makes its appearance in courtrooms across the country daily.
With Syndrome Evidence, the State Replaces Its Lack of Real Proof with Speculation.
CSAAS theorizes that because an alleged victim is supposedly demonstrating certain behavioral patterns that he/she must have actually been abused. Unfortunately, a big problem with this and other syndromes is that the character traits offered to show abuse are also common for non-abused children. If the child has been crying, he/she must have been abused. If the child has nightmares, he/she must have been abused. If the child is withdrawn, he/she must have been abused. If the child is outgoing, he/she must have been abused. If the child is happy around the accused, its because the child enjoyed the abuse. The list of factors goes on forever. But to a jury, when an expert witness is connecting typical childhood behavior with indicators of abuse, the testimony is extremely damaging to the falsely accused.
Convictions Without Physical Evidence:
Our prisons are full of persons who have been convicted of child molestation without any physical evidence ever introduced against them at trial. In other words, the typical evidence in which the state offers to convict a defendant, such as body fluids, blood, semen, hair, DNA, are not introduced at trial to link the accused to a crime.
Medical nurses and employees whose livelihoods depend upon their contracts with child advocacy centers will give opinions that a child was abused. Failure to give the right opinion will mean the contract is not renewed. These opinions from medical “experts” will say the findings are “consistent with” sexual abuse. Of course, “consistent with” is not a true medical diagnosis. This testimony, as demonstrated by a competent defense attorney will reveal the findings given as “consistent with abuse” are just as “inconsistent with abuse”.
Prosecutors Secure Convictions by Manipulating the Juries’ Fear of
Releasing a Child Molester Back Into the Community.
Instead of physical and medical evidence, the falsely accused are convicted upon theories, inferences, and speculation. Prosecutors secure convictions by manipulating the juries fear of releasing a child molester back into the community. This fear will be combined with hearsay, expert witness “syndrome evidence”, misleading medical testimony, and the biased opinions of child advocacy investigators.
To support this speculation, a biased child protective services caseworker will produce a video taped interview of the child. This biased interviewer will use leading, suggestive, and coached questions to easily obtain an “admission” from a child. Many times the child does not make a statement that abuse occurred, but merely agrees with the adult authority figure who informs the child of the abuse.
After an outcry, it is easy to find witnesses who can place the accused in circumstances in which he was alone with the alleged victim.
The system is not on your side.
I thought it is "not guilty" instead of "innocent" because you can be found "not guilty" but still be guilty as sin, just clever enough to hide your crime & evidence. And in the case of rape, aren't all of you obsessed with the "he said, she said" concept and insist that if it's not on videotape & witnessed (and notarized by the rapist), then it didn't happen? So lots o' men get off scot free, but are still guilty. Not "innocent", but not enough proof to convince a jury of guilt. Hence, "not guilty".
No, Jeana.
Wrong.
Again.
A defendant need not be found "innocent" because they've never lost that presumption of innocence from the outset.
Get it?
What are you doing here, anyway? A little early for Halloween, isn't it?
You are welcome Archivist.
It is almost always the same in any case where one or more children make accusations against one or more adults; "children do not lie or know how to lie", " why would a child ever lie about something like that or, know enough to lie about something like that". Children do learn how to lie and, learn how to lie about being abused sexually and otherwise.
SgtMom said...
" Convictions Without Physical "
and
" The system is not on your side. "
These are just two of the worst mistakes it has made. Those of us who love true justice, not the crap that passes for justice, are locked in costant struggle to destroy false justice and everything that it is and everything it causes. True justice shall prevail.
I remember what one of my fellow soldiers said; " Karma is a b*tch and she has puppies. "
""I remember what one of my fellow soldiers said; " Karma is a b*tch and she has puppies. ""
Oh. I like that.
Mind if I borrow?
One thing this article left out was rape shield protection.
In my case, the mother walked in on her 4 year old daughter with the 5 year old neighbor boy.
The mother's claim is he was raping her - she put the child sex abuse group therapy for the next several years.
Sex abuse group therapy is where sexually abused kids are brought together to talk about their sexual abuse experiences.
Five years later when she made her next accusation, this "sexual history" was all denied. "Inadmissible".
The therapist can't be required to testify or verify because of confidentiality laws.
"He MUST have done it! Children can't make things like that up!" "Children don't lie" prevailed.
I was barred from participating in his defense - it "retraumatized the victim" for me to have mentioned her past accusations.
I was the "mother in denial" for thinking if they lied in court denying the first abuse, they lied again with the second.
Child abuse accusations are custom made for those with 'Factitious disorder', or Munchausen's by Proxy.
Instead of life threatening medical conditions which can be investigated and records kept, accusations of child abuse are unquestioned, and unquestionable as truth.
The attention craving mother is surrounded by well meaning 'savers' who pour on sympathy and acceptance. 'Services' at the taxpayers expense beat hospital bills.
It's a perfect set up.
Axel,
So women not convicted of false rape accusations or of any crimes against men are "innocent", right? Then how come you people automatically assume they're guilty? Oh that's right; two different standards.
"Then how come you people automatically assume they're guilty? Oh that's right; two different standards."
They're not on trial for any crimes. They don't stand to lose 25 years of their lives if someone "gets it wrong".
Fool.
You're answering a different question. If a female is found "not guilty" or not charged with something, from what I read in this post, she would be "innocent". That's it.
jeana said...
You're answering a different question. If a female is found "not guilty" or not charged with something, from what I read in this post, she would be "innocent". That's it.
You are absolutely correct.
A woman not charged with a false accusation is 'innocent' of any wrong doing.
It doesn't mean she didn't do it - it just means making a false rape accusation is not a crime if she's 'disturbed'.
A woman can accuse time and time again - she's not a criminal, she's just 'disturbed'.
Her history of making accusations is rape shielded as well, so she is free to accuse with impunity.
There's nothing wrong with that.
Isn't Justice grand?
There is no comparison between rape accusations and charges of having made false rape accusations. The former is usually based on nothing more than a story, while the latter always at least involves contradictory statements and other hard evidence.
It therefore makes far more sense to presume that the rape defendent is innocent. There is no need to pretend that women who have been busted for lying about rape are anything but guilty.
How often do falsely accused men bring charges, or attempt to bring charges, against their accusers?
Or are they even allowed to?
Did the 4 accused in the Hofstra case choose not to bring charges, or were they denied the opportunity?
Are they supposed to be so 'grateful' they aren't spending the rest of their young lives in prison they choose not to pursue?
Are they expected to be 'sportsman' and not further disturb the poor disturbed girl?
Are they shamed into not pursuing because they participated in such a distasteful act? Or made to fear further legal repercussions for recording the event?
Anyone know how this works, exactly?
(Crickets chirp)
SgtMom,
I bet you are the only one here who would say that a woman not charged or convicted of a false rape accusation is “innocent”. Although I’d still say “not guilty.”
I highly doubt, though, that a woman’s false rape accusation can NOT be held against her. In that other thread about the football player, that information sure wasn’t shielded. I think people are confused about what can and cannot be shielded. Accused men can use anything about the female’s past they desire. Anything. As long as they know about it, they can use it. And the courts help them by giving them access to every piece of info about the female.
Isn’t that the little game that lawyers play? They’ll mention something in court that they aren’t supposed to and then say they withdraw the question. The jury still hears it and it prejudices them. I know. I’ve seen “Matlock”. Or was it “Law and Order”?
Bullshit. America is 99% made up of feminists and Uncle Tom men who can't wait to support a false rape accuser. There is NO stigma attached to false rape accusations. If there was then why isn't Crystal Mangum in prison? But she not only got out of the prison time she so richly deserves, but also got a free ride through college as a reward for her crimes!
Now she has a criminal justice degree!
So she has a Criminal Justice degree, eh. She also wrote a book. Anybody read it?
The NC attorney general declared the trio "innocent". That declaration is much more than merely saying they're "not guilty". Plus they had a lot of money to back them up.
Okay, so they're innocent. THEN WHAT HAPPENED IN THEIR OFF CAMPUS HOUSE THAT NIGHT? I'm just curious.
?
No matter how exonerated a defendent in a false rape case is, there is always a lying piece of shit like Atom there to continue smearing him for the rest of his life. This is why false accusations are among the worst crimes imaginable.
You owe those boys an apology.
@7:54, in otherwords, you cannot answer my question.
"THEN WHAT HAPPENED IN THEIR OFF CAMPUS HOUSE THAT NIGHT?"
It wasn't rape.
Jeana has misstated the rape shield laws. Of course. Pierce has written about them often on this site.
Jeana knows the rape shield laws. Her point was how a defense attorney can "accidently" prejudice the jury. Happens all the time, and it's a major reason why rape victims recant.
And a recant does not equal a false accusation.
Fuck off, liar.
Why do we have to put up with these cunts? Do we really need to discuss "a recantation is not a false accusation!"? Isn't this blog supposed to be for the victims of false accusations, not for feminist idiots?
They have the rest of the world to enable their bullshit, so can't we have an environment where we don't have to listen to the same preschool level arguments in favor of false accusations?
No, Jeana doesn't "know the rape shield laws." Jeana is a dumb bitch just like you who flaps her ass cheeks when she should be firing neurons. I for one am tired of you even being here, and am getting to the point where I'm just not going to participate any more. There is no reason for these idiot women to even have a seat at the table here.
Don't the rape shield laws keep changing?
jeana said...
SgtMom,
I bet you are the only one here who would say that a woman not charged or convicted of a false rape accusation is “innocent”. Although I’d still say “not guilty.”
__________-------
You say tomato, I say tomahto.
What's the difference? The damage is done.
A video tape of the 'victim' directing traffic and enjoying herself translates: 'innocent' if the DA chooses not to 'chill' others from coming forward by not charging the "disturbed victim"?
Being caught with your pants down and admitting your lied isn't really 'recanting'?
Why does 'innocent' or 'not guilty' matter when you got away with it?
Every once in awhile some million dollar defendant slips in some 'history' and truth?
Horrors!!!
Rest assured - what justice most accused can afford, your past history, false accusations and secrets are safe.
Justice ain't cheap.
Kobe Bryant. William Kennedy Smith. The $5 Million $ Duke LaCosse defense - that's playing the big leagues.
If you don't accuse in that league you have nothing to fear.
If you DO accuse in that league, the pay off can be pretty impressive - so what if the world knows you accused before and had 5 sperm samples in your stale panties?
Your'e only "embarrassed" all the way to the bank.
Anonymous said...
""There is no reason for these idiot women to even have a seat at the table here.""
Tell that to THIS "idiot" woman.
Looking for a new trial to overturn a mother's rape conviction
July 16, 2009 5:34 PM
CALHOUN COUNTY, Mich. (NEWSCHANNEL 3) – Thursday saw day two of a hearing that could result in a new trial for a mother convicted of rape.
In 2001, a jury convicted Lorinda Swain of molesting her eight-year-old son.
Now, the University of Michigan Innocence Project has come to her defense, saying that she was convicted based on false testimony.
Several witnesses came forward at the first hearing in June to testify in Swain's defense. Among them was Swain's original accuser, her adopted son, Ronald Swain. He testified that he made the entire story up and that he's sorry for what his mother has gone through.
"I was going to apologize, I was going to tell her I'm sorry for what I've done," said Ronald, "she already told me she forgives me, but it's not enough, but I'm deeply, very sorry for what I did."
Swain's appeal team lined up a host of witnesses to debunk any evidence that Swain is guilty of sexual abuse.
*******************************
The prosecution wants Swain's original conviction to stand, despite the fact that the alleged victim has recanted.
********************************
Innocent women have been falsely accused just as innocent men have.
Does your mother not speak up in your defense? Is she an "idiot woman" who has "no seat" in this discussion?
My son has a great many "idiot" women who grieve over this, suffer for him, and share the social stigma of association. Mother. Grandmother. Aunts, sister, and devoted girlfriend. His burden is our burden. None of us free until he is freed.
It's not about gender - it's about justice.
Remember everyone, children never lie about such things.
""There is no reason for these idiot women to even have a seat at the table here.""
Tell that to THIS "idiot" woman.
Okay! I'll repeat it. Note that I am now speaking to YOU, "This idiot woman."
These idiot women shouldn't even have a seat at the table here.
There! I repeated it. Now please entertain me some more with stories about your imaginary falsely accused son and raped daughter, who exist solely to make you the center of attention.
Also please post more BS "documentation" related to his trial.
Post a Comment