close
close
Local

Children must testify in person against alleged attackers, court rules

It is unconstitutional for children to testify against their alleged abusers without having to confront them in person in court, the Iowa Supreme Court ruled Friday.

The verdict came in a 4-3 vote Friday in the case between the state of Iowa and Derek Michael White, who argued the court should not have allowed two child witnesses to testify against him via video in his 2022 child endangerment case. A jury convicted White of three felony counts: one count of neglect or abuse of a dependent child and two counts of child endangerment causing bodily harm.

The Northwest Iowa Review reported in September 2020 that White and Donna Rae Reisdorfer, both of Melvin, were arrested for allegedly molesting a child multiple times, leaving bruises, fears and potential hearing loss. The child allegedly had linear marks on his face “consistent with a belt wound,” according to the Iowa Supreme Court’s description.

Reisdorfer pleaded guilty to one count of child endangerment resulting in bodily injury. She was sentenced to a suspended prison term of up to five years.

More information about the Iowa Supreme Court: Iowa Supreme Court rules that 6-week abortion ban can go into effect, ending injunction

Two children testified against White during his trial. White and the jurors remained in the courtroom while the children testified from the judge's chambers via a “one-way” closed-circuit television system. White could see the witnesses but the children could not see him.

Before their testimony, an expert told the court that testifying before White would be traumatic for the children and “could prevent them from communicating reasonably,” according to the opinion.

Justice David May wrote in the majority opinion that the method of testimony is unconstitutional. Justices Christopher McDonald, Dana Oxley and Matthew McDermott joined the majority opinion.

“When the defendant and the witness are prevented from seeing each other, there is no face-to-face confrontation, and the Iowa Constitution is not satisfied,” May wrote.

“Two-way visibility – the ability to see one another – is inseparable from the idea of ​​face-to-face confrontation,” May wrote.

He added that the court rejects “any procedure that prevents trial witnesses from seeing the accused” and that “such procedures are also incompatible with the truth-telling function of face-to-face confrontation.”

In the dissent, Chief Justice Susan Christensen criticized the majority decision as too strict a reading of the Iowa Constitution. She argued that the Constitution could not account for technology or even the type of case when it was written in 1857. Justices Edward Mansfield and Thomas Waterman joined the dissent.

“White was able to meaningfully confront the two boys. He observed them as they testified, and they knew he was watching them. White's attorney was in the room with the boys and cross-examined them.” , Christensen wrote.

“I see no practical difference in allowing child witnesses to testify where the accused can see them, but the children cannot see the accused,” Christensen added.

May wrote in the majority opinion, citing Iowa case law: “We are bound by the 'words used by the framers' of the Constitution.

“The meaning of those words was fixed when they were adopted,” May added, directing readers of the ruling to a 2012 book co-authored by then-U.S. Supreme Court Justice , Antonin Scalia, on legal interpretations.

May's citations of other legal precedents also included a majority opinion by Scalia in a 1988 U.S. Supreme Court case, Coy v. Iowa.

The Iowa Supreme Court's decision means White's convictions are vacated and he will receive a new trial, per the majority decision. White was sentenced in March 2022 to up to 15 years in prison.

Phillip Sitter covers the western suburbs for the Des Moines Register. Phillip can be reached by email at [email protected] or on X, formerly known as Twitter, at @pslifeisabeauty.

Related Articles

Back to top button