) has come forward and announced that she was molested by her uncle, Richard Hayes Stone, when she was a little girl.
Hatcher contacted Santa Clara County prosecutor Chuck Gillingham to help in convicting Stone, 67, for molesting 14-year-old Sarah Van Cleemput who later committed suicide. Gillingham needed Hatcher's corroborating testimony.
"She asked what I thought," about coming forward, Gillingham said of Hatcher. "I said, 'I'm going to beg you to be involved, as hard as that is for you.'"
Gillingham flew down to Los Angeles with a Sunnyvale public safety officer to take Hatcher's statement.
"When we went to interview her, she almost canceled," Gillingham said. "But she had been with her daughter that morning and was thinking if, God forbid, something happened to her daughter that someone would come forward and do the right thing."
With a tape recording running, Hatcher explained in detail how her uncle -- the then-husband of her mother's sister -- allegedly molested her in the late 1960s and early '70s when she was no more than 7.
"Obviously she took a big risk doing the interview," Gillingham said.
After prosecutors gave the defense a transcript of Hatcher's interview, Stone pleaded guilty Oct. 24, 2002, leaving no need for a trial nor a court appearance for Hatcher.
.
1
There was no trial and a confession by the defendant. So why did she make report of it to the press?
Posted by: Papertiger at March 08, 2006 01:12 PM (wZLWV)
2
paper,
the uncle has every opportunity to sue her for slander if she's lying.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at March 08, 2006 01:39 PM (8e/V4)
3
Paper, why shouldn't she?
Posted by: Oyster at March 08, 2006 02:59 PM (rf0W8)
4
Why shouldn't she? I don't know, maybe I'm old fashioned, but I don't consider the public airing of family business to be in good taste.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at March 08, 2006 04:26 PM (0yYS2)
5
"family business"
lololol! That's one way of putting it.
Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at March 08, 2006 04:48 PM (8e/V4)
6
Well IM, that's a man's viewpoint. I'll give you that. But this is a bit different. Actually, I can understand a male not wanting to make public any abuse by a male family memdber or any other male member of society. But for women, it's different. Being of the "weaker" sex I think I can say with authority, it's definately a bit different.
Ever been raped? I have.
Posted by: Oyster at March 08, 2006 08:01 PM (YudAC)
7
Well, I'm sure that was a thread stopper. Sorry 'bout that.
Posted by: Oyster at March 08, 2006 08:25 PM (YudAC)
8
Too bad she didn't come forward before the suicide.
Posted by: Bullshark at March 09, 2006 06:10 AM (m1nCk)
9
No Oyster, my skin is thicker than that. I was saying that I don't think it's right for anyone to air their dirty laundry in public just for the sake of it. Her statement served no purpose but to bring publicity to her flagging career.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at March 09, 2006 06:10 AM (0yYS2)
10
That may have been her motive. I don't know, but if it highlights a situation that too many people are willing to ignore - because a family member was involved - then I say all the better. There are a significant number of families out there who have an uncle everyone keeps the kids from, but they don't feel enough of a sense of community to report him and protect other people's kids. It's always just a dirty secret kept within the family. I just think it's wrong. And the more that get exposed, the better.
Posted by: Oyster at March 09, 2006 06:31 AM (YudAC)
11
IM
Yes, her statement serves an immense purpose - it shows that shes willing to talk publically about something that silence only serves to perpetuate. She is willing to say "see, I was too afraid to tell and someone else got hurt. please learn."
You have no idea how so many families will cover and run in these situations.
It's taken us months to try and break an extended family's silence on the murder of a 6 week old baby. And there's no guarantee when it goes to trial that a jury will convict because at this point we can't be assured that the family members won't change their stories yet again.
Posted by: Darleen at March 09, 2006 08:38 AM (FgfaV)
12
Good points ladies, but I still think there's a more dignified way to handle things, but then, dignified behavior was outlawed in America long ago, about the same time of the election of that piece of shit scumbag Kennedy.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at March 09, 2006 12:13 PM (0yYS2)
13
More dignified than the action itself? I don't mean to beat a dead horse, but it can't stay a private matter. Those who commit these acts no longer have the right to privacy and the families who do go public have a much better chance at closure.
Posted by: Oyster at March 09, 2006 01:20 PM (rf0W8)
14
To digress slightly from the thread, I read somewhere that the problem of sex crimes against children which occur in South America are usually kept within the family. It doesn't become public. The problem is resolved by killing the offender. The death is reported as an accident or suicide. I can't vouch for the accuracy of the source.
Otherwise, I lean toward Oyster's argument. That is excepting the part about being a thread stopper.
Posted by: Mike at March 09, 2006 04:11 PM (NbXFu)
15
That's the way it should be handled Mike, and not broadcast globally for everyone to know, but then, there is no sense of dignity in the Western world these days, which is a sure sign of its decline.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at March 10, 2006 08:34 AM (0yYS2)
16
If you've read the article or listened to any of the interviews with the writer, this was not what she intended to do in the interview. It "came out like a volcano". And the idea that a recent Golden Globe award winner has a flagging career is just stupid.
I'm a close relative of the prosecutor. I can tell you none of her story is untrue.
Posted by: mama shoe at March 10, 2006 10:39 AM (Eh/Hv)
17
The fact is that no matter how "private" you want or try to keep it, the media always sees it as another item to sensationalize because of the perceived "freedom of information" right. We call some lawyers "ambulance chasers", well, there's a large portion of the media who could be accorded the same title. They hang out in the courthouses looking for stuff,
"Oooh, a juicy molestation case. Let's put it ont 6:00 news!"
Posted by: Oyster at March 10, 2006 11:07 AM (rf0W8)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
