Rascals case in brief

In the beginning, in 1989, more than 90 children at the Little Rascals Day Care Center in Edenton, North Carolina, accused a total of 20 adults with 429 instances of sexual abuse over a three-year period. It may have all begun with one parent’s complaint about punishment given her child.

Among the alleged perpetrators: the sheriff and mayor. But prosecutors would charge only Robin Byrum, Darlene Harris, Elizabeth “Betsy” Kelly, Robert “Bob” Kelly, Willard Scott Privott, Shelley Stone and Dawn Wilson – the Edenton 7.

Along with sodomy and beatings, allegations included a baby killed with a handgun, a child being hung upside down from a tree and being set on fire and countless other fantastic incidents involving spaceships, hot air balloons, pirate ships and trained sharks.

By the time prosecutors dropped the last charges in 1997, Little Rascals had become North Carolina’s longest and most costly criminal trial. Prosecutors kept defendants jailed in hopes at least one would turn against their supposed co-conspirators. Remarkably, none did. Another shameful record: Five defendants had to wait longer to face their accusers in court than anyone else in North Carolina history.

Between 1991 and 1997, Ofra Bikel produced three extraordinary episodes on the Little Rascals case for the PBS series “Frontline.” Although “Innocence Lost” did not deter prosecutors, it exposed their tactics and fostered nationwide skepticism and dismay.

With each passing year, the absurdity of the Little Rascals charges has become more obvious. But no admission of error has ever come from prosecutors, police, interviewers or parents. This site is devoted to the issues raised by this case.

 

On Facebook

Comments Box SVG iconsUsed for the like, share, comment, and reaction icons
Cover for Little Rascals Day Care Case
304
Little Rascals Day Care Case

Little Rascals Day Care Case

This Facebook page is an offshoot of littlerascalsdaycarecase.org, which addresses the wrongful prosecution of the Edenton Seven and other such victims.

Load more
 

Click for earlier Facebook posts archived on this site

Click to go to

 

 

 

 


Today’s random selection from the Little Rascals Day Care archives….


 

Texas ex-DA pays price, however little and late

131120AndersonNov. 20, 2013

“GEORGETOWN, Texas – A former Texas prosecutor who won a conviction that sent an innocent man to prison for nearly 25 years agreed Friday to serve 10 days in jail and complete 500 hours of community service.

“Ken Anderson also will be disbarred and fined $500…. Anderson faced up to 10 years in prison if convicted of tampering with evidence in the 1987 murder trial of Michael Morton, (who) was released in 2011 after DNA evidence showed he didn’t beat his wife to death.

“Morton watched from the front row of the gallery Friday as the man who helped convict him now sat at the defense table, just as he once did. Morton smiled and was hugged by family members after the judge adjourned….

“During a weeklong Court of Inquiry earlier this year, special prosecutor Rusty Hardin presented witness testimony and other evidence to show Anderson kept evidence from Morton’s attorneys at his trial….

“Anderson said he couldn’t remember if he had evidence at the time of the trial that could have cleared Morton, but if he had had such material, he would have turned it over to the defense team.”

– From “Former Texas Prosecutor Gets Jail for Conviction that Sent Innocent Man to Prison” by the Associated Press (Nov. 8)

Even the righteous Jack McCoy withheld exculpatory evidence at least once, but of course the “Law & Order” DA was a fictional character – unlike Ken Anderson and the Little Rascals prosecutors and their unfortunate victims.

‘The most fundamental questions of fairness’

July 5, 2013

“RALEIGH – During a hearing at the state Court of Appeals, Chief Judge Gerald Arnold repeatedly asked a state prosecutor about the fairness of testimony by (Bob) Kelly’s former attorney in Edenton. Arnold said the attorney had, in effect, testified that he believed in Kelly’s innocence until he learned his child had been abused.

“ ‘How can you argue that it was not extremely prejudicial?’ the judge asked.

“Associate Attorney General Ellen Scouten argued that Chris Bean did not divulge confidential information and did not violate an attorney-client relationship with Kelly. She said Bean testified as a parent and a crime victim.

“Arnold said Bean, now a district court judge, had gone beyond describing what he had seen and witnessed as a parent.

“ ‘This boils down to the most fundamental questions of fairness,’ Arnold said. ‘When you have an attorney testifying that “I was Mr. Kelly’s attorney and I believed in him very strongly until I learned the truth, that is to say that he’s guilty, and then I was shattered.” How can there be more prejudicial, stronger evidence put before a jury than to have a former attorney, the defendant’s attorney say that?’

“Scouten said that because the defense had contended that accusers in Edenton were hysterical people on a witch hunt it was fair to allow the state to show the type of people involved.

“ ‘Mr. Bean and his wife were reputable, respected thoughtful, educated people – not the type of people that would be swept up by community hysteria,’ she said.”

– From “Appeal of 2 defendants in Little Rascals case draws a crowd” in the News & Observer (Jan. 10, 1995)

Given this line of questioning, it came as no great surprise when four months later the Court of Appeals overturned the convictions of both Kelly and Dawn Wilson.

Bean’s unfettered opinionating was only one of three major defects cited by the court, the others being the withholding of exculpatory evidence by prosecutors and the testimony of parents as expert witnesses.

The prosecution got off light – the brief filed by appellate defender Mark Montgomery claimed no fewer than 222 potentially reversible errors.

One argument for ‘satanic ritual abuse’ pardons

Jeffrey Toobin
Jeffrey Toobin

Dec. 28, 2015

“One problem with pardons is that Presidents have considered them in secret, springing the decisions on the public only after they have been made. In high-profile cases, like Gerald Ford’s pardon of Richard Nixon or Bill Clinton’s pardon of the fugitive financier Marc Rich, the political repercussions have been disastrous.

“But Obama could avoid this problem with some innovation – and sunshine. Over the last year of his Presidency, his Administration should publish the names of people being considered for pardons. In this way, members of the public can make their views known about the wisdom (or lack thereof) of letting each individual out of prison.

“All Presidents and governors (who also have pardon power) are haunted by the possibility that they might release someone who goes on to commit horrible crimes. (Former Governor Mike Huckabee of Arkansas pardoned several people who did just that.)”

– From “It’s Time for Obama to Go Big on Pardons” by Jeffrey Toobin in the New Yorker (Dec. 22)

Yes, the risk attached to granting pardons is real. But is it even possible for someone convicted of an imaginary crime – such as the Edenton Seven and Junior Chandler – to be a recidivist?

Which candidate cares about wrongful convictions?

Rev. William Barber
Rev. William Barber

April 8, 2016

“North Carolina’s attorney general (Roy Cooper) should set up a group to investigate claims of wrongful convictions to prevent more innocent people from being in prison, the head of the state NAACP said Thursday.

“The Rev. William Barber also called on Gov. Pat McCrory to establish a task force to recommend ways to strengthen protections against wrongful convictions….”

“Cooper’s office said a meeting was held with Barber and representatives of the NAACP: ‘We look forward to working with them to address systemic issues in the criminal justice system.” Cooper also wants more money for N.C. Innocence Inquiry Commission, which has been involved in releasing eight innocent men.

“McCrory’s office didn’t… respond to Barber’s comments….”

– From “NAACP: Attorney General should review wrongful convictions” by Martha Waggoner of the Associated Press (March 24) (text cache)

The latest addition to the long list of questionable North Carolina convictions comes from Gaston County (thank you, Elizabeth Leland of the Charlotte Observer). Least surprising sentence in Leland’s series: “The prosecutors who tried the case declined to be interviewed.”

LRDCC20