Robert Aldridge & Jennifer Wilcox - Perjury

North Carolina --  Aldridge and Wilcox (1 of 3) Aldridge, Robert AND Wilcox, Jennifer; OH; NRE: perjury/false accusation, no crime, child sex abuse hysteria, prosecutor misconduct, police officer misconduct, withheld exculpatory evidence, misconduct that is not withholding evidence, witness tampering or misconduct interrogating co-defendant

Suggestibility issues

[Aldridge] 1986 WL 5431; Ct. of Apps. of OH 5/6/86; affirmed

"During the summer of 1984...Aldridge...resided with Ms. Jenny Wilcox in an apartment complex in Huber Heights.

"Aldridge and Wilcox were both arrested...for various sexual assaults committed in the apartment compex with neighborhood children..."

"The children were between 7 and 11 years of age when the alleged offenses occurred."

"Two photographs were shown to each child on more than one occasion. One contained six photographs of males including [Aldridge]. The other contained six photographs of women including a photograph of Jenny Wilcox.

"Three of the children failed to identify the photograph of [Aldridge] until it was shown to them a second or third time."

"[N]othing in the record indicates any impermissible suggestiveness in the composition of the photo spread."

"[T]here was an abundance of evidence of guilt."

[Wilcox] 1987 WL 6822; Ct. of Apps. of OH 2/19/87; affirmed

"We...find that the conviction is supported by the evidence."

[Aldridge] 697 N.E.2d 228; Ct. of Apps. of OH 3/14/97; earlier reversal (not in Westlaw) affirmed, due to Brady violations

"In 1985...Wilcox and...Aldridge...were convicted...A full ten years later their convictions were vacated and a new trial was granted..."

"The investigation arose out of a complaint lodged by Sheila Hess, a resident of the [apartment] complex, who had heard that several neighborhood children had become sexually active with one another. Hess was especially alarmed because she believed that her six-year-old daughter [M.L.] along with three other five-year-olds...had been forced to engage in sexual activities with two neighborhood boys. The boys were initially identified as [JuC], age seven, and [SC], age four.

"Huber Heights Police Detective Jennifer Bazell was the primary investigator in the case...Bazell identified the victims in the cases as [MAP], a five-year-old girl, and [ML]. She also identified the suspects as [SB], [JuC], and [JuC's] brothers, eleven-year-old [JaC] and twelve-year-old [JoC]. As Det. Bazell interviewed the alleged victims, five other neighborhood boys ranging in age from eleven to thirteen began to emerge as suspects. Bazell determined that '[b]asically what we had was the suspects were forcing through threats the younger children to have sexual acts with the older kids and also was [sic] trying to force the younger kids to have sexual acts with each other.' The names of more alleged victims emerged as the investigation continued.

"After Bazell's initial investigation...the case took an important turn. Det. Bazell reported receiving phone calls from parents of the children involved, informing her that their children were implicating adults in the alleged sexual encounters. The children were allegedly claiming that the adults were 'having' the older boys have sex with the younger children and had threatened to kill the children if they told anyone. The parents reported that the children had used the names 'Dale,' 'Denny,' 'Eric,' 'Aaron,' and 'Scar Face' in reference to the adults. The parents also told Det. Bazell that the children were saying that the adults were taking photographs and filming the children performing sex acts in several vacant apartments in the complex. An additonal victim, [TS], age six, and an additional suspect, [TS's] brother [RS], age twelve, were identified by the parents. [TS and RS] also implicated adults when they were interviewed by Det. Bazell. Finally, [MAP's] sister [VP], age eight, gave Det. Bazell 'definite information' regarding the photography by adults.

"On the basis of the children's stories, Det. Bazell obtained a search warrant to look for child pornography in the Glenburn Green apartment where Jenny Wilcox and Dale Aldridge lived. The search revealed both developed and undeveloped rolls of cartridge film and movie film, but none contained child pornography."

"Det. Bazell concluded that Dale Aldridge and Jenny Wilcox were the leaders of a group of adults who had been repeatedly sexually molesting the children of Glenburn Green...Det. Bazell continued her investigation into the role of the other named adults and the neighborhood boys who were the initial suspects. While most of the boys denied any sexual conduct, two of them, [JuC and NR], admitted to having performed some sexual acts with younger children, but denied being a part of the other alleged sexual abuse."

"According to her own report, Det. Bazell began her interview with [JoC] by telling him that she was authorized to detain him at the Juvenile Detention Center unless he gave her 'some information that [she] requested.' She then proceeded to tell [JoC] what the other children had said about adults directing, filming, and participating in sexual abuse at the apartment complex. She again told [JoC] that if he failed to 'cooperate,' he would be detained at Juvenile Detention Center. [Only then did JoC begin] to identify several adults, including...Aldridge, as participants in sexual abuse. Det. Bazell reported the following:

'When I started going through the list of victims...he changed his story to where he stated thet he heard that all of those people were there. He then started denying any part of it...He changed his mind and he stated that he really didn't know what happened over there, that he wasn't there, that he had just heard that certain people were there, that he wasn't sure what apartment it happened in, etc. I started explaining to [JoC] once again that, if he didn't come clean with me and was honest, he was going to be detained at Juvenile Detention Center. I also advised him that it was a very serious situation that we had, that he was withholding information and that he was withholding information and that I needed it. [JoC] still continued to change his story around. Finally I advised him that I was going to have him detained at the Juvenile Detention Center and if at any point he changed his mind and wanted to cooperate with me then he should get in touch with me. At that time I had [JoC] transported down to the Juvenile Detention Center where he was detained on charges of rape and where he would be held until a hearing.'

[Remember: JoC was just twelve years old. ]

Det. Bazell next threatened to detain [JaC -- age 11] as well if he did not give her the information that she was looking for. When [JaC], like [JoC], explained that he had heard about sexual abuse at one of the apartments but that he was not there, Det. Bazell told him that she would not 'listen to him tell lies' and that she was 'going to have him detained at the Juvenile Detention Center.' [JaC] became upset and began to cry. Det. Bazell had [JaC] taken to a holding cell at the police department to await transfer to juvenile detention. After an uncertain period of time in the holding cell, [JaC] indicated, to a police officer, that he wished to talk to Det. Bazell about two occasions during which several adults had forced [JaC], his brothers, and other boys to engage in sexual activity with younger children.' Det. Bazell reported that she believed that [JoC and JaC] had much more knowledge than they had offered. She released [JaC] to his mother, telling him that she wanted to speak with him again and that she 'wanted more information next time.'"

"[JoC, JaC, and JuC] recanted their testimony in 1992. The ['C'] boys, who are now in their early 20s, claim that they lied during the 1985 trial because they were coerced and frightened by the police and prosecutors."

"[At the post-conviction motion hearing, Aldridge and Wilcox] also called Dr. John Joseph Peterangelo to the stand, who testified that he is [VP's] physician and that he examined her in 1984 regarding the alleged sexual abuse in this case. He testified that his examination revealed no evidence indicative of vaginal or anal penetration by adult males."

"In its findings of fact, the court found that the state failed to disclose exculpatory material to the defendants:

'[I]ncluding, but not limited to, medical examinations conducted of the alleged child victims with negative results, inability of the oldest ['C'] boy to identify Aldridge in a picture, inconsistent statements of [VP, JoC, and JaC], and threats made by Det. Bazell to [JoC and JaC] in the face of their denials of any sexual contact happening.'

"The trial court also found that [TS]...had denied the molestation and that this fact was not disclosed to the defense. Likewise, the court found that inconsistent statements made by [VP] were not provided in discovery. Additionally, the court determined that the state had failed to disclose evidence involving medical examinations* of the alleged victims. First, the court found that the state had received before trial Dr. Peterangelo's report on his examination of [VP], but had not revealed it. The court found that the state similarly failed to disclose that all of the alleged victims had undergone physical examinations, and that none of the girls had shown signs of sexual activity or abuse."

[* The same was true in Nickel's case. It was only well into trial that the defense forced the prosecution to disclose this buried evidence. But by then, it was too late to make effective use of it; and, in any event, much of it was unintelligible.]

[This Ohio 'detective,' Jennifer Bazell, should not have been allowed anywhere near alleged child victim-witnesses. Her grotesquely coercive and suggestive unproffesionalism likely did a great deal of harm to the minors who were unlucky enough to have to deal with her. Having said that, her misconduct also speaks to broader issues of poor (or non-existent) training and supervision of persons who conduct such investigations.]

from NRE synopsis (by Maurice Possley):

"Ultimately, Bazell identified 22 different children as victims..."

"[O]n January 11, 1985, Wilcox and Aldridge were convicted on all counts. Both were sentenced to life in prison."

""In 1992, investigative reporter Martin Yant interviewed the ['C'] brothers, who said they had been coerced by Bazell and other police to falsely implicate Wilcox and Aldridge. The brothers provided sworn affidavits recanting their testimony. In addition, Yant discovered that the prosecution had failed to disclose to the defense much of a 28-page police report which contained exculpatory statements from the alleged victims as well as the use of threats and intimidation to elicit the inculpatory statements from accusers. Moreover, the prosecution failed to disclose medical evidence indicating that none of the victims showed any sign of sexual abuse.

"A post-conviction hearing was held, where the ['C'] brothers recanted on the witness stand.

"On March 8, 1996, Wilcox and Aldridge were granted a new trial because of the failure to turn over exculpatory evidence and the recantations. They were released that day from prison. The state appealed and the order granting a new trial was upheld on March 14, 1997. The state then dismissed the charges.

"Aldridge and Wilcox filed a lawsuit seeking a finding of innocence in order to seek state compensation. In June 2020, the case was settled for $1.1 million to Wilcox...and for $800,000 to Aldridge."

[All emphases added unless otherwise noted.]