Page 42 - 2023 May June TPA Journal_Neat

perceived sexual and emotional neglect from his over the diaper with his tongue and hands and
wife. According to Appellant, he resented his wife penis, but it was all done over at [sic] the diaper.”
for going to lunch with her friends during the
weekend and leaving him in charge of watching the As expected, Ferrell’s examination provided no
children. Appellant blamed his wife for not putting evidence of a sexual assault. According to Ferrell,
shorts back on the child after changing her diaper evidence collection is usually only done within 96
and leaving her to run around in her diaper. hours of an assault and the exam was scheduled
“some time from when it had happened.” Because
Appellant’s wife remembered keeping the child in of the time lapse and the age of the child, Ferrell
early August at a time consistent with Appellant’s was unable to determine whether there was “any
confession and remembered talking with her kind of penetration or ejaculation.” She also noted
daughter outside on the back patio that weekend for no body surface injuries or injuries to the child’s
fifteen to twenty minutes while Appellant watched genital areas. Ferrell explained that she would not
the child inside. She specifically remembered both have anticipated finding injuries because the
going to lunch with friends that weekend and assault was described as “touching to the area” and
leaving shorts off of the child because the available “rubbing to the area,” which would not realistically
shorts were too constrictive. She also remembered cause injury. Finally, Ferrell noted that even if
Appellant “fasting a lot and [being] somewhat there had been penetration she would not expect
withdrawn” after the weekend. there to be apparent injury because “this part of the
body is very similar to the cells on the inside of
At the urging of law enforcement, specifically your cheek, and it heals very, very fast.”
Sergeant Jody Armstrong of the Montgomery
County Sheriff’s Office, the child’s parents took her The State charged Appellant with aggravated
for an exam at Children’s Safe Harbor, a multi- sexual assault of a child and indecency with a child.
disciplinary group designed to be a “one-stop shop At the trial, Sergeant Armstrong, Bishop Jenks,
to make things easier for the families and to collect Appellant’s wife, Ferrell, and the child’s mother
information on” crimes against children. At testified to Appellant’s double confessions,their
Children’s Safe Harbor, the child was examined by memories from the surrounding time period, and
Jamie Ferrell, a forensic medical examiner and the results of the medical examinations. At the
clinical director of forensic nursing services for the close of the State’s case, Appellant moved for a
Memorial Hermann Healthcare system. Children’s directed verdict and argued that the State had failed
Safe Harbor required children to be three years old to show independent evidence of the crime under
or older before they could conduct an interview the corpus delicti doctrine because it failed to
because a child younger than three is considered present independent evidence of the sexual
“pre-verbal.” Ferrell noted that the child was pre- touching other than the Appellant’s confessions.
verbal at seventeen months old and that the child’s The Appellant specifically pointed to the lack of
primary mode of communication was “pointing” eyewitness testimony, DNA evidence, injury, or
and “making unidentifiable sounds.” Although the outcry from the victim. The State argued that the
child “knew a few words,” she did not speak in Appellant’s confessions were sufficiently
sentences and was never able to relay information corroborated by pointing out details within the
about the incident to either Ferrell or her mother. confession, such as the date and the child’s lack of
Because the infant was pre-verbal, Ferrell asked the shorts, that lined up with testimony from other
child’s mother basic intake questions for the exam. witnesses. After listening to the arguments, the trial
The child’s mother noted that she and her husband court denied Appellant’s motion.
left their kids with Appellant and his wife and, after
this, Appellant told his Bishop that “he was going The jury found Appellant not guilty of aggravated
to change [the child]’s diaper and he touched her sexual assault, returning instead a verdict of guilty

May - June 2023 www.texaspoliceassociation.com • (512) 458-3140 37