Lewd Molestation Charge Dismissed

CALVIN S.

Calvin came to me and he had a real problem. His face had just been splattered all over TV. He had made the news. He was in the newspaper. He was online. The allegation was that he had just been in a pool at a Motel 6 here in town and had exposed himself to a little seven-year-old girl. He was looking at a charge of lewd molestation.
When he first came in, Calvin thought he was looking at a range of punishment of three to 20 years in prison. Still, not something that he was looking forward to. Calvin professed his innocence, but as he outlined the facts and we found out the age of the accuser we knew immediately that his situation was much more grave than what he originally thought and that the mandatory minimum was now 25 years because the child was under the age of 12.
In this particular case, instead of the state charging him with indecent exposure, these greedy SOBs always wanting to extract the most man years in prison possible on any case, decided that they were going to overreach and they were going to overcharge. And so, they actually charged him with lewd molestation with the legal theory being that he forced a child to view and gaze upon his private parts, and technically under the statute, that charge fits. And so, they charged him with lewd molestation.
Well, as we got into the case, employing our 10-step proprietary Berlin Defense System and on-site evaluation, a letter to preserve, evidence submitted to the motel because they had video cameras everywhere in this place, an analysis of the facts and the evidence plus our own interviews, we were able to, not quickly, but we were able to conclude in a powerful and persuasive manner that our client was actually completely innocent. Really, all it was is that he's out there in some Speedos and the manager of this hotel didn't like it. He thought it was inappropriate for an adult male to be swimming in his pool in Speedos.
What really got the manager upset, which is why the police were called and all of this came about, was because our guy actually wasn't staying at the hotel. Whoops! He had memberships at the Y, and at other places where he could swim. He was an avid swimmer. He'd swim for hours. It was not uncommon for him to swim an hour a day, and for months he'd been stopping by in the middle of the day while he was on his lunch break and getting in an hour swim. These people had seen him, these two girls that were at the pool and their mom, had seen him on numerous occasions dressed exactly the same. No issues or problems.
But on this day, the manager sees him, and thinks that his attire is completely inappropriate. The manager orders him out of the pool. And asks him where he's staying. My client, of course, does not tell the truth. He fibs. Through the manager's investigation, he came to realize the guy didn't stay there. The client lied about where he was parked and how he got there. Of course, they followed him and found out he actually had his truck there. The Motel 6 Management took pictures of his truck, and then contacted the police. Somewhere along the line, this child from all the way across the pool, when questioned, somehow was now saying that my client exposed himself.
Well, we find out that it's actually impossible, for one, for the child to have seen what she alleged she saw. Two, she had had three different stories that she told, none which was consistent with the other. The manager told a story that was inconsistent with what the little girl had told. The little girl's older sister told a story that was completely inconsistent with what she had told. We knew that factually it was impossible for her to visualize what she said she could visualize all the way across the pool. Our client was facing a direction that would have made it impossible for her to see what she said that she saw, and the list just went on and on and on.
So, we presented this to the district attorney's office and at the first appearance that we were set for preliminary hearing, and the state's response was to immediately attempt to dismiss the case. Not because of what we were saying, but because they were having a problem getting the witness in. What they wanted to do, is they wanted to dismiss the case and then immediately refile it on my guy, forcing him to be rearrested, and have to post another $50,000 bond. So, we objected to that, forced the stated to reissue its subpoenas and have them personally served, pass the case again so my client would not be rearrested and recharged and make the news in the paper all over again.
So, when we showed up again on the next court date, we presented these very same issues to the state, and at that point, they were forced to dismiss the case. So, my client who was originally facing 25 to life, after multiple court appearances ... Actually, I think we had five: three arraignment dates, two preliminary hearing dates, multiple conversations with the district attorney's office. We were finally able to secure that dismissal for our client.

Have You Been Charged With a Sex Crime in the Tulsa, OK Area?

If you or a loved one has been charged with a sex crime in the Tulsa, Oklahoma area you need to speak with an experienced Oklahoma sex crimes lawyer as soon as possible. Please contact us online or call 913.384.0850 for your free consultation. We are proud to serve Tulsa and all surrounding areas.