QUOTE OF THE DAY: "This won’t bar medical testimony ... (but) it sends a clear message
that opinions of experts, if not based on facts obtained from a physical
examination, should not be offered at trial...Juries trust experts,” she said. “They give them more deference. The
jury thinks, an expert believes a child, therefore we should.”
Lackawanna County
Assistant Public Defender Donna DeVita,
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
STORY: "Ruling in local case will affect child sex abuse prosecutions statewide," by reporter Terrie Morgan-Besecjer, published by The Times-Tribune on 21 October, 2017.
GIST: "Kenneth Maconeghywas convicted in 2014 of repeatedly raping a 10-year-old girl
and sentenced to 10½ to 30 years in prison. He challenged the testimony
of a physician who examined the victim and said he believed she was
sexually assaulted. In a decision that will affect child rape cases statewide, the
Pennsylvania Supreme Court upheld a ruling that granted a new trial to a
Lackawanna County man who challenged the admission of expert testimony. The 4-2
ruling
in the case of Kenneth Maconeghy will affect prosecutors’ ability to
present certain expert testimony in cases where there is no physical
evidence an assault occurred. That is significant because there often is
no physical evidence in sex abuse cases, many of which do not come to
light until years after the sexual abuse stopped, attorneys said. “This won’t bar medical testimony ... (but) it sends a clear message
that opinions of experts, if not based on facts obtained from a physical
examination, should not be offered at trial,” said Lackawanna County
Assistant Public Defender Donna DeVita,who handled the appeal. Maconeghy, 39, of Moscow, was convicted in 2014 of repeatedly raping a
10-year-old girl over a five-month period in 2005, and sentenced to 10½
to 30 years in prison. The victim did not come forward until 2011, when
she was 18. Maconeghy has been free on bail since December 2015 — six months after
the state Superior Court overturned his conviction after finding
Lackawanna County Judge Vito Geroulo erred when he permitted a physician
who examined the victim to testify he believed she was sexually
assaulted. The opinion was based on statements the victim made to the
doctor and not on any physical evidence. In its ruling this week upholding that decision, the Supreme Court
agreed the testimony was improper because state law does not permit an
expert to give an opinion regarding the credibility of other witnesses.
That determination is solely up to a jury, the court said. DeVita said ensuring expert testimony is properly presented is important because it has a significant impact on a jury. “Juries trust experts,” she said. “They give them more deference. The
jury thinks, an expert believes a child, therefore we should.”"
The entire story can be found at:
BESbswyBESbswy
http://thetimes-tribune.com/news/ruling-in-local-case-will-affect-child-sex-abuse-prosecutions-statewide-1.2258095
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue. Keep your eye on the
Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. The Toronto Star, my
previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put
considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith
and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic
pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic" section which focuses
on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at: http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html Please
send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest
to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com. Harold Levy;
Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog.
