|
|
|
Jury acquits county man on 140 counts of sexual molestation |
|
|
|
|
Written by Staff
|
|
Saturday, 12 May 2007 |
After a rare two-day trial that lasted into the evening hours of Thursday night, a Floyd County Circuit Court jury of seven women and five men needed just an hour and a half to acquit 41-year-old Stanley Ernest Hinckley of 140 counts of sexual molestation of an underage girl.
As Hinckley's accuser sobbed in open court, the jury returned "not guilty" verdicts on charges that included 49 counts of rape, 49 counts of animate sexual penetration, 21 counts of forcible sodomy and 21 counts of taking indecent liberties with a child.
The verdict followed two days of often-contentious legal wrangling between Commonwealth's Attorney Gordon Hannett and defense counsel Bev Davis of Radford and a rebuke of Hannett in open court by Circuit Judge Ray W. Grubbs.
The high number of indictments handed down against Hinkley by a Floyd County grand jury accused him of molesting the teenage girl over a three-and-a-half year period, starting when she was 13 and ending last year at age 17.
The case, however, came down to a "he said-she said" scenario with no DNA or fingerprint evidence linking Hinckley to the charges and testimony from both sides that jurors found questionable.
Jurors questioned by The Floyd Press after the trial declined to discuss the case on the record but two jurors said privately they found gaps in the stories told by both Hinckley and his accuser and that - under the law - they acquitted him because "reasonable doubt" existed.
The trial took many twists and turns over the two days. Even jury selection became high drama as no-shows and disqualifications left the court scrambling to find enough jurors to fill the pool when the trial began on Tuesday. Under questioning by defense attorney Davis, one woman juror admitted she was a victim of sexual abuse as a child and was excused from serving. Davis then began asking all potential female jurors if they were victims.
After one of the no-shows finally appeared, the jury was seated shortly before noon. Two other no-shows may face fines from the court.
In his opening statement Tuesday, Hannett told jurors that Hinckley's accuser would be vague on dates and details of many of the incidents surrounding the events but asked the jury if they could describe, in detail, each sexual act of theirs over the last three years.
Davis, in his opening, claimed his client's accuser was a revenge-driven teenage girl who made up the story to get back at Hinckley because she was mad at him over other matters.
Amid sobs during more than three hours of testimony Tuesday, Hinckley's accuser told a story of three-and-half years of what she called inappropriate touching, massages of her breast and crotch areas and one-and-a-half years of sexual acts.
As Hannett had predicted, her testimony was vague on dates and details. Davis in cross-examination, zeroed in on inconsistencies in the accuser's story.
The accuser's mother backed her daughter on the stand but had not witnessed any of the sexual encounters claimed by her daughter. Her sister also testified for the prosecution and said she had witnessed actions she thought were "suspicious."
The accuser's mother testified she had found a jar of anal lube and turned it over to the sheriff's department as "proof" of her daughter's accusations. Floyd County Sheriff's Department investigator Steve Graham testified that the Virginia State Police Crime lab did not find Hinckley's fingerprints on the jar and also did not find any DNA on sheets collected from the accuser's bed.
Davis claimed the lubricant had been planted, possibly by the accuser and her boyfriend.
Grubbs sent the jury out of the room several times during the trial as Hannett and Davis argued over procedural matters. Before the trial, Davis had tried, in closed-door sessions, to convince the court to let the accuser's sexual history be introduced into open court but Grubbs denied the motion. Hannett had wanted a discussion of pornography allegedly owned by Hinckley but that was also excluded as evidence.
Grubbs had ruled outside the jury's presence that no discussion could be introduced regarding the victim's virginity but the accuser's mother brought it up in testimony and Grubbs abruptly stopped the trial and sent the jury out of the room.
The judge demanded to know from Hannett why he had not followed his ruling that witnesses be told to not use the words "virgin" or "virginity" in testimony.
"Your honor I do not tell my witnesses what to say in testimony," Hannett responded.
"My instructions were specific Mr. Hannett," the judge replied.
Grubbs then recessed the court and retreated to his chambers where some observers felt he might be considering declaring a mistrial. During the recess, Hannett and Davis got into an argument over whether or not the defense could play a recording of earlier statements by the accuser's mother.
As the volume of the debate increased, Sheriff Shannon Zeman stepped in and said "gentlemen do I need to get a room for you to settle this?" Davis retreated to his seat and both lawyers waited in silence for the judge to return.
Grubbs returned and said he was not declaring a mistrial but expressed what he called "gave concerns" over Hannett's failure to follow his instructions.
"Your honor, I do not believe you instructed me to specifically instruct the witnesses to not use the words," Hannett said.
"Then you need to work on your memory Mr. Hannett," Grubbs replied.
Davis moved for a mistrial and Grubbs took the motion under advisement before calling the jury back into the room.
Hinckley took the stand after lunch on Thursday and denied any form of sexual involvement with the young woman. He also denied buying the bottle of lubricant and said the girl was a "known liar."
In closing arguments, both attorneys said the case boiled down to which witnesses they found credible. Davis also argued that the law was specific and if they jury had any doubts about what had happened they had no choice except to find his client "not guilty."
The case went to the jury at 5:17 p.m. Thursday. They returned with their not guilty verdicts at 6:58 p.m. |
|
|
