Mr. T protects witnesses in court

snopes · #1 19 March 2008, 08:30 AM

Comment: I remember a story where there was a court case where a group of school
children had been abused by the headmaster or whatever and the children
were afraid to go to court. they said they would go if Mr. T from the A
team would accompany them. so he did. he sat in court protecting them.
i hope it's true but i can't find anything.

forceflow15 · #2 19 March 2008, 11:29 PM

I doubt it. Not many kids know of the A-Team nowadays, or Mr. T for that matter.

ETA: Thanks for the edit snopes. I had an entirely different idea in mind when I entered the thread.

keokuk · #3 19 March 2008, 11:51 PM

I just did a Lexis search and found some old stories indicating that it is partially true. Some children were molested at a pre-school and felt intimidated by having to testify in front of their assailant. Mr. T offered to sit in court if it would make the children feel more comfortable, but the district attorney declined the offer.

Mr. T goes to rescue of kids in court. Chicago Tribune. January 17, 1985. Page C11.

Quote:

Mr. T, the tough talking hero of television's "A-Team," plans to be in
the courtroom to support children testifying about being molested at the
McMartin Pre-School, a spokesman says.

The actor planned to meet with representatives of the District Attorney's
Office to discuss his courtroom appearances as a spectator to provide moral
support while the children testify. "It's psychological warfare," Brad Turell, a spokesman for the actor, said Tuesday.

"(Defendant) Raymond Buckey has frightened the children so much that they
were afraid he would come after them," he said. "But they believe Mr. T will
protect them, and they feel more confident about telling the truth if he is
present in the courtroom when they testify.

BOY, 7, TO TAKE STAND THIS WEEK;FIRST CHILD SET TO TESTIFY IN MCMARTIN ABUSE CASE. Lois Timnick. Los Angeles Times. January 20, 1985. Metro p. 1

Quote:

Television tough guy Mr. T injected a Hollywood touch into the proceedings last week by offering to accompany any youngsters frightened at having to face their accused molesters. But the district attorney's office declined his offer, explaining that the TV personality's presence might detract from the seriousness of the proceedings.

One relieved defense attorney said: "It really is difficult to go up against Mr. T."

Natalie · #4 20 March 2008, 07:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by keokuk

I just did a Lexis search and found some old stories indicating that it is partially true. Some children were molested at a pre-school and felt intimidated by having to testify in front of their assailant.

Except that none of those kids were actually molested. That particular case was part of the satanic ritual abuse scare of the mid-80s, and because of poor investigation techniques and hysteria 360 children were believed to have been molested. Among some of the more bizarre claims: Chuck Norris took part in ritual abuse, children were flushed down toilets into secret rooms, and seeing witches fly. Charges were eventually dropped or dismissed in all of the cases.

keokuk · #5 20 March 2008, 08:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Natalie

Except that none of those kids were actually molested. That particular case was part of the satanic ritual abuse scare of the mid-80s, and because of poor investigation techniques and hysteria 360 children were believed to have been molested. Among some of the more bizarre claims: Chuck Norris took part in ritual abuse, children were flushed down toilets into secret rooms, and seeing witches fly. Charges were eventually dropped or dismissed in all of the cases.

Ugh, that's what I get for just looking to pre-trial articles involving Mr. T and assuming the charges to be true.

Thanks for the correction!

Natalie · #6 20 March 2008, 09:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by keokuk

Ugh, that's what I get for just looking to pre-trial articles involving Mr. T and assuming the charges to be true.

You're in good company - the state, news media, and a good chunk of the public assumed the charges were true as well. I think the person charged with the most counts wasn't released from jail for about five years.

keokuk · #7 20 March 2008, 09:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Natalie

You're in good company - the state, news media, and a good chunk of the public assumed the charges were true as well. I think the person charged with the most counts wasn't released from jail for about five years.

Wow. I just read some subsequent news articles. At first, I set my search parameters for the year following the first article I posted above (1985). Then I had to adjust it... and adjust it again. After two years, charges against 5 of 7 defendants were dismissed after a new prosecutor said there was no way he could prove the case, and the eventual trial led to a hung jury on the remaining defendants... in 1990.