Court: Victim’s mother’s testimony allowed jury to ‘impermissibly speculate’
By Bennett Loudon
BridgeTower Media Newswires
ROCHESTER, NY — A state appeals court has ordered a new trial in a sex abuse case because of testimony that should not have been allowed.
Defendant Raymond A. Hansel was convicted in February 2020 before Broome County Court Judge Joseph F. Cawley of predatory sexual assault against a child and three counts of first-degree rape.
Without holding a hearing, Cawley denied the defendant’s post-conviction motion to reverse the verdict in September 2020.
In 2016, the victim claimed that Hansel, who had been married to her mother, sexually abused her over a four-year period, from 2010 to 2014.
He was sentenced to concurrent prison terms of 15 years to life on the predatory sexual assault conviction and 10 years, plus 10 years of post-release supervision, on each rape conviction.
Hansel’s appellate lawyer, Thomas A. Saitta, argued that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence because the victim’s testimony was not credible, but the Appellate Division of state Supreme Court, Third Department, disagreed.
The victim testified that Hansel lived in their household from the time that she was 7 until she was 12. She said Hansel started abusing her when she was 8.
The girl said the abuse happened when her mother was out and also when she was home, but sleeping or sick. The girl claimed it was a daily occurrence until Hansel and her mother separated and he moved out.
After Hansel moved out the girl continued to visit him at his sister’s home where he had sexual relations with her one night.
She also testified that on another occasion, when she was sick and stayed home from school, her mother asked Hansel to take care of her and he abused her.
The girl said she didn’t reveal the abuse sooner because she didn’t think anyone would believe her and she feared that Hansel would hurt her family, and because Hansel told her that her mother would go to jail.
The victim revealed the abuse after her mother discovered her having sexual conversations online and planned to have her see a therapist.
During cross-examination, the girl admitted that she had fabricated accusations of physical abuse against her mother and brother, but denied that she had made accusations that her brother sexually abused her.
She admitted that she told a therapist that lying had become normal to her but claimed it was because she had to cover up the abuse, according to the decision.
Hansel denied he ever sexually abused the girl and claimed that his work schedule gave him very little time alone with the girl. He said his work records showed that he was at work on the day she claimed he abused her when she was sick at home.
“A contrary verdict would not have been unreasonable had the jury credited defendant’s testimony,” according to the decision.
“The victim’s propensity for lying, along with her explanation for her delay in reporting the abuse, raised credibility issues for the jury to resolve,” the court wrote.
Regardless, the court concluded that the verdict was “in accord with the weight of the evidence.”
The defense also argued that the judge should not have allowed the girl’s mother to testify about the frequency of her sexual relations with Hansel.
The mother testified that while her sex life with Hansel was “abundant during the beginning of their relationship, it declined precipitously” towards the end of 2010, the year the girl claimed the abuse started, according to the decision.
“County Court allowed the testimony as circumstantial evidence that defendant’s sexual desires were being met elsewhere,” according to the decision.
“The issue here is that the fact testified to, the significant reduction in the frequency of the couple’s sexual encounters, is not a fact from which the jury could reasonably infer the existence of a fact material to the charges against defendant,” the court wrote.
“It allows the jury to impermissibly speculate that the reason that defendant and the victim’s mother had less frequent sex was because he replaced one sexual partner, the victim’s mother, with another, the victim,” according to the decision.
The prosecution admitted that the purpose of the testimony was to convince the jury that Hansel stopped having sex with the girl’s mother because he was doing so with the victim.
“We agree with defendant that said error was not harmless … Accordingly, we reverse and remit for a new trial,” the court wrote.
