Charges are dropped against former Citrus County Judge Gary Graham, who had been accused of fondling two 10-year-old girls.
By Times Staff Writers
Published February 10, 2006
Prosecutors announced this morning that they will drop criminal charges against former Citrus County Judge Gary Graham, who had been accused of fondling two 10-year-old girls.
Graham faced three felony counts: one of sexual battery on a child younger than 12 and two of lewd and lascivious conduct. Authorities had said Graham touched the girls while they were in their beds one night in December 2003.
Graham, 58, pleaded not guilty and his case was set for trial in May.
But serious evidence problems cropped up. One of the children recanted her accusation, Assistant State Attorney Richard Buxman wrote in a memo to his boss, State Attorney Brad King. The mother of one of the children admitted making false statements to an investigator. The woman, who was Graham's girlfriend when the alleged sexual abuse happened, said during a deposition that she made the false statements because she was angry at Graham, Buxman wrote in the memo.
"The corrobrating statements of the children about the abuse and the consistent details they provided to law enforcement was the main strength of the case," Buxman wrote. "The recantation of two major witnesses has now become the greatest weakness in this case."
As for the second girl, she "has never wavered or vacillated in her allegation of being touched" by Graham, the prosecutor wrote. And the State Attorney's Office does not doubt her.
She and her family initially told law officers the abuse happened in February 2004; additional investigating showed that any such contact could have happened only between Christmas 2003 and early January 2004, Buxman wrote.
"Although we know a child would be unlikely to recall specific dates, the significant conflict in dates is yet another factor to raise doubts in the minds of jurors," the prosecutor wrote.
"In summary," he wrote, "the fact that two witnesses have admitted to being untruthful and recanted their testimony, the loss of previously existing corroborating testimony, no physical evidence, conflicts in date of abuse, my ability to sustaint a conviction at trial has been significantly compromised to the point I don't feel I can ethically proceed to trial."
Graham was elected Citrus County judge in 1986 and served until 1993, when the Florida Supreme Court removed him for judicial misconduct.
In kicking Graham off the bench, the high court had this to say: "As a county judge, Graham made what he perceived to be a valiant effort at ridding Citrus County of the political favoritism and government corruption that caused the demise of his predecessor. His zealous pursuit of a pure society apparently clouded his ability to impartially adjudicate the matters before him. His motives are acceptable, but his methods are not."
And: "We recognize that Graham is not dishonest, venal or guilty of moral turpitude."
In his separate, concurring opinion, Justice Parker McDonald wrote: "No one claims, or even suggests, that Judge Graham is dishonest. The record supports that he is in fact genuinely honest."
