Not guilty: Jury acquits Hart in child molestation case

The jury trying the case against Stephen Hart, who faced two charges accusing him of first degree child molestation, came back with an acquittal on both charges after four hours of deliberation Friday. The mother of the children stormed out of the courtroom when the verdicts were announced; but 28th Circuit Court Presiding Judge James Bickel stopped anyone else from leaving until the jury had a chance to leave without being accosted.

"You are free to answer any questions and discuss this with anyone but no one can compel you to talk about it if you don't want to," Bickel said to jurors.

The trial began Thursday, with lengthy video-taped testimony from both girls, who were ages 10 and 12 when the case began. When the court resumed the trial Friday morning, Catherine Hissink was the first live witness. Hissink testified the two children were first brought to her by the mother in February 2007 during a custody fight.

Hissink testified that neither of the children mentioned any form of sexual contact with Hart at that time. Hissink said the first mention of any such contact was during a session with both children present in June 2007.

After Hissink's testimony, Vernon County Prosecutor Lynn Ewing III rested the state's case at approximately 9 a.m.; and Hart's attorney, Ross Rhoades, began presenting his defense, after Bickel ruled against a motion to acquit Rhoades made.

The first defense witness was the children's stepmother, who, along with the children's father, shared custody with their mother. She testified that the children had behavioral problems and they had asked the Harts to give the children naps when they were watching them and that the children napped at her home as well.

Ewing did not cross examine the stepmother at the end of her testimony.

The second witness called was Hart's wife, Charlotte, who testified about her husband's health and the schedule they maintained when watching the children.

Ewing asked Charlotte if she were under subpoena or if she were there voluntarily, she replied she was there voluntarily.

Hart himself was the next to testify. Before letting Hart take the stand Bickel told Hart that he had a Constitutional right not to testify and that no inference was to be drawn if he didn't.

Hart denied any sexual contact with any child and testified about his medical conditions, which included erectile dysfunction, and the usual schedule when caring for the children.

Bickel gave the jury several instructions including one about not singling out one instruction above others to follow, the presumption of innocence, reasonable doubt and what was required to return a verdict on each of the counts.

The two attorneys then presented their closing arguments each highlighting different aspects of the testimony and then the jury was sent to the jury room for deliberations.

The jury sent out two questions during deliberations, the first was "What happens if we can't agree unanimously?" and the second was "Can we read transcripts of the video depositions?"

Judge James Bickel sent an answer back to the second question first. In part he said: "Your collective memories of the information presented must suffice."

For the answer to the first question Bickel brought the jury back into the courtroom and told them they should attempt to come to a unanimous verdict, that no one should force anyone to change their mind if they held a firm conviction but that no one should be afraid to change their mind if they honestly believed in the change.

The jury deliberated an additional two hours before returning their verdict of not guilty.