Nephi teacher found not guilty in sexual abuse case

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Uncle_Fester Niskayuna, NY
    Aug. 12, 2014 7:51 a.m.

    Like I wrote in the first instance, this had more than a little resemblance to McMartin and the bogus charges there.

  • xert Santa Monica, CA
    Aug. 12, 2014 7:41 a.m.

    So you finally get your day in court and present your case. You are found to be not guilty. Your good name is restores and then you wake up the next morning to and article which says, in effect "well--the jury found him not guilty but here's a few reasons that you the reader should still look at him with suspicion." This is shoddy journalism, Des News. I'd like to join the chorus of posts on this and demand that this man be given a new article. You were spot on the case to report the disgusting nature of his accusation, now behave like adults when you report the events of his exoneration.

  • Hank Jr Draper, UT
    Aug. 11, 2014 8:59 a.m.

    Still sounds suspicious.

  • I know it. I Live it. I Love it. Provo, UT
    Aug. 10, 2014 8:07 p.m.

    Judge not.

    From an authoring point of view, I could easily see myself writing the same article- "An accusation was made, physical evidence could potentially support it, a not-guilty verdict was returned."

    Whether the jury wouldn't give their reasons to the press or for the sake of respecting the privacy of a man who likely wants this to disappear as it's likely affected his life irreversibly already... I can see why there isn't more information.

    We may live in an online and nosy world. That doesn't mean a lack of information is inappropriate. I acknowledge the seeming 'lack of more story'. However, I don't acknowledge the entire world having the right to hear it. Everything in the comments about 'portraying him as guilty' is all speculation and illogical. A better article could have been written. But better comments could have been also.

    Judge not.

  • K Mchenry, IL
    Aug. 10, 2014 9:45 a.m.

    Four days. That is a long trial.

    So who gave this girl medication? I'm not saying the friends dad did, just want to get to the bottom of what caused the evidence the hospital found matching the allegation. She is in danger.

  • OnlyInUtah Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Aug. 10, 2014 9:44 a.m.

    I have to agree with the majority of others posting here. Although the defendant was found "not guilty" the reporter appears to have been found "guilty" of poor reporting by a jury of readers. Shame on the editors for allowing this poor poor example of news reporting. The Deseret News should have higher standards than this.

  • Benevolus Fruit Heights, UT
    Aug. 9, 2014 9:29 a.m.

    I think it is significant that the jury delivered their verdict within a couple of hours. It tells me the prosecution didn't make much of an impression on them. None of the news outlets I've read from appear to have covered the trial so we don't have the info the jury was given. It appears the only source used by the media was the charging document which certainly is not the last word in a trial. It would have been nice to have some insights on what transpired in the court.

  • LOU Montana Pueblo, CO
    Aug. 9, 2014 5:38 a.m.

    OK......where is the rest of the story??

  • Hoping for Balanced News slc, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 6:04 p.m.

    Their article sounds like they disapprove of the Jury's decision. Obviously the "evidence" mentioned was not proven, and may have not been as convincing as the article states, nor indicative of actual abuse and not other causes. Obviously their evidence did NOT meet the standard to convict, and perhaps, they believed that he did NOT do what he was accused of. We should Honor the Jury's decision, important in our form of government and our constitution.

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    Aug. 8, 2014 3:28 p.m.

    I knew there would those who disagreed when I said that a person is found NOT found "innocent", but "not guilty". Some would suppose that because we are "innocent" until "proven guilty", that the verdict should either be "guilty" or "innocent". From what I've read, that's not how the courts operate. The burden on the State is to prove guilt "beyond a reasonable doubt". Having a reasonable doubt that the State did not prove absolutely that someone is guilty does not mean that a juror must believe that the person is innocent; it only means that a juror has not found the person to be guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

    We, who have raised children, may have faced those types of situations in a family. We discover that some cookies are missing. We see crumbs leading to a child's bedroom. We smell cookies when we enter the room. The child denies eating the cookies. His wet toothbrush shows that he recently brushed his teeth. We might not be absolutely certain that THAT child ate the cookies. There is no evidence that proves "cookie eating" beyond a reasonable doubt, but is he "innocent"?

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 3:17 p.m.

    Doubtful 2 -- what that knowledge first hand or was it something you heard from the rumorsphere? If you had knowledge first hand, you should have gone to the police. If not, you should remain silent

  • Flashback Kearns, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 2:27 p.m.

    No matter how much we may disagree, Not Guilty is the same as Innocent and should be treated as such. So basically, in the courts mind, what was alleged didn't happen.

    OJ was found Not Guilty despite all the evidence to the contrary, but technically because if the Not Guilty verdict he was found to be Innocent. I disagreed with that verdict but it is what it is.

  • Shane333 Cedar Hills, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 12:08 p.m.

    Mike Richards,

    Your post is interesting but I have to wonder, aren't the accused supposed to be considered innocent until proven guilty? So if found "not guilty"....

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 11:34 a.m.

    Will he be allowed to return to teaching? If not, why not?

  • Doubtful2 Sandy, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 10:58 a.m.

    Having some knowledge of the case at the time it happened, I will always believe this child molester escaped justice. I hope he quits teaching now that his suspension is lifted. It's too bad it took so long to go to trial.

  • JayTee Sandy, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 9:32 a.m.

    This is one of those guilty-until-proven-innocent situations. Regardless of the actual truth or facts of the matter, there goes his reputation and who knows how many dollars on legal expenses. Often, there are NO winners in court. Anyone working with youth in today's world must be a little paranoid, because all it takes is one allegation and you're essentially toast.

    Aug. 8, 2014 9:28 a.m.

    Sometime the DN rejects my comments for reasons that don't make any sense to me.

    It seems that DN articles are also approved using nonsensical reasons. This article is clearly written in a way to cast doubt on the verdict or is tragically incomplete! Either way it should not have been approved in its current form.

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    Aug. 8, 2014 9:21 a.m.

    I agree that the article was poorly written, with the "twist" coming at the end. Surely the reporter and the editor knew better than to publish that story as written.

    There is one misconception that needs to be cleared up. The jury found the defendant "not guilty". He was not pronounced "innocent". There is a huge difference between "not guilty" and "innocent". "Not guilty" simply means that the jury did not agree with the State when the State claimed that the crime had been committed. "Innocent" would mean that defendant had done nothing that the State claimed that he had done. A judge instructs a jury to arrive at a verdict based on the evidence presented in court. If there was no evidence or if the evidence was poorly presented, and if the jury followed the judge's directions, the jury would have had to find the defendant "not guilty".

  • Christina Logan, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 9:15 a.m.

    I emailed the author. It looks to me like she didn't upload the entire story. Unless it is just very poor reporting.

  • Tdurden Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 7:51 a.m.

    You know it is a great article when more of the comments are about how bad the article itself is. The writer and DN were very irresponsible with this approach. All this article did was make it seem like they let a guilty man go. It would be helpful to add some information as to why he was found innocent and if you don't have that info at least don't just state the evidence against him.

  • Midwest Mom Soldiers Grove, WI
    Aug. 8, 2014 1:36 a.m.

    So the court finds the man "not guilty," but the DN decides to cast doubt.

  • Blue and White Provo, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 11:36 p.m.

    This article seems a little incomplete to me. Just seems strange to say he was cleared by the jury and to end with alledged evidence against him. I don't know either party involved or the full story but it seems to me that his reputation doesn't need to take anymore lumps by basically saying "well, he was cleared, but we'll only describe how he got here in the first place, not the evidence that helped the jury make a decision". Not a good situation for any one involved because it puts both the child's and the teacher's reputation on the line. Hope it works out as best as possible for all involved.