State v. J.Q

617 A.2d 1196 (1993)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

F had two daughters aged eight and six. F and M were never married and were separated, and F picked up the children for weekend visitation. F was then living with another woman in a one-room apartment. They were married in 1987. About two years after the separation, M learned that one child attempted to pull down her sister's underwear and touch her buttocks. Asked where she learned of such conduct she spelled out DAD. M disbelieved the information at first but then sent the children to counseling and reported the incident to the police. Both children reported that they had been the victims of repeated sexual abuse by their father. The trial court accepted testimony from a Dr. who testified that both infant witnesses would suffer severe emotional distress if forced to testify before spectators, jurors and particularly their father in a courtroom setting. The trial court then granted a motion to allow the children to testify on closed circuit T.V. The children described in detail the sexual conduct and there was evidence that they had stretched hymens. The same Dr. then took the stand and testified about CSAAS as a syndrome of children of incest and that the symptoms of the syndrome were present in the two children. The Dr. then gave her opinions that the children were sexually abused. F's defense was that the children were coached by M and that there was simply no opportunity for F to do those acts at his apartment as there was no isolated occasion for them to have taken place. D was convicted and appealed. The Appellate Division reversed; it was plain error to allow the CSAAS testimony to establish the credibility of the witnesses and to explain secrecy, belated disclosure, and recantation by a child sexual abuse victim. This appeal resulted.