An American Tragedy: Falsely
Accused Falsely Imprisoned
My fellow citizens, my name is Richard H Oehler. I am a
retired family doctor. Today I would like to relate to you a story that could
affect your family at any time. A true tragedy. Listen carefully for these few
minutes and then reflect if you would like to have your family destroyed by
this type of justice. On Dec 7, 2011, Keith Allen McMullin was charged with
child abuse. A crime he did not commit. Case # 12-00400 Clackamas
County Oregon Circuit Court. The charge: He had raped his accuser 2-3
times per week over the past 18 months. She was a 13 year old girl. The last
sexual penetration had occurred the day of the report or 10 days earlier
depending on which version of her story was accepted. She was examined by a
certified nurse practitioner and found to have a normal hymen. This should have
ended the story. The case should never have been presented to the grand jury.
This did not happen in Clackamas
County and probably would
not in your county either. Remember the accuser’s testimony. Age 11 to 13, she
was raped at least 100-150 times, yet had a normal hymen. A medical impossibility! How could this case
have gone to trial and result in a conviction? I would especially invite any
jurors in this case to listen carefully to testimony you were not permitted to
hear and the false testimony you were given. Then decide if you would still
vote for conviction.
.
Let’s examine the case a little closer. This is a list of
those involved plus of course the accused and the accuser. Think of all the
money wasted because these people were incompetent to do their jobs. It will be millions by the time this is
finally resolved. But even worse, think of the human misery caused this man,
his family, and our community. This type of so called justice is happening all
over the US
and possibly world wide.
DHS department of human
services In this state child protective
services comes under this head. Paid for by our tax dollars.
Office of the District Attorney This office determines if a case will be
presented to the grand jury which usually decides that the case will be tried. They
only have the DA’s view of the facts. Paid by our tax dollars.
Defense attorney In this case appointed by the court because
the defendant did not have funds to employ his own counsel. Paid by our tax dollars
Appeals attorney paid by our tax dollars to review cases for
judicial error
Circuit Court Judge appointed by
the Governor and paid by our tax dollars
Witnesses Any called as experts are paid by our tax
dollars.
Police This agency should collect evidence to prove
the charge or help exonerate the accused.
Paid by our tax dollars.
Grand Jury and Trial Jury Ordinary citizens called off the tax roles. Considered
public service, minimally paid by tax dollars. Completely reliant on the truth
being told in order to reach an honest verdict.
The McMullins had been foster parents to 29 children over 13
years. So DHS had been in their home and interviewing them and the children
many, many times. They had adopted 4 children and taken parenting advice and classes
through DHS for many years. All without any significant problems. When the
accuser made her charge, DHS immediately believed her story and agreed with the
charge.
Police No immediate investigation was done and no protocol
followed. The officer assigned to the
school system did not know that there was a protocol to follow.
DHS referred the girl to the Children’s Clinic in Oregon City
for a sexual abuse evaluation. The exam
was conducted 6-16 days after the last sexual penetration alleged by the
accuser. The story was believed without question by the “medical expert” and
all the abuse team experts in the system who interviewed the accuser. On the
basis of a maximum of 1 hour and 45 minutes exam and interview time with the
accuser and input by all the others who interviewed this girl for times ranging
from a few minutes to a couple of hours, the “medical expert” submitted a 19
page report. No input was received from the accuser’s family doctor or from the
counselor the accuser was seeing for issues with her mother. Nor was any input
considered from her family. In my opinion, this was a very one sided 19 page
report all based on the statement of the accuser by a supposedly unbiased team
of experts.
DHS had in their files at least 1 episode of the accuser
lying to them before this accusation. After the accusation they had accumulated
at least a couple incidents of her lying before the case ever went to trial but
this information was withheld from the jury during the trial.
The DA presented the case to the grand jury which accepted
his advice that the case should be scheduled for trial.
Take careful note
that all persons involved in this case thus far are recognized as having some
expertise in the area of child abuse and sexual assault. I do not expect that
all persons involved in all court cases will have a lot of medical knowledge
but certainly anyone working in the child abuse field should have enough
knowledge and more importantly common sense to know that an 11-13 year old
petite child will not have a normal hymen after being sexually penetrated by an
adult male 100-150 times over an 18 month period. If they do not have that minimal
understanding of human anatomy, they have no business being involved in a case
or testifying as an expert in a case that will potentially send a person to
jail for life. Yet it appears that all these experts in child abuse arrogantly
believe that they are all qualified to decide life and death issues for
citizens of this state even though they lack the basic understanding of human anatomy
and reproductive physiology at issue in this case.
Let’s now move to the trial.
First came the accuser’s testimony that she was raped with
vaginal penetration 2-3 times per week over an 18 month period.
The next day began by one of the jurors telling the judge
that some members of the jury had had difficulty hearing some of the most
important testimony of this trial. Did the judge see that the jury would be
furnished a typed copy of the testimony?
He did not. Did the defense attorney request such a copy be made
available to the jury? She did not.
Several witnesses were called over the next couple of days
who testified they believed the story told to them by the accuser. Each was
asked about the demeanor of the accuser. Remember none of these witnesses were
trained in psychiatry and the expert witness called by the prosecution even
stated that demeanor was of no value in this type of case.. None had seen the
accuser except for a few minutes to an hour or two at most. When the defendant
wished to have witnesses testify to the truthfulness and demeanor of himself
and his accuser, the court denied it.
His witnesses had been closely associated with the accused and/or
accuser for many days to over 30 years not just a few minutes. The judge ruled
that these witnesses were not reliable and could not testify.
The prosecuting attorney, an assistant DA, told the jury
that there was no physical evidence in this case and the case would be based on
testimony as evidence. This is an obvious lie. There was definite physical
evidence, the accuser’s normal hymen. In her closing statement the asst DA
again lied stating the defense attorney and I quote “talked about the fact that
there is no tearing to the hymen on the accuser. This is a myth. This is a
myth, and that’s what the medical expert sat up here and told you. It isn’t
normal for there to be any physical findings on a teenager. Why? Because this
is what our bodies are designed to do. Ladies and gentlemen, we are designed to
have sex with each other.” End of quote.
This was quoted exactly from the trial transcript except I substituted “the
accuser and the medical expert” instead of using their names. The
prosecuting attorney also stated that this was not CSI etc. It most definitely
was like CSI, but none of the child abuse experts involved in this case
appeared capable of analyzing the evidence correctly.
The “medical expert” in this case was a certified nurse
practitioner who testified under oath that she was as qualified as an MD to do
her job. She further cited that she was licensed for 30 years and had spent the
first 27 years mainly as a surgical nurse. She was probably a very good one.
She then decided to become a child abuse expert. She further cited as her
qualification to be an expert witness that she had been asked to speak at
various training seminars for other child abuse workers. These seminars were
attended by national as well as international participants. Think of that.
Frightening, but it emphasizes why all of these so called child abuse experts
are so medically ignorant. A person ignorant of medical facts can only teach
ignorance of medical facts.
It was also during this most critical testimony that several
jurors complained 3 times that they could not hear. Finally the judge
rearranged seating and the trial blundered ahead. No provision was made or
requested for the jury to be furnished a transcript of what they had failed to
hear. So the jury failed to hear the two most critical testimonies in this
trial.
The expert then testified under oath that she had done a
complete exam of the accuser in this case and with input from the team of child
abuse experts who testified in this case she had written a 19 page report. She
had found a normal hymen in this accuser who had testified that she was
sexually penetrated 2-3 times per week for at least 18 months. The expert
documented this normal hymen with a video camera designed for such an
exam. This “medical expert” then testified
that in this case and others like it, she EXPECTED the hymen to be NORMAL. She cited a study
by Nancy Kellog, MD as supporting her expert opinion. The study was of 36
pregnant girls with intact hymens. All were examined from 2 weeks after the
last reported sexual penetration up to the time of delivery. Those examined
within 1 month of the last sexual penetration were found to have CONCLUSIVE
evidence of being raped. Remember the accuser was examined in less than 1 month
of the last alleged penetration She had
a NORMAL HYMEN!14 of the 36 given a longer time to heal were still found to
have abnormal findings but which did not prove conclusively that rape had
occurred. Not at all the conclusions implied by the medical expert’s testimony
to the jury in this case. None of the girls in the study had been raped repeatedly
as the accuser had testified happened to her in this case. The medical expert
further stated that pregnancy was proof that sexual penetration had occurred.
This statement has no direct bearing on this case except it is further proof of
this so called expert’s lack of understanding of human reproductive physiology.
Let us pause for a moment and analyze this testimony in this
case. The medical expert has testified that in her expert opinion she expects the
hymen of a petite 13 year old girl to still be normal after 100- 150 sexual
penetrations by an adult male penis. Does this mean that she would also expect
that all adult sexually active females will have normal hymens after 18 months
of sexual intercourse? Why did not
anyone from this team of sex abuse experts contributing to this 19 page report
object to this absurd conclusion? Was it ignorance, arrogance, incompetence, or
malice? The expert stated that she was as competent as an MD to do her
job. ANY physician graduated from an
accredited medical school or osteopathic school who would testify that they
expected a petite 13 year old girl would still have a normal hymen after 100-
150 adult male penetrations over an 18 month period should have their license
to practice medicine revoked. Let me rephrase that statement. ANY physician
graduated from an accredited medical or osteopathic school who would testify
that they expected a petite 13 year old girl sexually penetrated 2-3 times per
week over 18 months by an adult male penis would still have a normal hymen
should have their license to practice medicine revoked. ANY ONE, I repeat, ANYONE testifying that a
petite 13 year old girl would still have a normal hymen after 100-150 adult
male penetrations over an 18 month period is lying and is certainly not an not
an expert.
The defense attorney was appointed by the court to represent
the accused because he was too poor to afford his own. Approximate cost of a trial attorney is
reported to be 150-200,000 dollars. How many of you could afford that? The
defense attorney was reported to be an experienced attorney and certainly was.
She was on the list to be appointed as a circuit court judge herself. It sounds
great for the accused to be represented by counsel like her.
However, let’s look
at her performance. She told him that his chance at trial was 50-50. With her
as counsel, it should have been 100% for acquittal. Here are some reasons
why. As an experienced attorney she
should have known that the judge was not going to allow him to present
witnesses supporting his truthfulness or reflecting negatively on his accuser’s
truthfulness. Therefore, she should have strenuously objected to the testimony
of all witnesses except the medical expert. After all, the prosecutor said
there was no physical evidence. Therefore, these witnesses had nothing to
contribute to this case except to tell the jury that they believed the accuser.
They had no knowledge of the case except what the accuser had told them. Anticipating
the judge would deny this objection, this experienced attorney should have
known that her main chance of winning her client’s freedom had to be proving
the medical witness was not credible and her testimony was false. How would
this be accomplished? The defense needed a qualified medical or osteopathic
physician to testify that no 13 year old petite girl will have a normal hymen
after being raped 2-3 times per week over an 18 month period. Did she call such
a witness? No, she did not.
Even lacking such a
witness she could have questioned the medical expertise of the so called expert
by asking detailed questions about her training and experience as an abuse
expert. I was scheduled to be a character witness for the accused The defense
attorney had my statement that I knew her client was innocent because it was
medically impossible for a 13 year old petite girl to have a normal hymen after
being raped repeatedly by an adult male. Had this attorney met with me, an
experienced physician, before hand, I could have helped her formulate questions
to ask the medical expert about the study she quoted and on which she based her
expert opinion. Her training, her experience, and her knowledge of human
anatomy and reproductive physiology could have been probed. As the attorney met
with me for the first time about a minute or two before I might be called to
testify, she stated that she wanted me to only answer the questions she would
ask me and that I was not to volunteer anything. She stated that if I would not
agree to do that, she would not call me as a witness. In other words, withhold
the truth which would exonerate her client or she would not call me as a
witness! I said that I would be testifying under oath to tell the whole truth
and nothing but the truth so help me God. I also said, if I stated that I knew
he was innocent of this medically impossible charge, the prosecution might
object but the jury would know that there were questions about the medical
testimony. I had the definite feeling that his attorney did not want to upset
the judge even at the expense of her client’s losing his freedom. A week later, after the sentence was
pronounced, I approached the defense attorney and asked her for the name of the
author, the title of the study, or the journal in which it was published so I
could look it up. She replied that she didn’t know off the top of her head.
When I asked if I could call her office later to get the information, she said
that she had to go, turned on her heel, and walked away. It became apparent to
me that she very possibly had never read the study. Any responsible attorney
would have had that study almost memorized and have been ready to question the
expert about the study. When I later found out she was on the list to be
appointed a judge by the governor, it only strengthened my feeling that this
defense attorney had a serious conflict of interest. As a matter of interest,
this attorney has now been appointed to be a circuit court judge by the
governor. Frightening. What are the ethical and moral standards to be appointed
a judge?
When I talked to the appeals attorney reviewing the case for
appeal, she stated that even if lies were told during the trial, it might not
be a basis for appeal. If the defense attorney does not object to testimony, even
if the testimony is false, there may be no basis for appeal! This is considered
justice in US courts. I understand that a guilty person who pleads innocent,
will lie about his case. However, I did not expect that the State would present
lies as evidence to convict a person who is innocent. This puts a huge burden
on an innocent person who does not know the law or medicine to prove his
innocence when he is depending on his counsel to do the ethical, moral, and
competent thing. If a gun were presented as evidence of a crime which the
police had planted and then testified that it was the weapon used by the
innocent accused, everyone would be filled with righteous indignation. This case is no different. The accuser has an
intact normal hymen, a medical impossibility.
The prosecution presented false testimony that this fact does not
exonerate the accused. They have planted evidence in the minds of the jury.
The judge in his wisdom did not see fit to assure that the
jury heard testimony or was furnished with a transcript of the testimony they
did not hear before advising them that they should rely on their memory of
testimony they could not hear from the two most important witnesses in this
case and on their common sense to reach a verdict. Remember the abuse experts used
no common sense and they had heard or read the testimony to be given by the
medical expert. How did the judge expect a jury with out any medical
understanding except the lies presented to them by the State, to somehow use
common sense? He also apparently made the decision that a 10-2 vote was all
that was necessary to put a person away for life.
He then at the
sentencing phase congratulated the attorneys on their professional conduct. He
further stated that he had received 33 letters in support of Keith McMullin and had carefully considered
them all. Interesting. He had received 33 letters from people prepared to
testify that they knew Keith McMullin to be truthful and his accuser to be a
known liar. He also had my statement that I knew the accuser’s story to be
medically impossible. What this judge was really saying was I don’t believe you
33 solid citizens, but I believe this known liar.
Just a follow up on this case. The accuser, having been
trained by DHS and the legal system that her lying will be believed, has now
accused another person of rape. I predicted in writing, this would occur but
did not expect it to happen so soon,. So we now have the second case of what
may become a serial accuser. What a disservice to this young girl struggling
with life’s issues.
Governor, you are the leader of our state and a physician by
training. You appoint judges. I wrote you 5 times pointing out the medical
problem with this case. Your office finally responded and said that when he
applied for clemency my letter would be on file. It is not clemency Keith
McMullin is seeking. It is justice.
Oregon Board of Medical Examiners This so called medical
expert is passing herself off to be as qualified as a physician to testify on
medical matters about which she is obviously not trained. She has done great
harm to a man and his family by this deceptive assertion. Certainly you should
have an interest in the clinic where she works and what type of medicine is
being practiced there.
.
Oregon Bar Association Is
there no interest in the conduct of attorneys in Oregon by your organization?
Committee on Judicial Fitness Are there no standards for
judges to sit on cases involving life time sentences? This individual judge is
not the only problem. The system with no quality control over judges is the
problem.
In conclusion, if justice is the goal of our court system
and this case, the judge, attorneys, and witnesses will step forward and
correct this false conviction by telling the truth. However, my prediction is
that my credibility will be attacked and court procedures will remain more
important than justice. Injustice will continue and innocent persons will
continue to be falsely imprisoned here and nationwide.
.
The challenge in attacking my credibility will be in getting
a qualified doctor of medicine or osteopathy to testify that they EXPECT the
hymen of a petite 13 year old girl to be NORMAL after being penetrated by an
adult male penis 2-3 times per week for 18 months and that they think the whole
hymen business is a myth and all sexually active girls and women have normal
hymens because the female body was designed to have sex.
Child abuse is a horrible crime. The overzealous, mindless
prosecution of innocent persons is equally horrible. The suppression of evidence
that could have proved this man’s innocence is terrible. But the lying about evidence
that would have exonerated him is even worse. This case is no different from
the witch trials of the sixteen hundreds after which a number of persons were
hung. This type of trial is being conducted through out our country in the 2000’s
and has resulted in multiple false convictions.
Thank you for your attention to this presentation of the
truth.
Richard H Oehler, MD
If you have any interest in this type of injustice, please
forward this to any and all who will listen. Especially any news media who
purport to cover stories of importance.
