Print

Email story

Comment

Email editor

Ex-police officer files for new trial

The officer, accused of molesting two girls, was told by his lawyers that he couldn't be convicted. They were wrong.

By CHRIS TISCH
Published October 8, 2005

LARGO - Ernesto Hedges took a major risk this summer.

The former Tampa police officer was accused of molesting two little girls. If convicted, he faced a mandatory 25-year prison sentence.

Typically in child sex abuse cases this serious, defense attorneys take a year or more to prepare for trial. They take depositions. They scrutinize the evidence. They hire expert witnesses.

Hedges' Tampa attorneys, James A. Thomas Jr. and Jorge L. Chalela, did none of that.

Instead, they urged Hedges to wield his right to a speedy trial, a strategy typically used to catch prosecutors flat-footed. The lawyers told Hedges he couldn't be convicted.

But a jury took just an hour to find Hedges, 50, guilty.

Now, Hedges has hired Barry Cohen's high-powered Tampa law firm to help him get a new trial. He says Thomas and Chalela gave him bad legal advice and didn't adequately prepare his case.

"There was nothing done in this case that you would expect would be done, especially in a case with this kind of a severe punishment," said Stephen Romine, Hedges' new attorney.

He has filed a motion for a new trial in which Thomas and Chalela are roundly criticized for their efforts in the Hedges case. A hearing is scheduled for Tuesday.

"It's very harsh. It's much harsher than you usually see," Charles Rose, a professor at the Stetson University College of Law, said of the motion. "It alleges an awful lot. And if true, it's troubling."

Thomas did not respond to interview requests for this article. Chalela declined to comment.

Prosecutor Bill Loughery, however, doesn't think Hedges should get a new trial.

Loughery said it's difficult to believe that Hedges, who had been an 18-year police veteran before his arrest forced him into retirement, didn't know the chance he was taking.

"He's been a cop for 20 years and knows the criminal justice system better than your average citizen," Loughery said. "It was a strategic decision. I think it's just sour grapes because he lost. If he was found not guilty they would be celebrating what great lawyers they were. He thought he could beat the charge and he didn't. And it's just a matter of him wanting a do-over now because he lost."

Romine disagreed.

"It's hard to blame anybody in any profession for listening to their lawyer," he said.

Hedges was arrested in March after one of the girls told an adult he had touched her. A second girl also said Hedges touched her. Hedges says he was simply tickling and horsing around with the girls and didn't touch them sexually, Romine said. Hedges says Thomas approached him after he was released on bail and offered to represent him for free. Thomas told Hedges he was a former police officer who wanted to help another cop, according to the motion for a new trial.

Thomas assured Hedges that the allegations didn't constitute a crime. He also told Hedges not to waive his right to a speedy trial, meaning prosecutors would have to take him to trial within 175 days of his arrest date. The trial was set for late August.

The right to a speedy trial is guaranteed by the Constitution, but it's rarely used by a defendant who is out on bail and is facing a serious criminal charge. Defense attorneys usually would rather thoroughly review the evidence, looking for holes or inconsistencies to exploit at trial.

"No person in their right mind is going to want to enforce their right to a speedy trial over their right to be properly defended," Romine said.

About a week before the trial, Thomas brought in Chalela to help with the case. Chalela never met with Hedges before the day of jury selection. Both attorneys told Hedges he had "nothing to worry about," the motion states.

In addition, the attorneys didn't review a copy of a videotaped interview with the accusers until just two days before the trial, the motion states.

During the trial, Judge Linda Allan asked Hedges if he wanted to proceed so quickly, without depositions being taken. Hedges, believing his attorneys' assurances that his defense was solid, said he did, according to the motion.

Hedges says he first heard of the 25-year mandatory sentence after the jury had been selected. Thomas later told Romine that neither he nor Chalela knew of the potential penalty until after the jury was seated, the motion states.

Romine argues in the motion that Hedges deserves a new trial because his lawyers were so ineffective.

Rose, the Stetson law professor, said the attorneys' decision not to hire an expert to review the accusers' testimony was a particularly bad decision. He said those experts can detect if a child was coached into making an allegation.

"There are potential ineffective assistance of counsel issues that the judge is going to have to look at," said Rose, who handled more than 100 child sex abuse cases as both a prosecutor and a defense attorney. "If they didn't do all that because they thought the case was so bogus that they didn't need to prepare, that's an issue of competency. Because even if you think it's bogus, you need to prepare."

[Last modified October 8, 2005, 01:39:39]