Sep 4, 2014
Aug 28, 2014
Aug 21, 2014
Aug 14, 2014
Mistrial in case of Hampton man charged with sexually assaulting 3 children
During the second day of testimony in Rockingham County Superior Court, a mistrial was declared in the sexual-assault case against Leonard Aldrich, 64, of Hampton. JAMES A. KIMBLE
Leonard Aldrich, 64, will remain behind bars at the Rockingham County jail while lawyers prepare for a new trial. Aldrich has been in custody since his arrest Jan. 29, 2012. He is accused of sexually assaulting two young girls and a boy, now age 7, between December 2010 and January 2012.
The new information about the records was discovered shortly before noon Wednesday during the second day of trial when two witnesses offered contradictory testimony, according to Judge Marguerite Wageling. Prosecutors argue that the girl's mother walked in on Aldrich as he was sexually assaulting the two girls - ages 6 and 2 - and promptly reported the matter to police. The mother testified she was alone at the time, but the boy testified earlier he was with his mother during the incident and provided details to the jury.
"She was clear in her testimony that she was not with (him)," Wageling said.
Police reports about the incident made no mention of the boy. Defense lawyer Patrick Fleming argued for a mistrial, which was initially denied by the judge. The contradiction in testimony prompted a discussion between Wageling and the lawyers during a break in the trial. A DCYF worker overheard that conversation and recalled a conversation she had with the mother on the same topic, revealing that there may be a record of it that was not previously handed over prior to the trial, Wageling said.
Such a record, or records - however minor they might be - could be used by the defense to impeach a witness, according to the judge.
Prior to the trial, Wageling said she reviewed scores of DCYF records to provide to the prosecution and defense as they prepared for trial. She said obtaining records from the state agency proved to be troublesome early on in the case.
"We had some difficultly with that issue earlier," she said. "The court will make every effort to get to the bottom of it."
No new trial date has been set. Lawyers will meet with Wageling March 29.
READER COMMENTS: 0
- Man stabbed in leg in Manchester incident - 0
- Possible negotiated plea for Nashua dad accused of negligent homicide in son's death - 0
- Amherst man facing charges in August Merrimack accident - 0
- Attorney claims illegal phone seizure following Christmas Eve accident that killed Brookline mom - 2
- Nashua couple's minivan stolen with toddler in back seat - 13
- Pelham store robbed Saturday - 0
- Woman charged with attacking fiancÚ, threatening him with a gun - 1
- Two months later, still no answers in killing near Stinson Lake - 0
- Man cited for OHRV use in wetland area in Stewartstown - 0
READER COMMENTS: 0
- Mexican man pleads guilty in international conspiracy to traffic hundreds of pounds of cocaine - 1
- Senate sustains Hassan veto of bill to revamp juvenile justice system - 1
- Dan Tuohy's Granite Status: Brown v. Shaheen: A tale of new polls - 4
- Traffic backed up a mile in Hampton tractor-trailer accident - 0
- Woman shot during Manchester drug raid is identified - 0
- Citizen's Police Academy in Manchester set for Oct. 1 - 0
- NHIAA Football Power Poll; Who's No. 1 this week? - 0
- Heating unit cause of blaze in Manchester - 0
- Dave D'Onofrio's Patriots Notebook: Belichick's 200th was a trademark triumph - 0
In 2nd District race, Garcia bucks Obamacare
Attorney claims illegal phone seizure following Christmas Eve accident that killed Brookline mom
Find the hidden cash stashed downtown
Strategery: A war by any other name
Freeh dumb: Favoritism in Vt.?
Lawyer wants cellphone evidence thrown out
Mexican man pleads guilty in international conspiracy to traffic hundreds of pounds of cocaine
Your Turn, NH -- Ted Menswar Jr.: How Manchester pulled together to honor one of its greats
- Mass. Supreme Judicial Court has found upskirt photos taken on a subway aren't illegal. Should such voyeurism be a crime?
- Total Votes: 917