Craft trial, day 16
To begin the day, the defense called Dr. Nancy Aldridge, a clinical social worker from Atlanta, to the stand. After establishing Aldridge's credentials to the court, and with no objections from the prosecution, the court entered her as an expert witness.
Aldridge, who has testified as an expert witness more than 200 times in her career, stressed the importance of looking at each case as a whole, in order to establish objective unbiased opinions.
The defense also discussed the knowledge required for one to conduct interviews. Aldridge said interviewers who do not have the proper knowledge of the required literature would be "irresponsible" in her opinion.
"If a child were told that something happened, and it was from someone the child looked up to, and if an adult said it in a way that was plausible to the child, the child could later believe that it actually happened to them," Aldridge said.
Become a CatWalkChatt Facebook fan
Get breaking news alerts. Make comments. Tell us the latest development on a story. Share your photos. To become a fan click here, then click on the "Like" button at the top of our Facebook page. Also, follow us on Twitter.
Aldridge took that philosophy a step further by stating that children are likely to agree with or believe a person of authority, especially if it is a person or figure they are taught to respect. “Children often see adults as being omnipotent, and knowing more than them.”
Craft, 37, a former Chickamauga Elementary School kindergarten teacher, is accused of molesting three children.
The trial is being held in Catoosa County Superior Court in downtown Ringgold, with Judge Brian House presiding.
She is facing 22 counts, including 10 counts of child molestation, six counts of aggravated sexual battery and six counts of aggravated child molestation.
She has maintained her innocence since her arrest in June 2008. She was fired from her job at Chickamauga Elementary.
Her trial began April 12 with the jury selection process and is expected to last four weeks. The jury consists of seven men and five women.
Defense attorney Demosthenes Lorandos asked Aldridge to explain the signifigance of questioning that goes into interviews with children.
“Interviewers should not go into an interview with one belief or one hypothesis, because it could lead them to looking for certain statements,” Aldridge said. “Repeated questions are harmful as well. If a child gives an answer, and then asked repeatedly the same question, they then feel that their answer may be wrong and change that answer.”
Aldridge broke down the videotaped interviews she received of the three girl victims.
She pointed out that the interviewer of victim #1 didn’t seem to follow any of the guidelines one should when conducting interviews with potential victims of child abuse.
Aldridge said she noticed 16 instances in the videoed interviews in which interviewers asked the question, “Is there anything else?,” which is a form of leading or suggestive questioning.
Lorandos asked Aldridge to summarize or give an overall consensus of the interview she observed of victim #1. She discussed how she believed that the child told the interviewer what she recalled. Repeated questions then caused the child to change her answer satisfy the interviewer’s desire for another answer, Aldrige said.
Later on in the exchange, Lorandos highlighted in the video transcript an instance in which victim #2 made a statement to her interviewer that was deemed “inaudible.” Earlier in the trial when that victim’s father was on the witness stand, the defense played the video for the father, who concurred that his daughter said, “My Mommy told me which was which and where they touched me.”
When Lorandos asked Aldridge of the significance of the phrase in question, she replied, “That’s how the child knows what she knows.” When Lorandos asked about the significance as to why the police would deem that phrase as “inaudible,” she said, “It didn’t fit with their theory.”
The defense concluded line of questioning by establishing a timeline of emotion established by victim #3. Lorandos cited many different checkpoints in treatment of the child, and the notes that were taken by the therapist on those particular days.
He explained that four days after the allegations came out, the child stated that Craft had applied medicine to her; 23 days later, the child states that she doesn’t want to see Craft and doesn’t miss her; and finally on day 187, the child is described as being extremely anxious, scared, and angry towards Craft for “what she did.”
The defense argued that these emotions all escalated over a period of time in which the girl had no contact with Craft; therefore it was curious as to how a child’s opinion could vary so drastically, having had no other encounters with the person they were now mad at.
Tempers between the councils continued to flare Monday as defense attorney Lorandos addressed the court before the jury entered the room.
Lorandos spoke to Judge House regarding what he described as continuous personal attacks by the prosecution on the defense as a whole, the media, as well as veterans who suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Lorandos also cited interest expressed by the public regarding the proceedings, in addition to the unprofessional behavior exhibited by prosecutors Chis Arnt and Len Gregor.
Court will resume on Tuesday at 9 a.m.
Become a CatWalkChatt Facebook fan
Get breaking news alerts. Make comments. Tell us the latest development on a story. Share your photos. To become a fan click here, then click on the "Like" button at the top of our Facebook page. Also, follow us on Twitter.
If Tonya is acquitted on these charges, and I believe she will be, I hope there are repercussions for the prosecutors, police, and people who have tried to manipulate justice for their own means. I also hope that Tonya is able to file civil suit against them & recoup some of her lost finances.
Earlier in the trial when that victim’s father was on the witness stand, the defense played the video for the father, who concurred that his daughter said, “My Mommy told me which was which and where they touched me.”
When Lorandos asked Aldridge of the significance of the phrase in question, she replied, “That’s how the child knows what she knows.” When Lorandos asked about the significance as to why the police would deem that phrase as “inaudible,” she said, “It didn’t fit with their theory.”