Ruling clouds Davis taped testimony Supreme Court's latest may require children to appear in court Sat, May 22, 2004 By LORETTA PARK Standard-Examiner Davis Bureau lpark@standard.net FARMINGTON -- A recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling may impact the use of videotaped interviews with children in Utah child-sex and physical abuse trials, attorneys say. Defense attorney Terry Cathcart, who is representing former Sunset Councilman Mel Vern H. Wood, recently asked the judge for a continuance so he could research how the ruling impacts his case. Another hearing has been set for June 8. Wood, 70, is charged with first-degree aggravated sexual abuse of a child. He appeared in Judge Rodney S. Page's court Tuesday for a pretrial conference. He had pleaded innocent to the charge on April 20. He faces up to life in prison if convicted. The charge stems from an alleged incident that occurred sometime between Oct. 24 and Oct. 26, last year. Davis County Deputy Attorney Troy Rawlings said the March ruling concerning Crawford v. Washington requires that statements made out of court by a potential witness for a criminal case to police cannot be submitted in court, unless the witness goes on the stand and is available for cross-examination. In August of 1999, Kenneth Lee was stabbed at his apartment and Michael Crawford was later arrested. His wife, Sylvia Crawford, made statements to the police, which were later used in court. But Sylvia Crawford was never put on the stand to testify because of the state marital privilege, which generally bars a spouse from testifying without the other spouse's consent. Prosecutors used her statements to police to convict her husband. The Supreme Court ruled that unless a witness can be put on the stand and be available for cross-examination, statements made to police cannot be used in court. Rawlings said it has always been the practice of the county attorney's office to put a child who is under 14 on the stand, if they are old enough, "because it strengthens our case" and "it is fairer to the jury if they are able to evaluate the credibility of the child." In the Wood case, the alleged victim is 4 years old, Rawlings said. He said as he has analyzed the Supreme Court case he believes that video statements made by children at the Children's Justice Center can still be submitted as long as the child understands the video is not testimony and they will likely testify at a trial. The videotapes are used for other purposes besides testimony in the courtroom. Also, he is suggesting a policy that if a police officer is in the room with the child during the interview with the case worker, the police officer cannot be dressed in uniform and should only sit and watch the procedure. Copyright ©2004, Ogden Publishing Corporation