 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Garcia v. State4/23/2004
assault exam on L.C. at the Advocacy Center. Neither of his parents were present. She took a verbal history, for purposes of diagnosis and treatment. L.C. told her that someone had put his private part into his butt and that it happened in the bathroom. He said that he had been very frightened because he was told he would be in trouble if he told - that he would be hurt. Goldberg testified that L.C. was very cooperative, but shy. He looked down at the floor from time to time and seemed somewhat afraid. He made age-appropriate responses to her questions and described what happened to him in a child's terms. Nothing occurred during the examination that caused Goldberg to believe that L.C. was being manipulated.
Goldberg testified that she conducted an exam of L.C.'s anus with a colposcope. She did not expect to find any signs of trauma because there is a great deal of blood flow to that area and because children tend to heal quickly. She stated also that the anus expands, so often there is no tearing or scarring. It is more common than not to find no trauma to the anus after penetration. Goldberg detected no trauma to L.C.'s anus. She also found no seminal fluid or other physical evidence.
Leoncio Cervantez testified that he was the father of nine-year-old L.C. He and L.C.'s mother Elena were divorced and did not have a good relationship. All of their children lived with their mother, but Cervantez was not trying to get custody. On June 14, 2002, Elena dropped L.C. off for visitation. Cervantez did not see appellant, but he knew that appellant had been staying with Elena. L.C. told his father something that caused him to call the police. The police arrived at Elena's apartment, they spoke to L.C., Elena and him about the alleged sexual abuse. Afterwards, L.C. was taken to the Advocacy Center where he was interviewed. Elena was very upset because she thought her ex-husband had made everything up.
Cervantez testified that he did not make up the story, that he was not trying to get appellant in trouble, that he had never met appellant before, that he was not interested in renewing a relationship with Elena, and that he did not blame appellant for the break-up of his marriage. He stated that he was not angry that appellant was dating Elena, that he did not think appellant was going to replace him as a father figure, and that he never told L.C. to punch appellant. Cervantez asserted that L.C. was a good kid, that he never caused trouble, that he was not a liar, and that he had never told a story like this before.
L.C. took the stand and acknowledged that he knew the difference between the truth and a lie. He testified that he met appellant when he woke up early one morning and saw him sleeping on the couch. One day L.C. went into the bathroom to urinate. He remembered that his mom was in the kitchen, his sisters were in their room, and his cousin was outside playing. While L.C. was standing there with his pants and underwear down around his ankles, appellant came into the bathroom without knocking. He closed the door behind him, turned on the faucet in the sink, and told L.C. to get on the floor. He then took off his pants and underwear and "put his private part in [L.C.'s] bottom." L.C. explained that a "private" is a "pee-pee." L.C. did not see appellant take off his pants, but he heard his zipper go "zip" and heard his button go off. He also did not see appellant's "pee-pee," but knew that appellant laid down on top of him and "stuck it in really hard." L.C. testified that it hurt and it still hurt when he went to the bathroom later. He never saw any blood on his underwear, though. L.C. did not know if anything came out of appellant's pee-pee - he did not feel anything on hi
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Texas DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|