The Tribune

By LAMECH JOHNSON

Tribune Staff Reporter

ljohnson@tribunemedia.net

A TEENAGE girl pointed to her grandfather in the Supreme Court yesterday as the man she claimed molested her over a period of six years while she lived in his home.

However, the elderly man, who denies the two counts of “incest” that he faces before Justice Bernard Turner, suggested, through his lawyer, that his granddaughter had made up the story because she had been disciplined. The case is before a jury of seven women and two men.

The two instances of incest listed on court dockets are alleged to have occurred on January 15 and 16, 2011.

However, the girl, who was 12 at the time of the alleged incidents, told the jury that sexual abuse occurred at the age of six when she was kicked out of her grandparents’ bedroom into a room with her aunt because she kept “wetting the bed” at nights. The girl said the molestation began when her grandfather came into her room and touched her breasts and hip, and inserted his finger into her vagina.

She said the incidents did not occur every day or every other day because persons were home on some occasions.

She claimed that her grandfather acted like nothing had occurred.

When asked by prosecutor Koschina Marshall why she didn’t tell her aunts or grandmother, she answered that she didn’t trust them to believe her.

The complainant recalled two particular instances, January 15 and 16, 2011.

On the 15th, the complainant said she had got up to use the bathroom that morning, having wet her bed overnight.

She claimed that her grandfather came in and locked the door, then proceeded to “feel my breast and my hip.”

“He told me to sit on the tub” the complainant said, adding that when she did so, he told her to spread her legs and he again, twisted her tights and “inserted his finger in my vagina.”

The girl claimed that the following day, when she went into the utility room to play with the house dog, her grandfather ordered her out of it and attempted the same acts as the previous day, also attempting to kiss her.

The teenager said she decided to report the matter to Social Services, having heard of their “hot-line” through eavesdropping on conversations and hearing ads during the news.

While she could not recall the day she called Social Services, she told the jury that she reported her grandmother to be an abuser who always slapped and beat her without any verification of her side of the story when her young aunt made a complaint about her.

She was visited some days later at school where she was asked about the abuse and if anyone in the home was “fooling” with her.

It was then that she made the complaint of molestation to the social worker, who took her to be examined twice at a medical clinic.

In cross-examination, the teenager was asked by lawyer Jomo Campbell why she left private school after her first term in seventh-grade.

The key witness said this was due to the report she made against her grandfather.

The defence lawyer then suggested that it was because of her low grade point average.

While the complainant admitted that she got a 1.0 GPA in that term, her leaving private school was not because of that.

The lawyer asked the witness if she could recall an argument she had with her grandmother two weeks before the alleged dates in question concerning the hemming in her skirt that was not at the appropriate length at the school.

The complainant answered that it was not an argument as her grandmother had approached her that morning, slapped her and took out the hemming from the skirt she had already ironed.

Mr Campbell suggested the story of molestation was concocted after her grandfather had told his wife that she needed discipline. The complainant denied the suggestion.

The lawyer also suggested that her story of reporting her grandmother to Social Services as an abuser did not make sense when she could’ve just reported the molestation at the first instance.

The complainant admitted that molestation was a more important issue than physical abuse, but said that at the time of making the call, she did not know if a relative would hear her or walk into the room where she called the hotline.

Mr Campbell suggested to the complainant that she simply made up her claims because she did not like being disciplined and wanted to get out of the house.

The teenager disagreed.

The trial resumes today.

Uel Johnson is assisting Ms Marshall in prosecuting the case, while Mr Campbell is assisted by Tommel Roker.