holding that, while expert testimony as to who had abused two brothers aged four and five was objectionable, “[e]xpert testimony relating to whether the children had been sexually abused was properly admitted”
How later courts described this case
- holding that, while expert testimony as to who had abused two brothers aged four and five was objectionable, “[e]xpert testimony relating to whether the children had been sexually abused was properly admitted”
- holding hearsay statement of incompetent child admissible because it was reliable as determined by trial court looking at circumstances under which statement was made
- warranted search of premises where alleged abuse took place revealed physical evidence and photographs corroborating victims’ stories
- physician’s interview of four year old before sexual assault examination allowed her to obtain idea of what specific sexual contact may have occurred, “and to build trust between doctor and child to minimize trauma” of the ensuing physical examination
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
POPOVICH, Justice
(dissenting).
I concur in the dissent of Justice Kelley for the reasons stated.