 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
In re D.K.W.12/27/1999
idence.
An adjudication of D.K.W.'s delinquency requires proof he committed the crime of sexual abuse in the third degree. Iowa Code § 232.20(2)(a). A person commits sexual abuse in the third degree when the person performs a sex act and the act was done by force or against the will of the other participant. Iowa Code § 709.4(1). The State has the burden to prove the elements of this offense beyond a reasonable doubt. Iowa Code § 232.47(4). If, in our de novo review, admissible evidence satisfies this standard, we need not reverse an adjudication of delinquency. In re Thompson, 241 N.W.2d 2, 4 (Iowa 1976).
Because the occurrence of a sex act is not disputed, the dispositive issue is whether it was performed by force or against A.T.'s will. The testimony of the immediate parties on this issue is irreconcilably conflicting. As finders of fact, we are accordingly required to accept the testimony we find more believable. The difficulty of this task is substantially increased because A.T. has made prior statements that conflict with her trial testimony. A.T.'s statements to others immediately after the incident concerning the cause of her back injury , her desire to have sex with D.K.W., and that she "fucked" D.K.W. are inconsistent with her testimonial claims of forced intercourse. The credibility of A.T.'s testimony is further diminished because it was substantially influenced by third-party interpretations of relevant events and clearly tailored to suit the needs of the prosecution.
Our reservations concerning A.T.'s complete truthfulness are not resolved by the State's physical evidence. A.T.'s torn jeans, abrasion on her back, the bruise on D.K.W.'s arm, and semen on her shirt lend themselves to plausible and innocent explanation. Any resulting inference of guilt necessarily requires a predicate assessment of A.T.'s truthfulness contrary to that which we have already made.
As noted earlier, the State bears the burden to prove D.K.W.'s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. It is not D.K.W.'s burden to prove his innocence. After a full and fair consideration of the State's evidence, we are not convinced of D.K.W.'s guilt. Our conclusion that the State has not met its burden of proof should not be interpreted as an endorsement of D.K.W.'s complete truthfulness or version of these events. Our findings are based on the State's failure to meet its heavy burden of proof. The juvenile court erred in concluding otherwise and its order adjudicating D.K.W. a delinquent child is reversed.
REVERSED.
Page 1 2 3 Iowa Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|