Return to Innocence

by G. M. Frazier

  Moultrie sits.

  “Alright, son,” Jim says to Curt, “I want you to tell these nice people,” Jim motions to the jury, “why our discussion about back rubs is confusing. You and I know what we have been talking about. They don’t.”

  So Jim knows about this. How does he know?

  Curt looks down again and doesn’t say anything.

  “Curt, no one here is going to think badly of you for telling the truth. Back rubbing is a game, isn’t it?”

  “Yes, sir.”

  “It’s a game that you boys played at the group home, at New Horizons, right?”

  Curt nods.

  “Curt, you see that nice lady sitting down there at that machine?”

  Curt nods again.

  “Well, she has to be able to hear your answers so she can record them. So I need you to answer with a ‘yes’ or a ‘no.’ Back rubbing is a game you boys played at New Horizons, right?”

  “Yes, sir.”

  “Tell us about the game, how it’s played. Let’s start by talking about where you would play it.”

  Curt clears his throat. “Sometimes in the gym, sometimes in the showers, sometimes in our rooms.” It is painfully obvious the boy is embarrassed—maybe even a little ashamed—to have to discuss this. Everyone is about to find out why.

  “How many players?” Jim asks.

  “Your Honor,” Moultrie is up again, “I’m renewing my objection. I’d like to know the relevance of this line of questioning.”

  “Mr. Aiken?” the judge says and looks to Jim.

  “I promise to tie this in with this witness’ previous testimony, Your Honor.”

  “Very well, proceed. The objection is overruled.”

  Moultrie sits, clearly frustrated.

  “Curt,” Jim continues, “how many boys would play?”

  “Sometimes a bunch, sometimes just a few.”

  “Would it sometimes be just two boys playing?”

  “I guess.”

  “Tell us how the game is played.”

  Curt shifts in the chair and plays with his hands. “The first one who gets his pants pulled all the way down gets it.”

  “Gets what?”

  “His back rubbed.”

  “And we aren’t talking about a real back rub, are we?”

  Curt shakes his head.

  “Curt,” Jim points toward the court reporter.

  “No, sir,” Curt replies.

  “So as far as the game goes, what does getting your back rubbed mean?”

  “Somebody sticks their finger up your butt.”

  Murmurs in the courtroom again. Three jurors are shaking their heads.

  “And the boy who gets his back rubbed is the loser?”

  “Big time,” Curt says, and that draws some laughter. Curt manages a meager smile.

  “So, let’s assume, then, that a back rub means what you have just said, getting someone’s finger stuck up your rear end. What we used to call ‘goosing’ when I was your age. You didn’t see Dr. Erskine do that to Tommy that night, did you?”

  “No, sir, he didn’t do that.”

  “Do you know what anal intercourse is, Curt?”

  The boy looks down at his lap again. “Yeah, I know what it is.”

  “Did you see Dr. Erskine do that to Tommy?”

  “No, sir.”

  “Did you see Glen touch Tommy’s penis?”

  “No, I didn’t see that.”

  “Did you see Glen touch Tommy in a sexual way at all?”

  “No, sir.”

  “Okay, Curt, let’s forget about the game at New Horizons. A back rub is just a back rub, okay? “Did you see Dr. Erskine rub Tommy’s back that night?”

  “Not really...he could have when they were hugging. Glen had his back to me. I saw Tommy rubbing Glen’s back when they hugged.”

  “So as far as Tommy saying that it felt good, he could have been talking about a real back rub?”

  “I guess so. The other kind sure don’t feel good.”

  Laughter all around. Curt laughs also, not realizing he’s just told everyone that he has been a loser at the game of back rubbing.

  Jim smiles.

  “Thank you, Curt,” Jim says, “you’ve been very helpful.”

  Chapter 16

  Alternative Explanations

  John Brantley testified next for the prosecution and, to my way of thinking, his testimony has proved the most damaging—except for Tommy’s, of course. The incident report which Chris Manning supposedly was going to file on me has been introduced into evidence. Thus, John is the first of Moultrie’s witnesses to offer an explanation for the events of October 29th, 30th, and 31st. I didn’t realize his testimony would be so crucial, but he has given the jury a hook on which to hang all the testimony Moultrie has presented thus far. Jim is about to cross-examine John. I hope and pray that, once again, he is a step ahead of Nathan Moultrie. The tide seems to have been with us so far, but I fear it is turning.

  “Dr. Brantley, tell us how you came to know Dr. Erskine,” Jim asks.

  “Twelve or so years ago, when I was in the process of applying for grants to expand New Horizons into a full-fledged counseling center for abused boys, I read an article by Glen on therapy for the victims of physical and sexual abuse. Some of his ideas intrigued me. So I contacted him and asked him to help us develop a sexual abuse counseling program based on his ideas. I gave him carte blanche. He could design the program anyway he wanted and he agreed to do it.”

  “And thanks to Dr. Erskine’s ideas, New Horizons, right here in South Carolina, is nationally recognized as a model for facilities that specialize in the treatment and recovery of boys who have been sexually abused, correct?”

  “Yes, we have a national reputation, thanks to Glen.”

  “Dr. Brantley, you testified a few minutes ago that you were never entirely satisfied with the ‘Statement on Sexual Misconduct’ that Dr. Erskine wrote and insisted that each staff member sign before employment. Did you ever inform Dr. Erskine of any concerns you had over the document?”

  “No.”

  Jim moves over to the jury. “And when did this document become a part of the staff manual?”

  “It was one of the first things Glen drafted for the manual.”

  “And that was before you asked him about joining the staff, correct?”

  “It was.”

  “So any inference that this statement was meant to be a license for Dr. Erskine to engage in sexual activity with residents of New Horizons is really improper, is it not?”

  “Objection, Your Honor,” Moultrie says as he stands. “Mr. Aiken is asking the witness to speculate on a pure hypothetical.”

  The judge looks at Moultrie with a mixture of amusement and disbelief. Such speculation is exactly what Moultrie elicited from John when he questioned him. The impression left with everyone in the courtroom was that I wrote that statement as a way to say, Hey, sex with horny teenage boys can happen and it’s no big deal.

  “Mr. Moultrie,” the judge says, “you started this. Your objection is overruled.” Moultrie sits and the judge nods to Jim.

  “I’ll rephrase the question anyway, Your Honor. Dr. Brantley, isn’t it true that when Dr. Erskine wrote the staff manual, which includes the statement on sexual activity between staff and residents, he had no way of knowing that he would eventually be on the staff of New Horizons? He was still teaching at the University of Pennsylvania at the time, was he not?”

  “That’s true, yes.”

  “Did you object to the statement when he proposed it?”

  “No.”

  “Do you have any objection to its factual contents?”

  “No, not really.”

  “And it’s not at all uncommon for boys Tommy’s age, especially if they’ve been introduced to sex at a very young age, to make sexual advances to boys or men, correct?”

  “That’s correct. Boys like Tommy can be quite uninhibited when it comes to sex.”

  “Wha
t was Dr. Erskine’s rationale for including this ‘Statement on Sexual Misconduct’ in the personnel manual?”

  “He said that the counselor who was aware that it could happen would be far less likely to engage in sexual activity than one who blatantly ignored the warning and then found himself in a situation he was totally unprepared for.”

  “And you agreed with that assessment?”

  “Yes. That is why we cover this topic thoroughly in orientation and each new counselor must sign that statement.”

  “So, Dr. Brantley, you never entertained any ideas that Dr. Erskine wrote this statement as a way of justifying sexual activity between staff members and boys?”

  “No, I never thought that for a minute.”

  “Would it be fair to say that in the beginning, the idea that Dr. Erskine was a pedophile, or was in any way unfit to serve as director of New Horizons, never crossed your mind?”

  “It would not only be fair, Mr. Aiken, it would be entirely accurate. I never considered Glen Erskine to be a pedophile. If I had, I certainly would not have asked him to run New Horizons.”

  “Alright, Dr. Brantley, let’s talk about what you believe happened with Dr. Erskine and Tommy Jackson. Based on your testimony thus far, let me see if I can give a quick rundown of how you see things. You believe that Dr. Erskine did engage Tommy in sexual activity. You believe Tommy’s counselor learned of this and confronted Dr. Erskine with it. Thus, the heated debate you overheard between Chris Manning and Dr. Erskine. Thus, the partially completed incident report by Chris Manning in Tommy’s file. Am I on target so far?”

  “Pretty much.”

  “Good. Now, let me ask you a few questions about the meeting you had with Dr. Erskine in your office the morning of October 31st. You stated under direct testimony that Dr. Erskine denied any sexual contact with Tommy and offered no explanation for the partially completed incident report. That’s not entirely true, is it?”

  “It is true. Glen could not—or would not—explain the report.”

  “Well, maybe what he said didn’t seem like an explanation at the time. Why don’t you tell us what he did say about the report?”

  “He said it was a mistake and should have never been filed. He said he intended to destroy it when he got to his office. Of course, I already had it, so he couldn’t.”

  “So, Dr. Erskine’s explanation was that the report was a mistake and should not be filed, correct?”

  “I suppose.”

  “And you assumed that Dr. Erskine had convinced Tommy’s counselor not to file the report? That he had convinced Chris Manning that it was a mistake?”

  “Exactly.”

  “Why didn’t you think of alternative explanations, Dr. Brantley?”

  “Mr. Aiken, you have been the one talking so much about context. Well, the context I had to work with was a thirteen-year-old boy saying that Glen had sexually abused him. That’s why I didn’t look for alternative explanations. What had taken place seemed pretty obvious.”

  “Well, let me ask you this: Did you ever stop to think that maybe Tommy’s counselor was going to file the report on someone else? There was no name filled in for the staff member involved, correct?”

  “That’s correct.”

  “Did you ever consider that maybe Dr. Erskine wasn’t the subject of the report at all?”

  “I’d like to believe that was the case, Mr. Aiken. I really would. But the boy is accusing Glen. We can’t get around that.”

  “We’ll see, Dr. Brantley. We’ll see.” Jim turns and walks back to the defense table. He is about to sit, but doesn’t. “Dr. Brantley, let me ask you about something else. Have there ever been any incidents of sexual contact between residents of New Horizons? Between the boys themselves?”

  “Yes, it happens…boys fooling around—it’s relatively normal and harmless. It’s what psychologists call ‘sex play.’”

  “Like ‘back rubbing’?”

  “That game got out of hand and we’ve pretty much put a stop to it.”

  “And how do you handle such sex play at New Horizons? Do counselors who discover it file incident reports such as the one you found in Tommy Jackson’s file?”

  “No, that form is used only for incidents of sexual contact between staff members and residents.”

  “Is there any sort of a report at all for incidents of sex play between boys?”

  “No form, if that’s what you mean. A notation will usually be made in the boy’s file and his case worker will be notified if warranted.”

  “But we aren’t talking about serious aberrant behavior here, are we, Dr. Brantley? I mean an actual sexual assault by one resident against another?”

  “No.”

  “What about an actual sexual assault—not sex play—by an older boy against a younger? Is there a special form for filing a report of such abuse?”

  “No. Fortunately, we’ve never had to deal with that.”

  “I see. But if that did happen a counselor might use the standard incident report form to record such a case of abuse, right?”

  “I suppose, yes.” John hesitates and then looks at me. “Glen, my God, is that what happened? Chris came to you because this was an incident between Tommy and—”

  “Objection!” Moultrie shouts.

  “Dr. Brantley,” the judge warns, “please do not address the defendant. The jury will disregard the witness’ last remarks. Mr. Aiken, do you have anything further for this witness?”

  “Just one more question, Your Honor.” He turns back to John. “Dr. Brantley, is it possible that Chris was going to file a report against another resident of New Horizons for sexually abusing Tommy Jackson?”

  John looks at me and then back at Jim. “Yes, it’s possible. But if that’s what happened, why is Tommy accusing Glen?”

  “Stay tuned,” Jim says, and turns toward the jury. “Stay tuned.”

  “Let’s break for lunch,” the judge says. “We’ll start back at one-thirty.” And with a bang of her gavel we rise.

  As Jim walks past me, I step by him, intent on confronting Moultrie.

  “Glen? What are—?”

  I wave off Jim’s question and tap Moultrie on the shoulder. He turns. I stare him in the eyes. He doesn’t blink. Neither do I.

  “Tell me something,” I say to him. “Are you still convinced I did it? Or are you just interested in winning?” I want to see some melting of this man’s resolve. Anything to give me a glimmer of hope that he may have some doubts. But I don’t. He holds my stare.

  “Dr. Erskine, your attorney’s doing a good job of pointing the jury to someone else. But they aren’t going to be fooled any more than I am. I believe you sexually molested Tommy Jackson and I believe you are going to prison for that crime. Does that answer your question?”

  “It does. Thank you, Mr. Moultrie. At least I know if I lose and you win, you’ll celebrate for the right reasons. But you’ll be sending an innocent man to prison. Know that.”

  Moultrie closes his briefcase and looks at me once before he walks down the aisle and out of the courtroom.

  After lunch, it was Vernon Peck’s turn to give the medical evidence. Jim has assured me that Vern’s testimony, despite corroborating Tommy’s story, will turn out to favor us. I don’t see how.

  “Please state your name for the record and spell your last name,” Moultrie says.

  “Vernon Peck, P-E-C-K.”

  “What is your occupation, Dr. Peck?”

  “I am a pediatrician.”

  “You are the on-call pediatrician for Children and Youth Services?”

  “I am.”

  “What does that entail?”

  “I do the physical examinations of all DSS intakes that go to New Horizons, any subsequent medical treatment required for normal illness our routine check-ups, and I do the physical examinations in cases of suspected abuse—physical or sexual. I’m also the on-call physician for the residents of New Horizons.”

  I glance over at Jim. He is looking
over his notes. He opens a manila folder and pulls out a copy of Vern’s report on Tommy.

  “Your Honor,” Moultrie says, “may the record show that the defense has stipulated to Dr. Peck’s standing as an expert medical witness in this case?”

  “The stipulation is noted.”

  “Thank you, Your Honor. Now, Dr. Peck,” Moultrie continues, “were you called on October 31st of last year to examine a resident of New Horizons?”

  “I was.”

  “And who was the resident you were asked to examine?”

  “Thomas Wayne Jackson.”

  “Please tell us about that examination.”

  “Lucille Drake called me that morning and said she had a suspected case of sex abuse and she needed me to examine the boy ASAP. I told her to send him over. Can I refer to my notes?”

  “Of course,” Moultrie says and gets a copy of the report from his assistant.

  Vern removes his half-lens reading glasses from his pocket and puts them on. He clears his throat and scans the form that Moultrie has handed him. “The victim is a white male. Age thirteen. Height: fifty-eight inches. Weight...do you want me to read all this?”

  “Yes,” Moultrie turns to Jim, “if defense counsel doesn’t object?”

  “We don’t object, Your Honor.”

  “The witness may proceed,” the judge says.

  Vern shrugs and continues: “Let’s see…weight: ninety-four pounds...no bruises or signs of physical trauma in the genital area...relaxed anal tone...slight dilation with no feces present in rectum...slight perianal bruising...some tearing around old scar tissue...two fissures, one distal to the perineum and one to the natal cleft...”

  Vern pauses and flips the page.

  “...victim’s underwear stained with blood and fecal matter in the seat...semen stains evident in the front. That’s about it,” Vernon says and replaces the report in the folder.

  Moultrie walks over to the exhibit table and picks up a plastic bag. He hands it to Vern. “Are these the boy’s underpants? The one’s in which you found blood and semen stains?”

  Vern takes the bag and looks at the label. “Yes, this is my signature across the seal.” He turns the bag over. The white briefs are flat inside the bag and turned inside out. “As you can see, this discoloration here in the seat is the fecal stain,” he points, “and these streaks here and here are blood.”