The Prince William County Police had asked me to take a polygraph test, and I had told them from the very beginning that I had been falsely accused and that I did not feel that it was necessary to have a machine tell them that I did not do anything illegal. The detective in my case stated, "If you don't take one, you must know that we are going to believe that you did do something." I consulted one attorney in Fredericksburg, VA who stated to me, "If you do not have anything to hide, then I suggest that you probably should go ahead and take the polygraph." So, I agreed to take it.
At the time I was a mess mentally. It was as if my life had been taken from me. I could barely wake up and take care of myself, let alone my family. I lost all contact with the students I had worked with each day and the staff whom I had worked with for ten years. I decided that I would take the polygraph because I had nothing to hide and felt that it would convince the police that I was falsely accused. During the polygraph, I was asked many questions about my sexuality, marriage, and contact with the student who made the accusations against me. Following the polygraph, I was told that it was determined that I was deceptive in my answers to the question of whether I had attempted to sexually assault the alleged victim. I continued to reiterate to the detective that I was falsely accused and that I was not going to tell them that I did something that I did not do! I was then subjected to an interrogation for approximately one hour. I continued to declare my innocence. The prosecutor's office made the unfortunate decision to present charges to a grand jury, and I was indicted, jailed, and then bonded out.
I then really needed a good attorney. Prior to being jailed, a friend recommended an attorney that he knew. I went and talked with him and explained my situation. He had some experience dealing with felony cases, and he was young and seemed aggressive. I retained him as counsel. I really did not know what I should do. The first thing that my attorney did was to try and work a deal with the prosecutor. They wanted me to plead guilty to several felony charges and serve 3-5 years. Well, needless to say, I was not interested in any plea agreement.
After many pretrial motion hearings, I then went to trial and my attorney's opening statement to the jury lasted 2-3 minutes and was unprepared. I should have known at that point that I was in trouble, but I continued to believe that my attorney would do his best. After a 4-day trial, my attorney recommended that I not testify. The jury deliberated for about 6 hours the first day. My attorney was in a panic and predicted that they were going to find me guilty on one of the three charges that I faced. He then wanted to see if prior to the jury returning a guilty verdict and me facing up to 30 years in prison, they would offer a better plea bargain.
They again came back with an offer requiring that I plead guilty to one felony, spend 6 months in prison and 3 years probation, be subjected to random polygraph testing, and resign my position with the school system. I would also have become a registered felony sexual offender. My attorney felt it was a great deal, and I guess it was, given that I faced up to 30 years behind bars. I only considered the thought of accepting a plea bargain due to my children. At the time, I had one daughter who was 3 and another who was 8 years old. I had a difficult time facing the thought that I could possibly spend their entire childhood without them being able to have a dad. It almost worked, but I declined the plea offer and put my faith in God and the jury that they would see the truth.
The second day, the jury continued deliberations, and I heard many times from my attorney how I might be going to jail and that I should have taken the plea bargain. Well, after 14 hours, despite the judge's instructions to the jury to continue and attempt to reach a verdict, they were deadlocked. A mistrial was declared on all of the charges. The prosecutor again decided to pursue my case, and I was tried again several months later. With the assistance of a new attorney, the trial lasted 3 days. The jury deliberated just over an hour, and I was acquitted on all charges.
What I want people to know is that they should never agree to submit to a polygraph test. If you are involved in any police matter involving felony charges, I would recommend that you invoke your Miranda rights the first question they ask you. Anything you say to the police can only be used against you in court. Never speak until you have good legal counsel.
They had the alleged victim call my home and try to talk to me, and I know for a fact they were on the line taping everything that was said with the hope that I would say something that would incriminate me. This happened to another teacher in my county who did do something illegal. The police are allowed to lie to you and be deceptive in anyway they can to get you to say something that they can use against you in court.
As far as attorneys are concerned, find a good one. Remember that it is not the "justice" system, as many people would want you to think: it is the legal system. Taking a polygraph test was the biggest mistake that I ever made. After I took it, it was somehow conveyed by the detective or the school system's risk management investigator--who was present during the interrogation following the polygraph--to a person who was a staff member at my school (and who also testified afterwards against me in court) that I had "failed it." I don't know if it was illegal for the polygraph results to be shared with others. A friend who was also a staff member called me on the phone the day that she heard that I had failed the polygraph from the other staff member.
A lot of people unfortunately do believe that polygraphs are the real deal, and if you "failed it," then you must be guilty. Dr. Phil, Court TV, and the agencies and people who administer them continue to convey the message that the polygraph is fool-proof, accurate, and without error. Well, any person who reads what is on the AntiPolygraph.org web site, or independent research that has been conducted, will have to come to the educated conclusion that polygraphs are a joke. In the words of Albert Einstein, "Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of Truth and Knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods."
I know that history has taught us many lessons. Why the polygraph is even a part of our legal system is beyond understanding. We might just as well have fortune tellers, Ouija boards, and tarot card readers doing the detective work. The hard part is that the public perception of law enforcement is that they are the good guys, and if they say that it is true, then it must be. They are the ones that are out there catching the bad guys and stopping the bad people from doing harm in society. So, if they are utilizing the polygraph to help them find the bad guys, then it must be right.
A lot of people believe in things that they don't understand or know enough about. They just put their faith in the belief that whatever it is must be right. I have tried to explain to those who know me how polygraphs themselves are deceptive and not accurate, and so on. But you still wonder whether they may not believe that you are actually telling the truth, thinking in the back of their minds that you must have done something wrong for the police to have charged you with what you were accused of and tried for in court.
The polygraph that I "failed" was utilized against me by the school system in a hearing to determine if they were going to fire me from my teaching position, and I was. I have lost almost everything in my life: my career, my home, and my reputation. I have tried to move on, but even finding a decent job has been an impossible task.
I am very grateful that I do have my freedom, am able to see my children, and am not labeled a felon or sexual offender because the legal system was right in my case, and the 12 people who served on my jury were able to hear all of the evidence and come to the conclusion that I was not guilty. I hope that my story will be read and that through my experience, people will know that a person should never ever agree to take a polygraph. Maybe someday history will teach us that all that what was really being tested using the polygraph was how deceptive the legal system can be toward the innocent.
Former teacher suing Kelly for defamation
By MARIA HEGSTAD mhegstad@potomacnews.com
Saturday, July 2, 2005A former Hylton High School special education teacher is suing former Prince William Schools Superintendent Ed Kelly for $1.94 million.
The lawsuit, filed Friday, alleges Kelly defamed David Anthony Perino, 40. Perino, formerly of Fredericksburg, was accused of sexually abusing a student in December 2003. Perino's first trial in Prince William Circuit Court ended in a mistrial when the jury could not reach a unanimous verdict. A second jury acquitted Perino of the charges of attempted forcible sodomy, aggravated sexual battery and indecent exposure in November.
Despite being found not guilty of the allegations, the Prince William County School Board terminated Perino in April and recommended the Virginia Department of Education revoke his teaching license.
Perino's attorney, Pamela L. Cave, argues that three letters Kelly authored regarding Perino's termination defamed Perino's character. Each letter states that Perino was terminated for child sexual abuse. The final letter, dated June 16, is addressed to Virginia's superintendent of public instruction, and recommends the revocation of Perino's teaching license.
"In brief, on December 12, 2003, Mr. Perino engaged in sexual or otherwise inappropriate conduct … to a mentally retarded 20-year-old student," Kelly wrote. "The events took place in a classroom at the school … where Mr. Perino taught. Such conduct amounts to immorality, a lawful ground for termination of his teaching license."
In an earlier November 2004 letter, Kelly wrote Perino that he recommended his termination from Hylton because of sexual abuse, pornography found on Perino's school computer and a founded case of child abuse by Prince William County Department of Social Services.
There "was absolutely no basis whatsoever" for claiming Perino had a founded child abuse complaint through Social Services, Cave wrote in the lawsuit.
The jury that acquitted Perino never heard about the pornography found on his computer. Before the second trial, Circuit Court Judge Rossie D. Alston Jr. barred the evidence from the trial because there was no way to determine who downloaded the pornography onto Perino's computer.
The evidence presented to both juries was very similar: the student's testimony and a video from a school security camera. The video shows the hallway outside Perino's classroom. The student enters, exits a few minutes later and leans against the wall with her face in her hands.
There was no physical evidence in the case, and much of it was circumstantial. The student's mother testified to a dramatic change in her behavior after Dec. 12, 2003. But Cave, who also represented Perino during his trial, argued that Perino wouldn't have been able to abuse the student even if he wanted to. His classroom door had a window, and was unlocked. Additionally, the student was only very briefly in Perino's classroom, Cave argued.
In June, Cave filed motions asking the Circuit Court to order the School Board to review its decision. In an answer filed Friday, the School Board's attorney writes that the board did not violate Perino's constitutional right to due process. McGowan wrote that there is no legal requirement for the student to be forced to testify before the School Board, and that the board's decision to terminate Perino based on a transcript from his original trial was sufficient.
In an additional document filed Friday, McGowan moved Perino's June lawsuit from Prince William Circuit Court to the federal district court in Alexandria. McGowan wrote the transfer was appropriate because Perino was claiming violation of his federal constitutional rights.
Kelly has 21 days to respond to Perino's new lawsuit. Perino seeks a total of $1.94 million. In the lawsuit, he claims damages of over $800,000 in lost income, and a calculated $60,000 in lost retirement benefits. As a result of the defamation, Perino relocated to Jeanette, Pennsylvania at a cost of $80,000, and claims damages to his reputation in the amount of $1 million.
Former teacher sanctioned for lawsuits
By ROB SEAL rseal@potomacnews.com
Saturday, December 31, 2005A former C.D. Hylton High School special education teacher's attempt to sue several school officials backfired this week, and he and his lawyer were ordered to reimburse the school system more than $14,000 in legal fees.
A judge ruled that David Anthony Perino's lawsuits against former Prince William County Superintendent Edward Kelly and other school officials were unfounded, and ordered Perino and his attorney Pamela L. Cave to pay thousands of dollars each to cover the defendants' legal fees, attorneys involved with the case said Friday.
The sanctions were issued Wednesday, during the most recent of Perino's many court appearances over the past two years.
The former teacher's legal odyssey started in December 2003, when he was accused of sexually assaulting a female special education student while they were alone in his classroom.
He was charged with attempted forcible sodomy, aggravated sexual battery and indecent exposure.
In May 2004, Perino's first trial ended in a mistrial when jurors couldn't agree on a verdict.
A few months later, the jury in Perino's second trial acquitted the former teacher of all charges.
But Perino's wasn't finished with hearings and court appearances. Despite the not-guilty verdict, the Prince William County school system started its own process to determine whether Perino should keep his job. A fact-finding panel put together by the School Board held its own hearing on Dec. 17, 2004, complete with evidence and testimony.
During the hearing, the panel considered evidence that didn't come out during the criminal trials, such as the results of a polygraph examination that Perino failed and the discovery of pornography on his school computer.
Though considered at the school's hearing, polygraph results are not admissible in Virginia courts because they are not considered reliable enough. A judge blocked the pornography evidence from the criminal trial, saying there was no way it could be proven to be Perino's since others had access to his computer.
The schools' panel decided Perino was guilty of child sexual abuse and recommended that the School Board fire him. The board complied, firing Perino in April.
The School Board also directed then-superintendent Edward Kelly to recommend to the state board of education that Perino's license to teach be removed.
"The harm (Perino) has suffered cannot be adequately reimbursed in any fashion," Cave said.
This summer and fall, Perino filed defamation lawsuits against Kelly, two members of the fact-finding panel, a former colleague and a school security officer that testified in front of the panel.
The lawsuits said the school officials defamed Perino by saying he was guilty of child abuse after he'd been acquitted in a court of law.
In October, Circuit Court Judge William Hamblen dismissed all of the defamation suits.
Hamblen said Kelly and the two men from the fact-finding panel couldn't be sued because they'd been performing official school duties when they concluded that Perino was guilty.
"It is also established that the findings complained of by (Perino) were the product of a rational and fair fact-finding process and were well-supported by the evidence…" Hamblen said in a written decision.
Hamblen also dismissed Perino's lawsuit against a teacher at Hylton, saying the time limit to file the suit had expired. Cave had previously withdrawn another lawsuit against a security guard.
Afterward, Cave filed paperwork asking Hamblen to withdraw from the case, and has appealed his decisions to the state Supreme Court, she said.
On Wednesday, Hamblen declined to leave the case and ordered sanctions against Perino and his attorney, Cave said.
He ordering them to reimburse the school system - which provided legal services for all but one of the school officials accused of defamation - to the tune of $14,000.
Some of the sanctions were for the lawsuit against the security guard, which Cave had dropped.
"It's unbelievable to me," Cave said. "I do not understand how a judge can open a case that has been non-suited."
Mary McGowan, the schools' attorney who represented all but one of the defendants in the defamation cases, asked Hamblen to impose the sanctions against Cave and Perino.
"We filed a motion to compensate the taxpayers for the attorneys' fees and costs that we were forced to incur because of these lawsuits," McGowan said.
The school's attorney said the lawsuits were without merit and the schools shouldn't have to pay to defend against them.
"The judge found the lawsuits were objectively unreasonable and baseless," McGowan said.
Both McGowan and Cave said sanctions are a relative rarity in the legal system.
"(Hamblen) said the lawsuits were filed for revenge," Cave said. "It's so ridiculous. I'm floored. I feel like if this is how the system is supposed to work, it is out of control."
Cave, who described herself as a single mother of five who represented Perino for free, was ordered to pay $7,275 in sanctions.
Perino was ordered to pay $6,846, McGowan said.
Still, the total amounts of the sanctions leveled at Perino and Cave didn't cover the amount the school system spent defending against Perino's lawsuits, McGowan said.
Cave said she plans to appeal the sanctions.
"I can't pay. Mr. Perino can't pay," Cave said.
Perino had also filed a lawsuit against the school board, saying they denied him due process. A federal judge dismissed that lawsuit in October.
Cave said she might appeal that decision to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals.
"If there are any appeals we would seek additional attorneys fees and costs related to the appeals," McGowan said.
Perino had also sued the school system itself, though Cave said she removed that lawsuit Wednesday for fear of drawing more sanctions.
"Actions like this make me feel like no one has a chance if you're trying to go up against people who can drown you in paperwork and pound you into the ground," Cave said.