In Re Dependency of AEP :: 135 Wn2d 208
Category: Family Law and Marriage
According to the record, the trial court allowed several hearsay and induced statements to determine that the father, Michael Petcu had sexually abused his daughters. Testimony from people who provided care for the girls was mixed while favoring the father. The most defamatory was from the mother of a seven year old boy who had inappropriate contact with one daughter and who, herself, had been abused as a child.
Other vilifying testimony had been induced by untrained professionals. One example at 218, when AEP had repeatedly denied any sexual contact with her father, she was interrupted and told to tell the truth and reveal what she had “discussed” in a previous interview.
The defense argued against the competency and reliability of the witness. They were, however, unable to convince the court that child interviews should be videotaped “to thresh out the possibility of suggestive interviewing techniques and possible taint.” [at 234]. The court properly held this to be in the purview of the Legislature.
The court rightly ruled against hearsay and incompetent testimony and reversed “the finding of abuse which was entered in the dependency hearing.” [at 234].
Rating the Usual Suspects:
| pass | Alexander, Gerry | |
| pass | Dolliver, James | |
| pass | Durham, Barbara | |
| pass | Johnson, Charles | |
| pass | Madsen, Barbara | |
| pass | Preble, Gary | |
| pass | Sanders, Richard | |
| pass | Smith, Charles | |
| fail | Dee, Edward | |
| fail | Gregoire, Christine | |
| fail | Guy, Richard | |
| fail | Sheldon, Toni | |
| fail | Talmadge, Phil |