Posted on 11/22/2009 12:31:10 AM PST by 4rcane
When that child later tested positive for gonorrhea of the throat, Ford used the test against Baran at trial, even though a) the child never accused Baran of forcing him to perform oral sex, b) the child, in fact, specifically denied having sexual contact with Baran on the witness stand, c) Baran tested negative for gonorrhea, d) the boy had told his mother two months prior that his stepfather had orally raped him, and e) on the very day Baran was convicted, charges against the stepfather were turned over to the district attorney’s office for possible prosecution. Baran’s counsel was never informed of the allegation against the stepfather. Addressing the gonorrhea issue in his closing arguments, Ford implied that Baran’s “lifestyle” made it probable that he contracted gonorrhea at other times and knew how to quickly eradicate it to cover his tracks.
This would have been sufficient to me, if I were on the jury and had been informed, to have doubted this part of the prosecution. As for your point about a 3 yo child being shown on a doll, this has been a technique that was easy to abuse. I believe that current procedures ask the child to independently point to where they had been touched. Numerous cases from this 1980s period also had the children subjected to multiple interviews until their testimony was 'correct' and then only that evidence was brought forth.
I would designate that prosecutorial abuse as child abuse in and of itself!
Yes. Psychological abuse.
Me too. There are, I'm sure, dozens of others in prison for similar charges prosecuted during that crazy period. If the legal profession had any ethics there would be prominent lawyers demanding all those trials be reexamined. I hear silence.
Good lord...hope he loses his judgeship.
“To make matters worse, the case against Baran was awash in homophobia. According to court documents, the first parents to come forward with accusations against Baran in September 1984 had just days earlier registered a complaint with the center that Baran was “queer.” The boy’s mother, who thought gays “shouldn’t be allowed out in public,” much less permitted to work at day care centers, said she “didn’t want no homo” watching her son.”
Wow, can you believe that a mother wouldn’t want her little boy “watched” by someone whose “identity” is public restroom sex, and all the “goodies” that go along with it (HIV, AIDS, etc. etc. etc.). Homophobe!
Is this article from the now defunct Washington Gay Blade?
Close, it’s from the pro-abortion, pro-homosexual LIBERTARIAN “reason.com”. (”Reason provides a refreshing alternative to right-wing and left-wing opinion magazines by making a principled case for liberty and individual choice in all areas of human activity.”).
Nice try, playing up the “gay man” as the victim.
“Whenever I read about these cases I am reminded that hysteria and mob psychology are an ever present danger in all of us. This same beast that was almost certainly behind the Salem Witch Trials and other such ‘old history’...”
Don’t cha just hate witch hunts? I know of another group that does as well:
WELCOME! The North American Man/Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) was formed in 1978. It was inspired by the success of a campaign based in Boston’s gay community to defend against a local witchhunt.
Nambla.org
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.