The state of New York filed a complaint charging a man with three counts of forcible touching, three counts of sexual abuse in the second degree, three counts sexual abuse in the third degree, two counts of endangering the welfare of a child, aggravated harassment in the second degree, and two counts of harassment in the second degree. A New York Drug Crime Lawyer said the charges were based on the man’s conduct toward a 13-year-old male that involved a sexual contact, exhibiting to the child a sexually explicit video, and other communications in an explicitly sexual nature.
At the beginning of the jury trial, the criminal court granted the of New York’s motion to dismiss the two counts of harassment in the second degree. At the end of the trial, the man was convicted with all the remaining counts after the evidence was presented which includes the victim’s narrative testimony of the man’s sexual conduct, the admission into evidence of the video which had been recovered from a laptop that the man had produced to the police as his personal property and the testimony of a forensic psychologist on the subject of adolescent sexual abuse syndrome. A New York Drug Possession Lawyer after the sentence was imposed, the man was designated as a level three sex offender.
Consequently, the man filed an appeal on which he argues that playing the video repeatedly to the jury served only to inflame the jury’s passions and was of questionable evidentiary value. However, the victim asserted that the man had informed him that the man was the actor in the video, which showed a male masturbating and performing other acts of a sexually explicit nature. Based on records, it is irrelevant for the commission of the crime of endangering the welfare of a child, whether the identity of the person in the video is known. Although playing the video evidence more than once was the basis of one of the two counts of endangering the welfare of a child and, as a general rule, photographs and similar evidence is acceptable.
Continue reading