Thank you for reading D.C. Witness.
Help us continue our mission into 2025 by donating to our end of year campaign.
By
Beatriz Olivares [former]
- August 19, 2022
Court
|
Daily Stories
|
Sex Abuse
|
Sexual Assault
|
DC Superior Court Judge Rainey Brandt continued a motion hearing for a 2016 child sex abuse case.
The defendant is charged with three counts of first-degree child sex abuse for allegedly raping his stepdaughter when she was between the ages of 13 and 15 while they were living in the same home. According to court documents, investigations did not begin until 2014, when the complainant reported the defendant to the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD).
During the Aug. 19 hearing, parties discuss the defendant’s motion to suppress statements he allegedly made during his interview with detectives on June 13, 2015, and in two audio recordings from the complainant.
The prosecution called the lead detective on the case to discuss the two audio recordings that allegedly capture the defendant confessing to abusing the complainant and his video-recorded interview with the defendant.
The complainant emailed the detective two audio recordings documenting the defendant allegedly confessing to sexually abusing her. The recordings were taken on two separate occasions and done without the defendant’s knowledge.
During the detective’s testimony, he revealed that he told the defendant “you’re sitting there with your arms crossed like a pedophile,” during the initial interview, which spanned over two hours long. He also revealed that another detective in the room was cursing at the defendant during interrogation.
Defense attorney Sylvia Smith argued to have these statements come into evidence during trial because the statements were in violation of the defendant’s Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination and local law.
“You were trying to get the defendant to say that he had talked to her and confessed,” Smith said to the detective.
However, during the prosecution’s re-direct, the detective testified that he told the defendant he could leave at any time during the interview and one hour into proceedings the defendant outwardly said he was willing to continue to talk.
Video of the detective’s interview spans over two hours long and Judge Brandt said she has not finished watching the video due to having a high caseload.
Smith offered to continue the hearing until next week, so that Judge Brandt would have finished viewing the video when all parties make final arguments.
The next hearing is scheduled for Aug. 25.