By Jake Romero
DUBLIN, CA — “Welcome to the world of children talking about their sexual abuse,” said Deputy District Attorney Colleen Clark Wednesday, referring to the stepdaughter and alleged victim of “Robert” here in East County Hall of Justice / Alameda County Superior Court.
Closing arguments were heard Wednesday for “Robert,” on trial for multiple counts of child sex crimes and sending harmful material to a minor from 2017 through 2020.
*NOTE: To protect the identity of the victim, referred to as “Jane Doe,” the suspect’s true name is redacted, and “Robert” is being used.
DDA Clark admitted Jane Doe, during her three-day testimony, was sometimes inconsistent, often asked to take breaks or sometimes paused for awhile before answering questions on the stand.
The prosecution explained how the testimony of Dr. Blake Carmichael, a psychologist and expert in child maltreatment, said these things are expected of a child witness.
Carmichael had testified that children are more likely to remember core details of an incident rather than peripheral details, and that they may have dissociated or not thought deeply about the event afterwards.
DDA Clark also noted the consistencies between Doe’s CALICO interview, preliminary hearing testimony and trial testimony such as where the abuse occurred and what kinds of inappropriate touching happened.
CALICO is a non-profit organization that interviews abused children after a crime is reported.
Private defense attorney Chris Lamiero undermined the importance of Carmichael’s testimony, claiming that it added nothing new because the expert witness did not have contact with Doe and did not review the CALICO interview recording.
Allegations against Robert first came to light when Doe’s mother confronted her about pornography found on the victim’s tablet device.
The victim testified last week that she chose that moment to disclose the abuse so she could avoid getting in trouble.
Defense Attorney Lamiero suggested that, during the CALICO interview, Jane Doe knew the story had grown beyond her control and she had “no choice—in her mind—but to roll with it.”
He added that the input of others, such as the forensic interviewer and their leading questions, influenced the victim’s story until it evolved into the testimony given in court.
Doe previously testified that Robert, the accused, had introduced her to pornography but did not show her how to access it.
“Somebody sexualized this kid. It just wasn’t my client,” Lamiero said.
The defense claimed that the victim’s mother could be responsible for Doe’s pornography access.
Doe’s mother had testified that she watched porn videos on her cell phone which her daughter had access to.
Lamiero also said he believed the CALICO interview was downplayed during the trial, noting that the video recording shows Doe seemingly happy and upbeat with “a demeanor completely incongruous with the matter being discussed.”
Jury deliberations are expected to begin this week.
**NOTE: The Vanguard was not present for the prosecution’s rebuttal to the defense closing.
