San Antonio:
In 1999, Frank Navarijo was sent to
prison to serve 20 years for repeatedly assaulting a 5 year old
relative. This child was 7 when she testified that she had been
molested, even raped repeatedly with a knife. Last week, she stood
before a judge and testified that it wasn't true; that her
grandmother had manipulated her into accusing an innocent man.
The first time she recanted was before
the trial, and then apparently again afterward, when she was 10 or
11. Navarijo filed an appeal in 2001, but his conviction was upheld:
“After reviewing the record of
Navarijo's trial, we cannot conclude that Navarijo was denied a fair
and impartial trial.”
Woven through the
appeal are mentions of a phrase that I can only assume was first used
by the defense; court school. Now, I can't be sure I'm reading this
right, but it appears that they thought the child had been prepped in
this 'court school' so that she could testify convincingly. From the
prosecutor's closing statement:
“Ms. Huntzinger told you, during
her closing arguments, that - talking about A.N., where you go to
court school and you tell your story one more time. As if the -
telling you directly that A.N. go - went to court school and she told
people at court school her testimony. She talked about the
allegations in this case and she talked about what Frank did to her.”
“She talked about
what Frank did to her”...Which, if she's now telling the truth, was
nothing. So what did they talk about? How did they talk about it? In
the time between the 1998 outcry and 1999 conviction, how did nobody
figure out that this child was being used?
In the opinion of
the state of Texas, Frank Navarijo got a fair shake; a trial in which
every 'i' was dotted, and every 't' was crossed. Whether or not the
child was telling the truth or had been manipulated by others, they
considered their asses to be covered, and that was the end of it.
Now Navarijo, who
is 73 years old, will have to wait for the judge to decide what
happens next. Affidavits from jurors have been filed, saying that the
decision to convict was close and that if the child had denied it
ever happened, as she is doing right now, they probably wouldn't have
convicted him.
I'll keep an eye on
this one; Normally I don't write about cases which haven't been
resolved, but the original Navarijo trial seems to be very similar to
Coy's, despite the gruesomeness of the accusations against Navarijo
and the disparity in their sentences.
6 comments:
Gonna be interesting to see what happens
Pedro Avalos
It boggles my mind that so few of your readers seem to understand the connection between the Coy case and the other cases that you post. That they don't get the implication for their own lives and the potential for injustice if nothing is done to correct the problem. (With apologies to Niemoller) When they came for the rappers I didn't speak out because I wasn't a rapper......
^ dont assume things
@ Anon 8:16, Then please explain why on posts such as this, where an egregious injustice has taken place there are only three (now four) comments and on posts where a 'cold 40' is posted or a message from Coy is posted there are usually over 30 comments which morph into a pissing contest between the fan-boys of SPM and 'Lil' Bing?
The number of comments doesn't determine the validity of the posts; people discuss Coy more because the blog is...well, ABOUT him. Of course, his letters are going to garner the most attention.
My apologies.
Post a Comment