[Devastated]

I apologize for the extremely long post but details are necessary. I would like an honest, legal opinion as to what you think might have gone wrong. My attorney is stunned and devasted by the verdict, me too, and says he can't make sense of it. Maybe someone here can...

In April 2006, non-residing 17-year-old stepdaughter (no stranger to the police or judicial system for her violent past) came for a visit and started a verbal confrontation with her mother and I. I asked her to leave; she refused and threw expletives my way for several minutes. When asked to leave again, she refused and pushed me down. When I stood up, she pushed me again. I got up and moved toward her at which time her mother (my wife) grabbed her and physically removed her from the room. I told her to get the (expletive) out of my house but she refused and kept shouting expletives. She then attempted to provoke me into striking her saying, "Come on. Come on (expletive), hit me you (expletive) coward. Hit me and I'll send your ass to jail."

Wife and I both called the police. They arrived 20 minutes later, separate us all then took our statements. They examined her and found nothing. She stated that I slapped her but her mother (interviewed by another officer outside of the house) stated that I didn't slap or hit anyone and that she (stepdaughter) push me twice. My wifes' statement and mine were identical, hers' was not. The officers told her to leave the property immediately, which she did. The officers spoke with me and my wife for a few more minutes, then left. Total time elapsed was 45 minutes.

2 days later, she went back to the police station with a fat lip, a bruised eye and a bruise on her cheek. She told the officer (who was one of the original responding officers) that she wanted to change her report. When asked why, she told him they didn't give her enough time to make a statement. She said the she "now remembered" that I punched her 3 times causing the injuries. The officer responded to her (and on the report) that her story had changed and that the bruises on her face were not there nor was there ANY evidence that she had been hit (no swelling, no redness, no bleeding, etc.) the night of the incident; both officers attested to that. They took pictures, made notations and that was that.

3 weeks later charged with Misdemeanor Domestic Violence. I declined 3 plea deals as I don't plead guilty to something I didn't do. August 4, 2006 we went to trial. Prosecuting Attorney admitted into evidence a photo that was taken by her father two days AFTER the incident a few hours prior to "changing her story" to the police. We objected but the judge overruled and allowed the photo into evidence. The two responding officers, my wife and my testimony was honest, truthful and straightforward and all matched. Wife indicated that she (wife) was there the entire time and I did nothing but tell her to get out and that the injuries were not present at the time of the reported incident (also noted on the police report which was part of our evidence), and that she returned 2 days later with the bruises and a completely different story. All PA had was the pictures and her spotty testimony. His closing argument was "A picture paints a thousand words" and "Pictures don't lie."

25 minute deliberation and the verdict: GUILTY of misdemeanor Domestic Violence! The judge closed his eyes, lowered and shook his head in disbelief. He took a long pause, dismissed the jury then gave me one year probation. They asked for jail time and a no contact order for the stepdaughter but the judge refused both saying that she would have to say away from my house as long as I chose and that she'd have to find another place to visit her mother.

We filed appeal on discovery rules in cases of misdemeanors vs. felonies. However, the day of the appellate hearing, we all (including prosecuting attorney) discovered a US Supreme Court ruling (US Supreme Court v. Green) a month prior indicating that, in misdemeanor cases, neither party has to disclose any evidence prior to court proceedings. Appeal shot down and judge refused to take my sentence under advisement; he reserves that for pre-trial plea deals only.

I'm a 49 year old professional with an absolutely spotless record, minus a traffic ticket 23 years ago. I thought my counsel was effective but something went terribly wrong. Do any of you have an expert opinion as to what might have gone wrong? Thank you for your time and again I apologize for the long post. I'm just trying to make sense of this all.

[Litigator]

It is hard to say without having been at the trial itself but oftentimes these cases come down to credibility determinations for a jury to make. Evidently, they found the accuser's version credible in the face of conflicting testimony such that they were convinced of your guilt. To whatever degree there may have been corroboration of her testimony may have influenced the jury as well. Typically injuries and photos of injuries of accusers in DV cases help the prosecution's case and serve to corroborate the accuser's testimony unless explained away to the satisfaction of the jury. A trial is always a gamble no matter how good a case you present--a case does not always turn out the way you hope it will even though your attorney may have done an excellent job.