One very typical aspect of a false accusation case is the overwhelming use of hearsay testimony. It comes in the shape of the testimony of the CPS and Sandra Glenney chosen psychologist. The psychologist will testify to what your child allegedly said in therapy. However prior to this, this same professional, a perfect example of this is Dr. Mary Lindahl, will testify that your child will be to traumatized to be present in Court, This results in the inability of you and your attorney to question your child. This is by design, completely by design. Sandra Glenney wants the psychologist to be the filter to be heard in Court.
The psychologist selected by Glenney needs to be challenged at every turn, your attorney must be comfortable in doing this. Below is a very critical case that your attorney needs to be familiar with
There has been a growing attempt to protect the child witness from the trauma of testifying in court by modifying court procedures, such as testifying behind a screen or on videotape in another room. This was the issue addressed in Maryland vs. Craig (110 S. Ct., 3157, 1990) where, according to the Supreme Court, if the prosecution moves to have the child witness testify behind a screen, they will have establish several things. The requisite necessity finding must be case specific. The trial court must hear evidence and determine whether the procedure’s use is necessary to protect the particular child witness’s welfare; find that the child would be traumatized, not by the courtroom generally, but by the defendant’s presence; and find that the emotional distress suffered by the child in the defendant’s presence is more than de minimis.
However, if the prosecution makes such a motion, the defense should immediately move for an evaluation of the child by their own expert in order to counter the testimony of the prosecution’s experts. Such an evaluation can produce useful information and may enhance the credibility of the defense expert if he or she has also evaluated the child. But the best and most accurate testimony may well be for the expert to testify that there is simply no way to tell whether the child will be traumatized in court other than to rely upon the baseline information that most children are not severely traumatized by testifying.
It is important that your attorney file several motions to prevent the admission of hearsay evidence. As mentioned, it is critical for your attorney to file a motion for your child to be evaluated by your own expert. The psychologist chosen by Glenney will be pro-Glenney and pro-CPS. The danger of allowing hearsay testimony is that there is no way to challenge it. In the case of Dr. Mary Lindahl, the facts were grossly misrepresented and dishonest. Illustrating the fact that the majority of the time the hearsay testimony is fraudulent. The way Sandra Glenney likes it.
