GA - *ACQUITTED* Tonya Craft, teacher, faced 22 false counts of child molestation

[butwhatif?]

BBM

True, but is it not possible that a woman can be overtly sexual and still be appropriate with children? Being a sexual person doesn't necessarily mean you'd involve children. I think you can be a good mom and still be sexy - with adults.

But she's not entirely wholesome with children. The boundaries seem blurred to me.
I know that my DD's teacher is very wholesome in the classroom, but I don't know what she gets up to in her spare time- that's none of my business, but it's also why I would never allow DD to go to a party or sleepover at her house.
They should have stuck to parties for kids and parties for adults, not all of them together....especially when alcohol is involved.

And they should not have mixed school and pleasure/parties...that's just a disaster waiting to happen imo. She's their teacher- she shouldn't be their friend and baby-sitter too.

And who lets their kid be watched by someone who had to write a letter of apology to everyone for her drunken behaviour?
Bad judgement all round imo.

I'm beginning to think that Tonyas suggestion that the stepmom was possibly sexually abusing her own daughter (interestingly, just after her daughter says she now has two mommies), spiralled into a tit-for-tat revenge scenario, and these poor kids have been dragged into a nightmare.

Can someone please link me to where it says that tonyas daughter helped shave her stepmoms pubic hair? From every article I've read, it says the daughter noticed the difference between her mom and stepmom while showering with stepmom- not that she shaved it for her. BIG difference.

My six yr old dd showers with me sometimes, and my 11 yr old neice has walked in on me in the shower. I don't tell them 'dont look down there'. Of course they notice these things. They're curious.

And one more thing, the kids may have been coached, they may have actually known about these things from their own admitted gf/bf play, or they may have seen it from being exposed to , either by an adult, another child, or just from being online.

Regardless, if it were my child involved I would absolutely err on the side of caution and get it all checked out. but i would also tell them that the most important thing was telling the truth, no matter what it is, and if they were making it up, or told to say it, they would not get into ANY trouble for changing their story.
JMO

 

[kbl8201]

well she goes to get it checked out and the next thing she knows the cops are barging down her door, accusing her and taking her kids. not like she had a chance. and then the prosecutors would just say she was the one that coached them anyways.

 

[butwhatif?]

I was watching the Today Show this morning and Wendy Murphy implied that since Ms. Craft had a relationship with a woman she was capable of these crimes. Even Matt Lauer had to break with the neutral and call her out on that. Seriously, what kind of logic is that? Women *are* capable of abusing children, but the kind of clothes they wear, or having consenting adult homosexual relationships, are not indicators of that at all. I can't believe those things were even allowed in the trial, let alone alleged on national TV.

Some of the bloggers in this case have alleged that the vaginal injuries she mentioned on The Today Show may not have been properly assessed either. I don't know, and honestly I don't really want to know details, but there's at least some doubt out there about the validity of that claim.

We talked a lot about childhood memory in my college psychology classes, specifically in connection with things like the Little Rascals case. And the truth is, kids DO lie, or misremember, or mis-report. Especially the very young ones. Asking a young child repeatedly "Is there anything else?" is a blueprint for getting an outrageous tall tale. Kids want to please, and if they think adults are displeased with the stories they're telling, they DO have the imaginations to come up with more. These interrogations, at least as reported, sound incredibly mis-handled.

I can't say for sure what The Truth is in this case, but something very weird is going on here. I'm not sure it's an active conspiracy, but it very well might be a grudge snowballed in with a lot of ignorance about sexuality and child psychology.

I thought the lesbian issue was noteworthy only because she did not openly admit to having a lesbian experience. She claims that she was drugged, and woke up in bed with another woman?? C'mon! Why not be entirely honest about it?
Her ex hubbys statement that he found her with lesbian , backs up the fact that she may be bi-sexual. That's no biggie, and has absolutely NOTHING to do with child molestation, but why not admit it and move on?

Her denial, and claims that she she was drugged just don't sit well with me.
I don't care if she was worried that her sexuality would be put under scrutiny, what I care about is the truth,the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

ETA: CORRECTION: Am just now reading that witness (ex-hubby?) didn't 'catch' her watching girl-on-girl - they were watching it together. (not that it really matters either way, just wanting to correct my mistake)

He is saying the night Craft went drinking with a female friend and woke up next to her that Craft told him she thought she had been drugged. Prosecution asks, "Are you the same person you are today that watched with the defendant?" He replies, "I'm not the same person today."

http://www.walkermessenger.com/view...0?instance=news_special_coverage_right_column

I do have to wonder why she didn't report an incident where she believed she had been drugged and possibly raped. Or did she? Hard to get the right info with the media saying different things.

 

[kbl8201]

so she doesnt want to come out of the closet, so what?

what does any of this have to do with the case? and if this was a 'fair' trial that would be cause for a mistriall.

and the nonsense about the wedding dress is so absurd it proves how desperate they are to get a conviction. and depening on what kind of close minded people might be on the jury, that might work.

 

[kbl8201]

i'll come back to this thread when there's a verdict. right now i need to step away.

 

[butwhatif?]

well she goes to get it checked out and the next thing she knows the cops are barging down her door, accusing her and taking her kids. not like she had a chance. and then the prosecutors would just say she was the one that coached them anyways.

Did they stop the kids from seeing dad and stepmom when she wanted the step-mom investigated?

I don't understand why she isn't even able to have supervised visitation with her daughter. That way they could be certain that no coaching was going on by Tonya.
But to just rip a child from her mom like that is just waaaaay wrong, and paves the way for coaching by others. Especially if it was proven that one of the witnesses had A LOT of phone contact with Dad .

 

[butwhatif?]

so she doesnt want to come out of the closet, so what?

what does any of this have to do with the case? and if this was a 'fair' trial that would be cause for a mistriall.

and the nonsense about the wedding dress is so absurd it proves how desperate they are to get a conviction. and depening on what kind of close minded people might be on the jury, that might work.

She is under oath!!! That's what! It hurts her own defence to not be entirely honest about everything.

 

[kbl8201]

oh so her ex the step mom, and the prosecutors can lie, and they can coach the kids to lie, about what the case is ACTUALLY about. but if she lies about a collateral matter thats wrong. i dont get it. it has nothing to do with this case. it shouldnt have been brought up, it has no place in this trial. and it should have caused a mistrial.

i've seen witchunts, i worked on a case that haunts me to this day cause a woman has been convicted of murdering a man she never met simply cause of what her lifestyle was. i dont particpiate in witchunts.

 

[butwhatif?]

oh so her ex the step mom, and the prosecutors can lie, and they can coach the kids to lie, about what the case is ACTUALLY about. but if she lies about a collateral matter thats wrong. i dont get it. it has nothing to do with this case. it shouldnt have been brought up, it has no place in this trial. and it should have caused a mistrial.

i've seen witchunts, i worked on a case that haunts me to this day cause a woman has been convicted of murdering a man she never met simply cause of what her lifestyle was. i dont particpiate in witchunts.

It's a courtroom- everyone should be telling the truth. But it rarely works that way.
I know that if I was in her position I would list every embarrassing or shameful thing (not that any orientation should make anyone feel ashamed) I've done, so that the jury knows that they can trust my honesty, and show them that I have absolutely NOTHING to hide.
If I'm open about the things I wouldn't normally want the public to know then they will know that I am nothing but honest.
She is fighting to clear her name, and hopefully regain custody of her daughter. The truth sets people free. Hiding things, makes a jury suspicious of what else they may be hiding.
JMO

 

[kbl8201]

well im praying the jury sees this is nonsense.

 

[butwhatif?]

well im praying the jury sees this is nonsense.

I really can't see a jury coming back with a guilty verdict. There's no way they've met their burden of proof. Not even close, imo.

If/when she's found not guilty, will she be re-united with her daughter? Or will it be tried all over again in a custody battle in family court?

 

[kbl8201]

i think even with an acquittal she is still screwed as far as custody (and her job) goes. unless the girls suddenly come forward and say something.

 

[keeponsearching]

I don't understand why some just assume she is not telling the truth. I mean her ex just said he doesn't watch anymore, I might wonder if he is lying, and does the fact that anyone watch adult make them a bad person. She might of blacked out that night. It can happen to anyone.
I wonder, if any of the children every came home that "day" from Tonyas and said we had baths at so and so. Or it just came up a year later. Doesn't make sense.

 

[tlcya]

Just watched coverage of this case on GMA and found something really disturbing in the conversation I had not known previously. Apparently one of the child/victims (alleged?) has done some acting and actually played the role of a sexually abused child. I am assuming that there would have to have been some coaching involved in the preparation to play that role and this disturbs me. I wonder how much that played into the interview of this child and her responses to questions.

 

[Jade]

"Also on Today the woman said Ms Craft said didn’t know why she was
being accused. According to testimony it is because “she ticked off” the parents:


http://www.chattanoogan.com/articles/article_175191.asp"






That's not what the testimony ferreted out. That was Ms. Craft's version. Phone records prove at least one parent was very friendly with her and unaware of any sexual molestation up until police contacted HER wanting to interview her daughter!

Yes, that is Ms Craft’s statement. Then she gave instances.

My point is that the Today Show women gave an inaccurate synopsis of the facts.

She said TC said on the stand she didn’t know why she was being accused.

As far as your reference to the other testimony I am not understanding what that has to do with the inaccurate information conveyed on the Today Show that TC did not know why when she testified she did know why.

There is relevant discussion, imo, about how the accusations came about and who talked to who but it has no impact on the fact the Today Show women was wrong in those two statements.

 

[elle1919]

still waiting for a verdict : http://www.newsrunner.com/display-a...=Former+GA+Teacher+Fights+Molestation+Charges

snip~Craft faces 22 counts, including child molestation, aggravated child molestation and aggravated sexual abuse, Chattanoogan.com reported. The jury will continue deliberations Tuesday in the 21-day trial, according to the Chattanooga Free Press.

"I never ever imagined that someone that did absolutely nothing could be arrested, indicted and face the rest of your life in prison," Craft said.

Craft said she believes the children were playing on their own when she wasn't looking.

"I think that what has happened is more within a travesty. I think that the experts have explained how something this horrible can happen," Craft said. "But I think there's a lot of things that have been done wrong that I know I did not do … anything to these children."

Craft's own daughter is one of the three young girls she has been accused of abusing. She lost custody of the girl in 2008. ~end

 

[elle1919]

Video of charges read to jury: http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/2010/may/11/video-charges-given-jury/

 

[Jade]

I thought the lesbian issue was noteworthy only because she did not openly admit to having a lesbian experience. She claims that she was drugged, and woke up in bed with another woman?? C'mon! Why not be entirely honest about it?
Her ex hubbys statement that he found her with lesbian , backs up the fact that she may be bi-sexual. That's no biggie, and has absolutely NOTHING to do with child molestation, but why not admit it and move on?

Her denial, and claims that she she was drugged just don't sit well with me.
I don't care if she was worried that her sexuality would be put under scrutiny, what I care about is the truth,the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

ETA: CORRECTION: Am just now reading that witness (ex-hubby?) didn't 'catch' her watching girl-on-girl - they were watching it together. (not that it really matters either way, just wanting to correct my mistake)



http://www.walkermessenger.com/view...0?instance=news_special_coverage_right_column

I do have to wonder why she didn't report an incident where she believed she had been drugged and possibly raped. Or did she? Hard to get the right info with the media saying different things.

Where do you get all of that out of your link?! :

He is saying the night Craft went drinking with a female friend and woke up next to her that Craft told him she thought she had been drugged.

I think that this testimony from the father of one of the accusers [/I]is better described in this article:
http://www.chattanoogan.com/articles/article_174160.asp

Going to the idea of Ms. Craft’s “prior bad acts” the prosecution asked the father of child witness #3 if he had knowledge of an instance where the defendant had done anything that might construed as other than heterosexual. His answer was that he knew of an instance where she had gone out one evening with a female companion and had not returned home until the following day.

He said she told him that she remembered having a few drinks at a nightclub and the next thing she realized was that she woke up at the friend’s home in the same bed with the girlfriend.

Under cross-examination, the witness could not recall any other details of the incident.

This is how Ms. Craft testified:

http://www.chattanoogan.com/articles/article_175102.asp

“What’s this about you blacking out with Jennifer Sullivan?” “Joal took this and added more things to it to make me look bad. Jennifer and I had gone to dinner and I had a few more drinks than she did because she was driving.” She said they had gone back to Ms. Sullivan’s and taken off their make-up, put on their “jammies” and gone to bed. She also said that no one was looking for her, nor did anyone walk in on them.

 

[tlcya]

TY for the link elle but when I click it I get a "blog not found" message and then a prompt to return to the home page.

 

[kbl8201]

the longer the jury is out the better