OK - Child testifies in trial of rape, kidnapping suspect
- Thread starter tk71texas
- Start date
Wise Old Owl
Retired WS Staff & Founding member of AFKBPOFPOPL
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2008
- Messages
- 13,866
- Reaction score
- 2,316
What a brave, strong girl!
IMO this is one of the first things that need to be addressed. Legislation that states a child who has been raped, molested, traumatized - should be allowed to testify via video camera. Most states are not allowing this now which is one reason alot of the scumbags get pleas. Parents weigh the damage such testimony will further do to the child and they "give in" (for lack of a better word). If children were not made to face their "monster" and still testify safely it would do wonders to keeping these "things" behind bars.
JMO
IMO this is one of the first things that need to be addressed. Legislation that states a child who has been raped, molested, traumatized - should be allowed to testify via video camera. Most states are not allowing this now which is one reason alot of the scumbags get pleas. Parents weigh the damage such testimony will further do to the child and they "give in" (for lack of a better word). If children were not made to face their "monster" and still testify safely it would do wonders to keeping these "things" behind bars.
JMO
tk71texas
wth is wrong with people today
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2009
- Messages
- 1,192
- Reaction score
- 10
i totally agree
not_my_kids
New Member
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2008
- Messages
- 12,689
- Reaction score
- 285
That did it. I don't cry on a very regular basis but that did it. I hope they give him life and I hope they mean it.
At least they let her have someone familiar there with her on the stand. Video testimony is excellent, but the defense attorneys later play hard with the appeals that there was someone off camera coaching the child. The stress is just as bad after when you hear that there is a chance they could get out or temporarily bond out again.
I got to testify by closed circuit TV from inside the courthouse, I was lucky there, and I have have since realized how rare that chance actually is, but I chose to make the victim impact statement in person. Easily the worst part, in ways, but I'm glad I did it and I'm glad this child did too. I am so proud of this little one. There are adults that couldn't do what she did. Her future is very bright, despite what she's been through.
At least they let her have someone familiar there with her on the stand. Video testimony is excellent, but the defense attorneys later play hard with the appeals that there was someone off camera coaching the child. The stress is just as bad after when you hear that there is a chance they could get out or temporarily bond out again.
I got to testify by closed circuit TV from inside the courthouse, I was lucky there, and I have have since realized how rare that chance actually is, but I chose to make the victim impact statement in person. Easily the worst part, in ways, but I'm glad I did it and I'm glad this child did too. I am so proud of this little one. There are adults that couldn't do what she did. Her future is very bright, despite what she's been through.
I couldn't agree with you more. Unfortunately, some defense lawyers feel they must exercise their "client[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]'s(thing's)[/FONT]" 6th amendment right to have their a[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]c[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]cuser[/FONT] face them in a court of law. Consequently, it does allow many of these lowlifes to escape the full consequences of their crimes, if a justifiably traumatized child cannot do what this[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif] brave little girl [/FONT]has done. I can't help but wonder when the Constitution was drafted that they ever envisioned a time when [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]such evil [/FONT]men would be able to brutalize children this way and still be able bodied enough to stand trial or that a defense lawyer would use any slimy trick they [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]could[/FONT] to get their "client" a lenient sentence or to be found not guilty.
At least this defense lawyer knew to stay silent.
not_my_kids
New Member
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2008
- Messages
- 12,689
- Reaction score
- 285
No, each side is entitled to know the other's witnesses. It may not have been choice, the judge may have removed his right to cross examine her, they never say why the attorney didn't go after her. I think the chances are better that the defense attorney was a human being, doing a job, and so no reason to harm a child further to complete that job. Some of them really are good people that happen to defend monsters as a job.
This case is so sad for me as nothing has changed in over 11 years. All eight of our children had to face their rapist for their hours on the stand, as did their five older siblings were not victims. In fact, they had to be walked past him to get to the stand. We tried so hard to prevent one child, who is autistic, severely cognitively challenged and deaf (but reads lips), from having to testify to no avail. The DA just learned to communicate with her and the judge accepted her testimony as it was shocking in its simplicity. The argument was used that the children had "to face their attacker". They also had to testify with their school librarian (the rapist's mother--a person of authority in their life) staring at them. The children ranged in age from 8-13 at the time of the trial and all have documented special needs. The media reported the children's testimony.
When the children were compelled to re-testify 9 years later in a Post Conviction Relief Trial, that's when we dealt with the rash of suicide attempts. I've never understood why our children's long and detailed and well video-taped disclosures weren't enough. The defense was gentle with a few of the children but brutal with others. I'm certain that the act of testifying played a part in the long term PTSD. All broke down on the stand and two trembled uncontrollably. One looked at the judge and pleaded with him to make the rapist stop staring at them. I was not allowed to make eye contact with the children as the defense attorney complained that I might influence them. I was allowed, through much wrangling, to escort them to and from the stand. The defense had asked that a bailiff escort them. They were also allowed a pre-trial walk through of the courtroom.
One of the young men to testify (not related to our family) did die of a suicide several years later. So, yes, it takes unbelievable courage and is most certainly not child-friendly. I wish there was a kinder way to handle our precious children in these horrific trials. I'm hopeful that this little girl has years of supportive therapy set up for her. She's going to need it. My heart goes out to her for her bravery.
When the children were compelled to re-testify 9 years later in a Post Conviction Relief Trial, that's when we dealt with the rash of suicide attempts. I've never understood why our children's long and detailed and well video-taped disclosures weren't enough. The defense was gentle with a few of the children but brutal with others. I'm certain that the act of testifying played a part in the long term PTSD. All broke down on the stand and two trembled uncontrollably. One looked at the judge and pleaded with him to make the rapist stop staring at them. I was not allowed to make eye contact with the children as the defense attorney complained that I might influence them. I was allowed, through much wrangling, to escort them to and from the stand. The defense had asked that a bailiff escort them. They were also allowed a pre-trial walk through of the courtroom.
One of the young men to testify (not related to our family) did die of a suicide several years later. So, yes, it takes unbelievable courage and is most certainly not child-friendly. I wish there was a kinder way to handle our precious children in these horrific trials. I'm hopeful that this little girl has years of supportive therapy set up for her. She's going to need it. My heart goes out to her for her bravery.
That is all so wrong. Victimized over and over again. The system must be fair but when did we become so obsessed with forever defending the criminal while continuing to inflict pain on the victim?
Texas Mist
Retired WS Staff
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2008
- Messages
- 9,218
- Reaction score
- 132
This is a monster that should never be on the streets again -- he had 3 orders of protection against him before he raped this little girl...I don't understand why those incidents didn't get him behind bars!!
I feel so badly for her -- this *advertiser censored* was talking to her during the rape....Maybe in a few years we'll be reading he got shanked in the big house...I wouldn't cry if it happened.
Anyway, bless these children & the mom...they have all been terrorized....I can't imagine what it's going to take for the little girl to work thru this & not live a life filled with terror.
Two hours on the run and police chased down Brandon Brixey.
The one and three-year-old boys and and eight-year-old daughter were safely returned to their mother.
However, the mother testified in court that she soon discovered her daughter was not safe.
Holding back tears, she told the jury when officers returned her daughter in her arms, the little girl told the her, 'Mommy, he (Brixey) hurt me, he hurt my privates, he hurt my bottom. He is going to hurt us.''
The victims mother told the jury as Brixey was assaulting her daughter, he told the little girl, "This is what daddy's and little girls do and we are going to make a baby'". :furious:
She also told the jury Brixey told the children to call him Daddy and then began to call himself Uncle Bill.
The mother also testified that her daughter fears men and that she refuses to go back to their home in fear Brixey will be there.
She says her daughter is changed person.
A brave little girl who survived an assault that her family hopes will put Brixey behind bars for life.
more here on mom's testimony
http://www.fox23.com/mostpopular/st...a-Child-Rape-Case/HNeZDERFykGRbwPGD-OdVA.cspx
=================================
Last Modified: 7/2/2008 2:50 AM
Three protective orders against him were sought in the last three years.
A suspect in the kidnapping of three children and the rape of one of them last week had a violent past, court records show.
..............
Brixey's mother, Karen Bendell, requested one of the protective orders in November.
Brixey "grabbed me by my arms, slammed me against the wall, choked me and promised me that he would kill me next time if I didn't keep my mouth shut," Bendell wrote in a petition for the protective order.
She also wrote that on Oct. 22, Brixey "held me at gunpoint for 30 minutes."
A judge ordered Brixey out of his mother's home and to have no contact with her for three years, records show.
Two of the protective order applications were filed by Denise Mears, 20, a former girlfriend of Brixey's.
The pair were convicted on felony drug charges and received deferred sentences on gun charges in August.
In a December 2006 complaint, Mears wrote that Brixey "was pushing on me and screaming at me and spitting in my face."
Although that protective order
was later dismissed, Mears asked in September for another one, which was issued for three years.
In that complaint, Mears wrote that Brixey "called my mom and told my mom he was going to cut my neck in front of her and then kill her."
In April, Brixey filed for a protective order against Mears.
In his petition, he wrote that from September through March, Mears "sent me and my family text messages and called me and my family repeatedly during (the) past seven months after my family repeatedly requested her to not contact us."
Brixey also wrote that Mears' mother pulled a gun on him.
Brixey pleaded guilty in April to violating Mears' second protective order.
In that case, police say he referred to a recent domestic-violence shooting in Broken Arrow and told Mears, "I certainly hope that doesn't happen to you."
Mears also reported that her tires were slashed and that Brixey had sent her 31 text messages and telephoned her more than 20 times, threatening her life during some of the calls.
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/arti...rticleid=20080702_11_A9_spancl877442&allcom=1
I feel so badly for her -- this *advertiser censored* was talking to her during the rape....Maybe in a few years we'll be reading he got shanked in the big house...I wouldn't cry if it happened.
Anyway, bless these children & the mom...they have all been terrorized....I can't imagine what it's going to take for the little girl to work thru this & not live a life filled with terror.
Two hours on the run and police chased down Brandon Brixey.
The one and three-year-old boys and and eight-year-old daughter were safely returned to their mother.
However, the mother testified in court that she soon discovered her daughter was not safe.
Holding back tears, she told the jury when officers returned her daughter in her arms, the little girl told the her, 'Mommy, he (Brixey) hurt me, he hurt my privates, he hurt my bottom. He is going to hurt us.''
The victims mother told the jury as Brixey was assaulting her daughter, he told the little girl, "This is what daddy's and little girls do and we are going to make a baby'". :furious:
She also told the jury Brixey told the children to call him Daddy and then began to call himself Uncle Bill.
The mother also testified that her daughter fears men and that she refuses to go back to their home in fear Brixey will be there.
She says her daughter is changed person.
A brave little girl who survived an assault that her family hopes will put Brixey behind bars for life.
more here on mom's testimony
http://www.fox23.com/mostpopular/st...a-Child-Rape-Case/HNeZDERFykGRbwPGD-OdVA.cspx
=================================
Last Modified: 7/2/2008 2:50 AM
Three protective orders against him were sought in the last three years.
A suspect in the kidnapping of three children and the rape of one of them last week had a violent past, court records show.
..............
Brixey's mother, Karen Bendell, requested one of the protective orders in November.
Brixey "grabbed me by my arms, slammed me against the wall, choked me and promised me that he would kill me next time if I didn't keep my mouth shut," Bendell wrote in a petition for the protective order.
She also wrote that on Oct. 22, Brixey "held me at gunpoint for 30 minutes."
A judge ordered Brixey out of his mother's home and to have no contact with her for three years, records show.
Two of the protective order applications were filed by Denise Mears, 20, a former girlfriend of Brixey's.
The pair were convicted on felony drug charges and received deferred sentences on gun charges in August.
In a December 2006 complaint, Mears wrote that Brixey "was pushing on me and screaming at me and spitting in my face."
Although that protective order
was later dismissed, Mears asked in September for another one, which was issued for three years.
In that complaint, Mears wrote that Brixey "called my mom and told my mom he was going to cut my neck in front of her and then kill her."
In April, Brixey filed for a protective order against Mears.
In his petition, he wrote that from September through March, Mears "sent me and my family text messages and called me and my family repeatedly during (the) past seven months after my family repeatedly requested her to not contact us."
Brixey also wrote that Mears' mother pulled a gun on him.
Brixey pleaded guilty in April to violating Mears' second protective order.
In that case, police say he referred to a recent domestic-violence shooting in Broken Arrow and told Mears, "I certainly hope that doesn't happen to you."
Mears also reported that her tires were slashed and that Brixey had sent her 31 text messages and telephoned her more than 20 times, threatening her life during some of the calls.
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/arti...rticleid=20080702_11_A9_spancl877442&allcom=1
not_my_kids
New Member
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2008
- Messages
- 12,689
- Reaction score
- 285
Gee, here's a novel concept for those that make the laws. For quite some time, he has attempted to prey on those weaker than him, this last time, he chose children, even easier to control than women...once a predator always a predator.
Although, even I have to admit, from his earlier crimes, I would have thought he would destroy an adult, not a child. Just goes to show, once a predator has shown what they are, there is no reason to let them back out on the street. Civil commitment.
Although, even I have to admit, from his earlier crimes, I would have thought he would destroy an adult, not a child. Just goes to show, once a predator has shown what they are, there is no reason to let them back out on the street. Civil commitment.
GannyP
Searching for Truth
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2008
- Messages
- 316
- Reaction score
- 127
Yet another instance which shows that our system is in its totality FOR the rights of criminals. There HAS to be laws passed that protect the rights of the VICTIMS at least equally to the criminal!! Disgusting that this brave child had to suffer abuse first by her rapist and then by the court.
Thankfully she didn't undego defense questioning, however I hope it was not a ploy to ask for retrial. This monster needs to be under lock and key for the rest of his life!
Thankfully she didn't undego defense questioning, however I hope it was not a ploy to ask for retrial. This monster needs to be under lock and key for the rest of his life!
My suggestion is for the victims rights groups in Oklahoma to go over their laws about now. Every person should know the victims rights laws in their state. Openmind, ITA, that the system is set up to protect the rights of the criminal. Victims have had to fight like heck to be afforded their rights. Many people believe that they are automatically afforded by the law buy they are not.
The scary thing is is that this child and her family will be re-traumatized upon appeal, upon Supreme Court trial, upon Post Conviction Relief Trial, upon request for Governor's clemency, and upon the criminal's release. The PCRT is a trial which is held years after all appeals have been exhausted and is where the criminal civilly sues his/her attorneys for failure to represent. Many states allow the criminal to call the original victim as a witness FOR THEM!! Our kids were called nine years after the original crime. Shocking and appalling but true. That is the trauma that I speak of frequently. The very real pain of dealing with the system does not end the day of the trial when you walk out of the courtroom with a conviction. I think that really surprises some people, especially victims.
Go to:
http://www.doj.state.or.us/crimev/cvr/pdf/book_eng.pdf
and scroll down to the top of page 10:
YOU MAY NOT BE REQUIRED TO PARTICIPATE IN A POST-CONVICTION RELEASE
PROCEEDING WITHOUT A COURT ORDER REQUIRING YOU TO PARTICIPATE.
"You may not be forced to testify at a hearing, disposition or in any other
way in a post-conviction release proceeding unless a court allows a
subpoena. A court may not allow a subpoena unless the person who wants
you to testify shows that you have important information that is favorable
to the convicted person and the information was not used at trial. If you
end up having to testify, your testimony may be given over the phone or by
another communication device approved by the court."
Do you see blood, sweat, and tears dripping from those words? You should. This is our kids' legacy. It was Senate Bill 985 and became law in 2007. We were overwhelmed and shocked that their testimony (and mine...and ALL our private records up until the PCRT--financial, school, medical, personal diaries, and therapy records created after the trial) was compelled. Compelled.
Because of the way the laws were written, the judges could not deny the motions and were powerless to protect the kids or our privacy. We set about fighting to change the law. We worked hand in hand with the Attorney General and Crime Victims United of Oregon. It was just another walk through hell, but the outcome felt pretty great. As the bill moved through the Legislature, it was known as the L****** bill. It is now in the statutes. Our kids got to be on the floor when the final vote was announced.
You either lay down and die or you stand up and fight.
The scary thing is is that this child and her family will be re-traumatized upon appeal, upon Supreme Court trial, upon Post Conviction Relief Trial, upon request for Governor's clemency, and upon the criminal's release. The PCRT is a trial which is held years after all appeals have been exhausted and is where the criminal civilly sues his/her attorneys for failure to represent. Many states allow the criminal to call the original victim as a witness FOR THEM!! Our kids were called nine years after the original crime. Shocking and appalling but true. That is the trauma that I speak of frequently. The very real pain of dealing with the system does not end the day of the trial when you walk out of the courtroom with a conviction. I think that really surprises some people, especially victims.
Go to:
http://www.doj.state.or.us/crimev/cvr/pdf/book_eng.pdf
and scroll down to the top of page 10:
YOU MAY NOT BE REQUIRED TO PARTICIPATE IN A POST-CONVICTION RELEASE
PROCEEDING WITHOUT A COURT ORDER REQUIRING YOU TO PARTICIPATE.
"You may not be forced to testify at a hearing, disposition or in any other
way in a post-conviction release proceeding unless a court allows a
subpoena. A court may not allow a subpoena unless the person who wants
you to testify shows that you have important information that is favorable
to the convicted person and the information was not used at trial. If you
end up having to testify, your testimony may be given over the phone or by
another communication device approved by the court."
Do you see blood, sweat, and tears dripping from those words? You should. This is our kids' legacy. It was Senate Bill 985 and became law in 2007. We were overwhelmed and shocked that their testimony (and mine...and ALL our private records up until the PCRT--financial, school, medical, personal diaries, and therapy records created after the trial) was compelled. Compelled.
Because of the way the laws were written, the judges could not deny the motions and were powerless to protect the kids or our privacy. We set about fighting to change the law. We worked hand in hand with the Attorney General and Crime Victims United of Oregon. It was just another walk through hell, but the outcome felt pretty great. As the bill moved through the Legislature, it was known as the L****** bill. It is now in the statutes. Our kids got to be on the floor when the final vote was announced.
You either lay down and die or you stand up and fight.
impatientredhead
New Member
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2008
- Messages
- 6,475
- Reaction score
- 35
In my opinion it has nothing to do with the victim, what is best for her, or the defense attorney being a good person.
He didn't question her because it would not help his clients case.
He didn't question her because being viewed by the jury as bullying a child won't help his case.
The only thing questioning her could have achieved was prolonging the jury's exposure to a very sympathetic witness/victim. The only other effect would be to bring out more details that make his client look like the rabid animal he is.