12 Years for First Offense Lewd Act on Minor

[completelyshatterred]

My question involves criminal law for the state of: south carolina

My husband was convicted after three years of time extensions for the prosecution who never had any evidence, of lewd act on a minor. His ex-wife's schizophrenic little sister accused him of touching her when the big sister he was married to and he started having problems and the subject of divorce came up. There are no children of this marriage for anyone to program to accuse him of something. There was never one piece of evidence, he lost his job immediately when they found out about the charge, every time there was a court date the solicitor's office would say they had no evidence and could they pretty please have more time to try to find some. Sure no problem, the judge would reply, while my husband (now, not at the time of course) was sitting on his laurels at home pissed off and helpless. Lost his house and car had to live with relatives, the whole deal. The child was diagnosed shizophrenic at a public mental health facility in the area, but for some reason her recall of the incident is not in question. My husband's defense attorney inherited the case from the second lawyer in his partnership who died during the course of waiting to go to trial for this, and would have had to return my husband's money if he turned the case down, so took it, in name only as it turns out, and never ordered expert witnesses, mental health witnesses, anything. The girl also went all out there since she was getting so much attention and looking so pious and holy while my husband looked like a greasy creep out of nowhere all of a sudden, and said, you know what, he did it to two other girls in the family, too. Both of whom said uh.... no he didn't. One said it in writing, the other broke down under questioning by a detective and admitted the girl had pressured her into lying to help her get my husband. Once again, the defense attorny failed by not introducing the detective's report for the second girl because HE thought the girl MIGHT chicken out in court with the girl watching her and recant the recantation. My husband never had anything but a traffic ticket before t his, always worked to support the endlessly gluttonous needs of wretched bovine he was married to at the time, and doesn't have a clue why this happened except for the obvious that this is revenge for wanting to divorce the controlling heifer who tricked him into marrying her. The judge, who it is rumored extensively is a friend of the father of the accuser and the ex wife, sat on this for three and a half years and just allowed extension after extension, and sometimes just didn't call the case at all even when everyone was ready to go, saying later that he didn't have to and that was all there was to it. Finally an "administrative judge" was given the case and came out of retirement (is this a common practice, do they work per diem or something afterr retirement?), and by this time he was in California visiting me and the baby girl whose birth he missed to be a good little citizen and wait around for a court date that we knew was a sham anyway. Anyhoo, the lawyer had given him permission to leave the state and come live with me and the baby for a while, and as soon as the prosecutor found out he was gone the case is suddenly, mysteriously, a top priority to try. So when we're informed that the real trial is actually coming, and soon, we told the lawyer to ask for an extension so we could get the money to send him back, the lawyer said he asked the solicitor and not surprisingly it was not granted. So he was tried and convicted, again with NO EVIDENCE, when not even there, and sentenced to 12 years for a first offense lewd act. I have heard of men accused of multiple accounts of CSC getting five years, what the hell is the deal and is this grounds for protesting the judge, and how does this sound for appeal? South Carolina is one of the states in which an appeal can be granted for innefective counsel if it is so found.

Am I the only one who finds this sentence fishy? When he was transported back and heard his sentence, he appealed to the judge for a reasonalbe sentence based on his previous good standing in community, lack of legal trouble before, and strong desire to provide for his daughter and keep an intact family.

[Dogmatique]

You both need counseling, and he needs an attorney.


Period.

[completelyshatterred]

Why do I need counseling? Yes, I'm aware of the need for a lawyer and I'm getting the funds together for that. In the meantime I was looking for a little more dialog than, "You need a lawyer." What do you think of the facts that took place that I briefly highlighted in this post?

Period? Really? That's the end of it? There's no more to it than that? What was the thought process that led to the conclusion? Could you share, please, I was hoping for an exchange of some type. I don't need to be "fixed" it is quite normal to be outraged at this horrendous situation. I don't need a counselor to try to anaesthetize me or give me "coping" skills, I want to know if someone has some insight or personal experiences to share? Thank you.

I'm not going to bend over passively and let the "officials who know what they're doing" handle it. Is it not advisable to be part of one's own problem-solving process and take an active role, rather than just being apathetic and assuming the system will work for you when it has proved that it has it's own best interests in mind, not yours?

[Dogmatique]

Why do I need counseling? Yes, I'm aware of the need for a lawyer and I'm getting the funds together for that. In the meantime I was looking for a little more dialog than, "You need a lawyer." What do you think of the facts that took place that I briefly highlighted in this post?

Hon, listen. Your case is complex and requires far more expertise and dialog that can be obtained from a public forum such as this.

You feel a grave injustice has occurred, even though your husband was given a trial date but didn't turn up. That was his major downfall. He was not convicted on a child's statement, really, but was convicted by his failure to defend himself against the charges.

You need counseling to help you deal with this, regardless of your husband's guilt or innocence.

Good luck.

[completelyshatterred]

I appreciate your concern over my well-being, it's just that I can always deal with that later, I'ma hands-on person who isn't content to let others take charge, and I'm also not looking to hold anyone liable for "legal advice.": I understand that this site is not responsible in any way. I was looking more for... I don't know, something like maybe someone was familiar with or heard of a case somewhere in which ineffective counsel was used and an appeal granted, or, hmm I don't know just some other tidbit that I could research, you know along those lines. I don't consider this a done deal yet, and I'm prioritizing and my desire to understand this case and analyze the possibilities inside and out is my priority right now, I just have that type of personality. You know, when the storm's completely over I can evaluate the damage, right now I'm still in the eye and I don't want a prime opportunity to think about something in a new light or learn some legal detail that someone else has experience with but I don't, pass me by. I'm sure a lawyer will do as much as he sees fit to do but I don't exactly trust them very much now, this is my family not the potential new lawyer's, and I'm the one with a vested interest in making sure every possible detail is covered. Thank you for your time in looking at this. My need of counseling may be valid but it's not gonna shed any light on the possibility of appeal.

[cyjeff]

You are a third and biased party who wasn't there for ANY of the previous trials, discussions or, even, the incident.

You are basing your entire indignation on the facts as your husband has laid them out to you...

Wait, maybe I am overstepping... maybe you HAVE read the previous court transcripts and police reports of the incident in question. Maybe you have already realized that it is possible to be both mentally ill and raped. Maybe you have already thought, "Maybe there is another side to this that I am not hearing."

Until you can give the other side, the advice "get a lawyer that CAN get the court transcripts and CAN access the police reports and analyze them for legal irregularities" is the best we can do.

[completelyshatterred]

I did send for the trial transcript, indictment, etc... as they are public record. I have read them and am in possession of them. Thank you for asking. I also knew him before this happened and know people involved so I'm not as clueless as you are trying to portray me.

I am aware that it is POSSIBLE to be mentally ill and raped; however, A: The charge was not rape so that is irrelevant, and B: Just because it is possible doesn't mean that is the case here and there are many details that must be weighed against each other. Making a sweeping generalization designed to insinuate that I am dismissing the claim because of her mental impairment shows that you are not considering this matter thoughtfully but snapping at me because you see everything as black and white ("only bad people say that an abuse charge is false because the accuser is mentall ill - I will now discredit everything else you said based on my misunderstanding of your comment") it could be an effective tactic if it weren't challenged. But, I must challenge it because I did not say that her accusation is patently false simply because she's mentally ill, I implied that it is unethical to not question the validity of a claim of physical touching from a person who suffers an impairment THAT CAUSES THEM TO HALLUCINATE THAT THEY HAVE BEEN TOUCHED WHEN THEY HAVE NOT, AND THAT RENDERS THEM UNABLE TO DISTINGUISH FANTASY OR HALLUCINATION FROM REALITY, AND THAT LEAVES THEM EXTREMELY SUSCEPTIBLE TO SUGGESTION. In a case where a man and a family's entire well-being are at stake and a lot of people's lives are going to be irreversibly damaged by a guilty verdict, and HELLO the burden of proof is on the accuser to produce evidence beyond a reasonable doubt, it is entirely rash to not question the testimony. I didn't say the girl had to be regarded in a malicious manner that might hurt her when it's not her fault she's mentally ill; I do say that with such high stakes and so much on the line, the word alone of someone who has been certified from a mental health facility as unable to distinguish fantasy from reality and prone to tactile hallucinations should be challenged at least a little bit! The girl is not the only person here whose feelings should be considered. It's supposed to be innocent until proven guilty and and a huge amount of damage was done by allowing faulty, unreliable testimony to "prove" guilt. And no, once again, there was NO evidence. The girl had been acting out at school, was in constant trouble, was known to make things up, and came out with this when she was in the counselor's office for being in trouble again at school. She sure got out of trouble real quick when it was decided she was a victim, which is what the counselor was aiming at when she kept asking questions leading the girl to say that there was some "outside factor" causing the school problems, rather than the good old-fashioned fact that the girl was a troublemaker on the one hand, and mentally impaired on the other.

So, why are you attacking me with insinuations that I'm ignorant of the facts, etc...? I get the feeling for some reason you have been biased against me from the beginning... perhaps mental illness is a pet cause of yours. I'm sorry the girl has problems but she's brought it into my house now and she is not entitled to wreck my home and my life because it's not politically correct to say that a mentally impaired person's statements should be checked for the simple reason that they're mentally impaired and it might not be the accurate truth. When so much hangs in the balance? Come on you can't seriously be that black and white about it. Do we just let them go around and say whatever they want without determining if the nature of their illness or disability might make their statement questionable? I"m not saying, like you seem to think, that her testimony should be outright discarded based on that but I am saying it is compromised and testimony of her psychiatrist as to veracity of what she says as well as information for the jury about the details of her mental illness and how it could affect the objective reality of her statements should have been introduced for the jury to consider, it is only right. Why should an innocent man be hung high because everyone's too scared and PC to question the reality of the statement of a person who has problems understanding reality?

Sommmmethinggg tells me I'm in the midst of some prosecutors...

[Dogmatique]

I did send for the trial transcript, indictment, etc... as they are public record. I have read them and am in possession of them. Thank you for asking. I also knew him before this happened and know people involved so I'm not as clueless as you are trying to portray me.

I am aware that it is POSSIBLE to be mentally ill and raped; however, A: The charge was not rape so that is irrelevant, and B: Just because it is possible doesn't mean that is the case here and there are many details that must be weighed against each other. Making a sweeping generalization designed to insinuate that I am dismissing the claim because of her mental impairment shows that you are not considering this matter thoughtfully but snapping at me because you see everything as black and white ("only bad people say that an abuse charge is false because the accuser is mentall ill - I will now discredit everything else you said based on my misunderstanding of your comment") it could be an effective tactic if it weren't challenged. But, I must challenge it because I did not say that her accusation is patently false simply because she's mentally ill, I implied that it is unethical to not question the validity of a claim of physical touching from a person who suffers an impairment THAT CAUSES THEM TO HALLUCINATE THAT THEY HAVE BEEN TOUCHED WHEN THEY HAVE NOT, AND THAT RENDERS THEM UNABLE TO DISTINGUISH FANTASY OR HALLUCINATION FROM REALITY, AND THAT LEAVES THEM EXTREMELY SUSCEPTIBLE TO SUGGESTION. In a case where a man and a family's entire well-being are at stake and a lot of people's lives are going to be irreversibly damaged by a guilty verdict, and HELLO the burden of proof is on the accuser to produce evidence beyond a reasonable doubt, it is entirely rash to not question the testimony. I didn't say the girl had to be regarded in a malicious manner that might hurt her when it's not her fault she's mentally ill; I do say that with such high stakes and so much on the line, the word alone of someone who has been certified from a mental health facility as unable to distinguish fantasy from reality and prone to tactile hallucinations should be challenged at least a little bit! The girl is not the only person here whose feelings should be considered. It's supposed to be innocent until proven guilty and and a huge amount of damage was done by allowing faulty, unreliable testimony to "prove" guilt. And no, once again, there was NO evidence. The girl had been acting out at school, was in constant trouble, was known to make things up, and came out with this when she was in the counselor's office for being in trouble again at school. She sure got out of trouble real quick when it was decided she was a victim, which is what the counselor was aiming at when she kept asking questions leading the girl to say that there was some "outside factor" causing the school problems, rather than the good old-fashioned fact that the girl was a troublemaker on the one hand, and mentally impaired on the other.

So, why are you attacking me with insinuations that I'm ignorant of the facts, etc...? I get the feeling for some reason you have been biased against me from the beginning... perhaps mental illness is a pet cause of yours. I'm sorry the girl has problems but she's brought it into my house now and she is not entitled to wreck my home and my life because it's not politically correct to say that a mentally impaired person's statements should be checked for the simple reason that they're mentally impaired and it might not be the accurate truth. When so much hangs in the balance? Come on you can't seriously be that black and white about it. Do we just let them go around and say whatever they want without determining if the nature of their illness or disability might make their statement questionable? I"m not saying, like you seem to think, that her testimony should be outright discarded based on that but I am saying it is compromised and testimony of her psychiatrist as to veracity of what she says as well as information for the jury about the details of her mental illness and how it could affect the objective reality of her statements should have been introduced for the jury to consider, it is only right. Why should an innocent man be hung high because everyone's too scared and PC to question the reality of the statement of a person who has problems understanding reality?

Sommmmethinggg tells me I'm in the midst of some prosecutors...

You are completely in denial.

As I earlier advised, get your husband another attorney and get yourself - and probably BOTH of you - some counseling.

For what it's worth, I'm not a prosecutor. I'm also not a defense attorney.

[completelyshatterred]

In denial of what? Why are you completely ignoring the content of my posts and only replying with suggestions of counseling. How does suggesting counselling address a single legal point I've brought up? Does anyone have any worthwhile comments, similar cases that this brings to mind, legal points to make? Is there any worthwhile conversation to be had here about legal issues brought up here besides a vague dismissal and "you need counseling?" Why I'm so in need of counseling I can't quite figure, but I seem to need it the more in-depth my information gets? What's the deal with that? I need to be counselled because I'm aware of the facts and details and am willing to weigh them thoughtfully and seek others who are likewise inclined? Is there anyone who actually thinks about these things or has an opinion other than that I need counseling? LOL

[Dogmatique]

What exactly are you expecting from an internet message board?

This isn't a support board, and we cannot provide either referrals or individual counsel. But either way let me put this bluntly.

You cannot act as your husband's counsel. You are barred from doing that. What your husband needs is an attorney. An attorney can research and perhaps use case law and statute.

Which part of that aren't you understanding?

And no, I don't think you have ALL of the facts.

If you did - I strongly suspect you wouldn't be here.