By Charlotte Caldwell and Kimberly Pistone
SIDNEY – After almost eight hours of deliberation, a Shelby County Common Pleas Court jury found Joseph L. Yelton, 38, of Sidney, not guilty on five counts of rape, a first-degree felony, and five counts of sexual battery, a third-degree felony.
Yelton was accused of raping a then 13-year-old girl over the course of a year, and was indicted on 13 counts of rape and 13 counts of sexual battery. During the course of the trial, the prosecution dismissed 16 of the charges. The Sidney Daily News does not identify juveniles who testify during a trial to protect their identity.
Opening arguments
Opening statements were given on Monday, March 18. Shelby County Prosecutor Tim Sell represented the state of Ohio, the plaintiff, and Timothy Young of the Ohio Public Defender’s Office represented Yelton, the defendant.
In his opening statement, Sell said the victim would tell the jury in her testimony that Yelton had sexual contact with her – including touching, sexual comments and intercourse — and after a year she reported this to her counselor who is a mandatory reporter. She would say Yelton finished by doing something on a wall in the corner of a room, which is where the detectives found DNA using a black light which was sent to be tested at the Ohio Bureau of Criminal Investigation (BCI) and was shown to have DNA from both Yelton and the juvenile girl.
Additionally, Sell said, stains on the juvenile girl’s mattress were tested and shown to have DNA from both her and Yelton.
Young began his opening statement by talking about the DNA stains. Young said according to the juvenile girl, this sexual activity occurred two and three times a day for over a year, but there was no DNA on the sheet or mattress pad when evidence was collected, only on the mattress. Young also stated the spot on the wall where the DNA was found was also where dirty laundry was kept, which further explains the DNA on the wall.
Young said for the girl, “dishonesty became a way of life.” Young said the evidence would show an emotionally disturbed child and that she tells lies.
Plaintiff witness testimonies
The girl testified first for the state. She said uncomfortable moments started happening with Yelton the day after her 13th birthday. On that day, she said Yelton tickled her on her stomach. He would make random comments about her body and how clothes fit her. He also held her down with pillows and blankets. The defendant’s lawyers said the girl never spoke about these things when preparing for trial.
She asked him on multiple occasions to leave her alone but he wouldn’t and would tell her to be quiet and would turn on music on his phone or the TV. Afterward, he would walk to the corner of the room, and she could only speculate what he did there.
Eventually it escalated into sex. He said if she told anyone he would hurt her. She testified sex would occur a few times a week — which is different than previous statements of a few times a day which were told to police, nurses and counselors.
She clarified Yelton would do something to her every day, but not always sex. She also testified to sex happening in a small room and a bigger room. This was never said before, so police didn’t search for DNA in the small room.
She started seeing Debra Gunnels, her counselor, after she got out of the hospital, where records said she was suicidal and thinking about jumping from a bridge. The girl said the records weren’t true because she never talked to a nurse to provide these details, although the documents said, “reviewed all above information with the patient. She agreed.”
During her counseling sessions, she said she didn’t trust Gunnels at first.
“Once I realized she wasn’t going to leave I felt more comfortable,” the girl said. One day she told Gunnels about the sexual encounters. She said she didn’t go into full detail about the sexual activity with Gunnels and the police she spoke to afterward because she was scared it would get back to Yelton.
When the girl was living with a relative, another adult close to the case would visit, and she told the girl to say it was another man who raped her, not Yelton. The adult took her to the police station to recant, and she did it because she was worried about the threats she heard from the adult about her cat.
She said testifying for the jury trial was hard for her because, “I never really spoke up in front of a lot of people.”
The next state witness was Brenda Miceli, a pediatric psychologist on the care team at Dayton Children’s Hospital. She performs psychological evaluations and therapy for kids with sexual abuse and trauma. Miceli had never met the girl or counseled her; she testified to provide expert information to the jury.
Information provided included definitions of sexual abuse and grooming; the dynamics between an abuser and a victim; how children usually lead up to disclosing; and how long it takes for victims to usually disclose.
Miceli confirmed it would be hard for kids to remember all the details and when specific things happened if it happened multiple times. Regarding children recalling specific dates, Miceli said, “Children are notoriously bad at that.” She said recanting doesn’t mean the original story is false.
The state then called witness Debra Gunnels, the girl’s counselor who has worked at Samaritan Behavioral Health in Troy for four years. Gunnels said on the day the girl disclosed she was being raped, she was rushing into the room. The girl’s demeanor was usually “bright and cheery,” but it wasn’t until she spoke that Gunnels realized her true demeanor. Gunnels described the girl as “horrified,” and was screaming and crying.
“I knew there was something inside her that wasn’t coming out,” Gunnels said.
She didn’t continue counseling after the disclosure. Gunnels confirmed she thought the girl was raped every day, sometimes multiple times a day.
The state’s fourth witness was Sidney Police Narcotics Detective Robert Benshoff. He was one of the police officers who showed up at Samaritan after the rape disclosure. He was under the assumption that Yelton “did bad things to her frequently.” He had the girl draw a picture of the room and mark where things occurred and passed the information to Sidney Police Capt. Jerry Tangeman, who was at the house performing a search warrant.
Benshoff spoke to Yelton about the allegations at Samaritan. “He stated it was not possible because he was never alone with her,” Benshoff said. Yelton said due to a previous accident, he can’t get an erection and has erectile dysfunction. He cited the girl’s previous allegations about another man.
Tangeman was the next witness. He said during the first search warrant, it appeared the laundry had just been done because the dryer was on. He used a black light and a camera called OSCR360 which took a 360-degree picture of the room. Four points of interest were noted in the girl’s room with the black light. Two stains from the room and two from the mattress were sent to the BCI.
A second search was done after a relative let the girl see Yelton and the girl said sexual activity occurred again. The bed sheet was sent to BCI for testing then, and there was no evidence of Yelton’s DNA.
After Tangeman, Megan Voelker testified. She is a clinical team leader, or charge nurse, at Dayton Children’s Hospital and is considered a sexual assault nurse examiner (SANE). She collected swabs from the girl and took a history of events. The girl told Voelker that Yelton “had ejaculated on her stomach before but not this time,” as the last reported sexual activity was the night before the exam.
Voelker noted the girl took a shower, urinated, changed clothes, menstruated, brushed her teeth, ate, drank and defecated before the exam; all of these things could have affected the DNA found.
Voelker described the girl’s demeanor as quiet and didn’t seem to be in immediate distress. “Everyone has different reactions,” Voelker said, further saying being quiet is not abnormal. She noted no suicide risk for the girl.
The seventh state witness was Rhea Jeffers, a nurse practitioner who owns a private mental health practice. She saw Yelton twice and Yelton never followed up afterward. Jeffers confirmed Yelton has had a vasectomy.
Justin Masin and Sara DeVine, forensic scientists who work at Ohio BCI, testified after about the tests performed on the evidence.
The final state witness was Sidney Police Juvenile Sex Crimes Detective Rachel Croskrey.
Croskrey described the girl as closed off with her hands on her knees, and she sat as far away from Croskrey as possible. She took it as the girl being uncomfortable. When Croskrey mentioned stains on the wall were found, the girl stopped making eye contact, and in a soft voice said Yelton didn’t rape her. When the girl recanted, Croskrey said she offered more information than before. The girl eventually took back the recant, and Croskrey said she was in foster care at that time.
Defendant witness testimonies
After the state rested, the defendant’s lawyers made a Rule 29 motion, which is a motion for acquittal due to insufficient evidence. Judge James Stevenson agreed the evidence was vague but denied the motion.
The defendant’s lawyers called four witnesses, including an adult and another juvenile who would have had first-hand experience with the allegations.
One witness was Oshae Peart, who worked as the volunteer coordinator for Court Appointed Special Advocate (CASA) and was assigned to the girl during the time of the rape accusations.
Peart wrote monthly progress notes which were presented to the jury.
Peart had two interactions with Yelton about the girl. Yelton showed Peart a video of the girl crying and freaking out and a note written by the girl saying she wanted to kill herself. Peart asked the girl’s counselor to increase visits.
“He (Yelton) showed he really cared about her,” Peart said.
The last defendant witness was Julie Heinig, the lab director and DNA technical leader of forensics at the DNA Diagnostics Center. She analyzed the BCI tests and confirmed a mixture of DNA on the mattress. She also said there is no way to know when DNA was deposited on an item. The DNA could be from saliva, skin cells, sweat, or other body fluids.
Closing arguments
Closing arguments were on Thursday morning. Sell began by explaining the charges. For each count of rape, the state had to prove the crime occurred in Shelby County, include sexual conduct which means vaginal penetration, and that the defendant compelled the victim by force or threat of force. For the sexual battery charges, the only difference is force or a threat of force does not have to be included. The state had to meet the burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
Sell said, “As it relates to sexual conduct, we have the testimony of the victim.”
Previous to the rape, he was grooming her by touching, tickling and making sexual comments, but grooming is not a crime, said Sell.
Additionally, Sell described the juvenile girl as the perfect victim. Sell further described everything the juvenile girl had to go through in order to go to trial – she had to reveal these secrets to her counselor, tell officers, tell a SANE nurse and go through an intrusive rape kit procedure, and had to deal with the stress of months of waiting, and then had to come talk in front of a group of strangers.
Sell asked how the girl would know about the semen on the wall if she did not witness it after Yelton raped her, and that the DNA evidence was consistent with her story.
Sell said, “The key to this whole shooting match isn’t that bed. It’s that wall.” Sell also said the girl’s testimony did not go as they expected it to go, that she changed her story when she was on the stand, and because the juvenile girl said the first penetration was in the spring the state dismissed the charges for the first eight months.
Young began his closing argument by saying he knew child sexual assault is the hardest for a jury to decide because people worry about getting it wrong, and they want to protect the children, but in this case, that is not what is happening.
Young reminded the jury the burden of proof was on the state, and Yelton did not have to testify or prove anything. Young said he believed the juvenile girl is extremely traumatized and lied to the jury. None of the physical evidence supports the state and the girl contradicted everything every witness said.
Young described the girl’s testimony as an inconsistent train wreck. As Young went through the girl’s testimony, he said the difference wasn’t in the details, but that she “flat out lied to you.” He said her description of the sex act was like someone who has an idea of what sex is, but has never had sex.
Young talked about when the girl recanted and when the detective described her behavior during the interview as someone who was not being truthful, that description matched her behavior on the witness stand.
