P19hf56 Y0nktrzu3 Jsaqx Oe42lnmi9r

Sexual Abuse Virginia Infection Bodily Rashes Prince George County

Sexual Abuse Virginia Infection Bodily Rashes Prince George County

JAMES WILLS v. VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES
Facts:

The Prince George County Department of Social Services received a complaint that alleged that the father had sexually abused his daughter (the child). The mother explained that after the child was treated for a urinary tract infection in 2001, when she was two years old, and upon mother’s subsequent completion of guardian ad litem training, she became suspicious of sexual abuse. The matter was transferred to the Surry County Department of Social Services (Department). Child protective services worker “M” conducted the Department’s investigation of the complaint. At the conclusion of the investigation, the Surry County Department of Social Services entered a disposition of “founded, level-one sexual abuse”. Father sought review by administrative hearing. The Circuit Court of Prince George County declined to reverse the finding. The father appealed.

Sexual Abuse Virginia Infection Bodily Rashes Prince George County

Sexual Abuse Virginia Infection Bodily Rashes Prince

Issue:
  • Whether the substantial evidence did not exist in the agency record to sustain its finding?
Discussion:

The Court agreed, finding that a reasonable mind would necessarily reach a difference conclusion than that reached by the hearing officer. The medical records demonstrated that the child had been treated over the same time period that the alleged abuse occurred for both a urinary tract infection and various body rashes. The evidence, specifically the medical records, was consistent with the father’s explanation and description of occasions when he examined the child or otherwise had contact with the child’s private area. First, the record reflected that the child presented symptoms of vomiting and abdominal pain during visits with her pediatrician. The father testified that he administered a suppository in the child’s rectum on one or two occasions following the child’s visit with the pediatrician. The statements by the child requesting the father to stop touching her heinie were made after the father’ medical examination in response to her complaint of itching and discomfort. In addition, a forensic exam of the child indicated that she was normal.

Conclusion:

Accordingly the judgment of the circuit court was reversed and the case was remanded to set aside the disposition of founded, level-one sexual abuse and to further remand the matter to the hearing officer for any other necessary proceedings.

The SRIS Law Group Virginia lawyers will do their best to help you with your sex crime case. Contact a Virginia lawyer from our firm to discuss your sex crime case. A Virginia lawyer from our firm will talk with you about your sex crime case in Virginia and advise you about your options. You can count on a lawyer from our firm to try their best to help you obtain the best result possible based on the facts of your case.

We have client meeting locations in Fairfax County, Prince William, Richmond, Virginia Beach, Fredericksburg & Lynchburg.

Article written by A Sris

Click to Chat

Disclaimer:

These summaries are provided by the SRIS Law Group. They represent the firm’s unofficial views of the Justices’ opinions. The original opinions should be consulted for their authoritative content.

Comments are closed.

Powered by: Wordpress