Postscript of the Leon Wilson case (chess coach)

Chess is experiencing quite an increase in interest, especially among the youth as major tournaments worldwide are often dotted with scholastic players. This boom has necessitated the demand for able instructors, coaches and trainers. With the demand, comes increasing contact between adults and minors. It is rare that there is a conflict, but when there is one, it is usually a matter of the two parties not being able to get the results desired … so there is a parting of ways. Rarely is there anything more serious than a disgruntled customer or parent.

Ohio v. Leon Wilson

Last year, F. Leon Wilson was accused of inappropriately touching a 4-year old minor during a chess lesson. This came after the parent informed the police about a conversation he had with his daughter. In the case of Wilson, we was a highly-regard coach and has been teaching in the Columbus area for a number of years with great success. He had submitted to a number of background checks with the Ohio Bureau of Criminal Investigation (OBCI) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). When the allegation arose, Wilson had been returning from a tournament in Greece when he was apprehended at the airport and placed under arrest before any investigation was done. After he was arrested, a 7-year old came forward to make a similar claim.

The initial charge was a first-degree felony of “rape,” but later downgraded to fourth-degree “gross sexual imposition.” He posted bail on a $250,000 bond and has been free ever since. All of this changed within a year. Social media excoriated Wilson and tended to paint him as guilty before any evidence was presented. Another 23-year old accuser came forward with a 10-year old claim, but it was not admissible. Wilson submitted to a polygraph test prior to the trial and it came out that he was “truthful.” These results, however, would not be admitted as evidence. After four grueling days of the first trial in February, the jury could not come to an agreement and a mistrial was declared.

F. Leon Wilson at February trial
Photo by

In the second trial, a DNA test was offered during the trial, but it showed no connection to Wilson. Another source says that the DNA of another male was found on the clothing of one of the girls. There was no other evidence and while the prosecuting attorney Mark Sleeper admitted there was not much physical evidence, he offered that there are such cases where DNA cannot be found. It boiled down to the testimony of the two girls. It appeared in the first trial there was a failure to convince the jury of Wilson’s absolute guilt. In the second trial, the jury reached a “guilty” verdict. The question would be, what changed in the second trial? What was the burden of proof that convinced this assembly of jurors? If there is no DNA, no audio, no video, no witnesses then what is the basis of the conviction?

Are Chess Coaches Safe?

Accused of “gross sexual imposition” on a minor, Leon Wilson was found guilty on two of three counts and will face sentencing July 29th. The verdict begs the question, “How are chess coaches and trainers protected from these allegations?” One may glibly answer, “Well… they shouldn’t molest children.” Of course not and any pedophile or child molester should be held to the letter of the law. Let’s look at it a bit deeper. What is to stop any angry child from leveling a charge against their coach and what would their defense be?

F. Leon Wilson
Photo by Frank Johnson.

If a passed polygraph and a negative DNA test are not sufficient and if there is no other audio-visual evidence, then it is the word of the accuser versus the accused. In this case and 4- and 7-year old accused Leon Wilson of inappropriately touching them during a chess lesson. This means that chess coaches have to take precautions to protect themselves. What precautions?

In order for coaches to protect themselves (and thus protection of child), they should resort to video taping every private session (or not giving private lessons), having at least one parent present at all times, having the lesson in a public facility, or having the lessons on the Internet (also with parents watching). If only one parent is present and they have to leave the room, then the lesson must stop and the child has to go with them. If parents don’t submit to being there at all times, then should the coaches deny the service? This is now a legitimate question. Of course, this is cumbersome to carry out, but if Wilson can be convicted without any evidence and a mere accusation, then what precautions should a coach take?

There is no charge easier to make in America, perhaps the world, and more difficult to disprove than a teacher, a coach, a relative being accused of touching over the clothing, inappropriately, or sexually, or molesting or sexually assaulting a child.”

~Brad Koffel, Defense Attorney for F. Leon Wilson

Coaches/Parents: Protection is Vital

In the Wilson case, there was no shred of physical evidence that he had molested the two girls, yet their words were credible in the eyes of the jurors and the cries of emotional parents touched all those guardians who dread the day that they will face such a situation. The defense contended that the girls were coached by their parents to testify credibly in the court. Of course, but it’s up to the legal system to uphold due process and the mantra “innocent until proven guilty.” Wilson was arrested at an airport prior to any proof (other than the accusation). If a child utters to a parent, “My coach touched me,” and that parent calls the police who arrests them on the spot, perhaps we have come to the end of the road in terms of due process. In this day and after this verdict, it is doubtful that coaches will want to continue to take such a risk.

Photo by

We are moving into a society where people are becoming disconnected due to cell phone, social networking and video conferencing. Are we coming to a time where children will receive all of their chess instruction via cell phone or computers? Not likely, but the Wilson case is a lesson for all of us who want to share our joys of chess and its inherent benefits. This verdict sets a precedent for future. Coaches and trainers should take precautions (as should the parents) to ensure of the safety of both parties.


  1. Sources

    Dean Narciso, “Girl says teacher sexually assaulted her at preschool,” 28 April 2015.

    Lori Kurtzman, “Rape charges against chess teacher worry parents, teachers at several schools,” Columbus Dispatch, 29 April 2015.

    Lori Kurtzman, “New allegations emerge against youth chess teacher,” Columbus Dispatch, 29 April 2015.

    Chess Instructor Accused Of Raping Children.” WBNS-10TV News, 1 May 2015.

    Josh Poland, “Mother Speaks Out About Alleged Abuse By Chess Instructor,” WBNS-10TV News, 4 May 2015.

    Thomas Gallick, “Alleged victims of chess teacher now number three,” Olentangy Valley News, 6 May 2015.

    Daaim Shabazz, “Chess Coach Wilson facing trial July 14th” The Chess Drum, 8 May 2015.

    Dean Narciso , “Ex-chess teacher accused of sexual abuse disputes testimony of young witnessesColumbus Dispatch, 23 February 2016.

    Steve Levine, “Chess coach on trial for alleged sexual contact with students could testify,” FOX28 Columbus, 25 February 2016.

    Rick Reitzel, “Chess coach testifies in sexual assault trial,” WCMH-TV Columbus (, 25 February 2016.

    Trial in progress for Coach Leon Wilson

    Jury can’t reach verdict in chess teacher’s molestation trial

    Wilson retrial set for June 6th

    The Wilson trial begins today!

    Jury selection underway in retrial of chess teacher accused of molesting students

    Jury finds F. Leon Wilson guilty on two of three counts

    Former chess teacher found guilty on 2 of 3 sex-abuse counts

    Ohio chess teacher convicted of sex abuse of 2 young girls

    Al Sharpton Radio (June 12, 2016) on F. Leon Wilson

    There was a call from “Charlotte” into the Rev. Al Sharpton show this morning. I received a text from a listener with the following audio clip. While I’m uncertain of Rev. Sharpton points, the caller was a witness to the two trials and wanted to bring attention to the case. I have spoken to her and she cites a number of irregularities in the two cases. 3:53 minutes

    STATE OF OHIO (No. 18CAA040035)
    Plaintiff-Appellee, v. F. LEON WILSON, Defendant-Appellant

    Court of Appeals of Ohio, Fifth District, Delaware County
    December 20, 2018

  2. So, there was no doubt of Mr. Wilson’s guilt despite of the lack of evidence. I wonder what sort of job did the defense lawyer do for Mr. Wilson to defend his client. Will there be an appeal of the sentence?
    Also, is there a possibility of a civil case as well? I am a sponsor of a High School chess club, what can I do to protect myself? Am I limited in the things I can do for the club?

    1. It’s a sad case. There will be an appeal. I haven’t read the transcripts, but I’m interested in knowing how the second trial differed from the first… jury, testimony, witnesses.

      It’s tough to be a coach while you have to be concerned that someone will get mad and accuse you of something. This case sets a bad precedent.

  3. It seems to me that if there was a pattern of abuse and the first girl reported the incident, they should have been able to put a wire on her or make sure the video surveillance was working to nab him. The television show “To Catch a Predator” was an interesting exercise in how these men (didn’t profile woman predators) were caught in the act. They were recorded and there were computer records … tangible evidence. Typically in an investigation you follow up on accusations, you don’t arrest until you have solid evidence, lest the defense lawyer can cite violations. Ohio never collected any evidence in this case and is clearly operating by a set of standards that do not guarantee a citizen due process.

  4. I’d be the first to admit that to dishonor the reputation of an innocent person is simply disgraceful. However, there are two questions that I hope the transcript will help explain. First, if Mr. Wilson did not commit the actions, then either the parents or the kids have fabricated this shocking accusation. The first question is what in the world could Mr. Wilson have possibly committed that was so awful to cause any of the parents to use their kids to retaliated in such wicked manner? Secondly, what could Mr. Wilson have done to the kids to cause them to manufacture such a scandalous allegation against their coach?

    1. Those are very good questions, but to convict without proof? He has to be proven guilty. How do you get to a burden of proof? The prosecuting attorney said Wilson didn’t answer any of the questions, so maybe he did not represent himself on the stand very well. I will attempt to retrieve the transcripts when they become available. If the first case was a mistrial, it begs the question of what differed in the second trial? I have gotten information from a reliable source that he may have had a few detractors before the incident. One of them posted an anonymous response on one of my stories and was giving information that was not public domain.

  5. I know Mr. F. Leon Wilson and I can say that I am 100% confident that he is being attacked.

    Mr. Wilson teaches in a public environment with multiple kids present. One of the accusers was only in his class twice. The orientation class and one other class!

    This does change the teaching arena and could happen to any teacher or coach regardless of the subject.

    Something must be done.

  6. Apparently there is can unofficial “guilty until proven innocent” in child molestation cases. I don’t see any other way one can be arrested without any evidence or an investigation. You are resigned to “proving a negative”.

  7. Daaim, you are speaking before knowing any of the facts of this case. There was clear evidence that Wilson committed the acts that he stood accused of. There was convincing witness testimony in the form of his two victims who had never met, had no reason to accuse Mr. Wilson of any act (according to F. Leon Wilson himself), and told the same exact version of events. This was not a “coached” story, this was an interview administered by experts in the field of forensic interviewing of children. These interviews were both conducted the day after disclosure and the version of events was not disclosed to the media. Tell me how 2 girls, 4 and 7, attending different schools who had never met each other “fabricate” the same story? Saying that Mr. Wilson’s methods were the exact same, that Mr. Wilson uttered the same words during the act, and who both according to all accounts were fond of Mr. Wilson? DNA does not matter for the type of act that Mr Wilson committed. The clothes that were tested weren’t even certain to be the clothes that the girl was wearing and were taken out of a communal laundry hamper by detectives. The outerwear was not tested, and the girls testimony both states that only the outerwear was touched. We did not hear about the polygraph exam, but lets face the facts; a polygraph is not a reliable tool and if he had failed the polygraph you would be arguing the same thing. Mr Wilson was given due process, twice, and 21 out 24 people believed beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Wilson had committed this act. I believed the girls, and just so were clear that is enough to convict someone in sexual assault cases. Mr. Wilson appeared extremely deceptive on the stand, dodging questions, being caught in lies, calling other people liars, providing no motive for anyone to make up accusations, and questioning his own witnesses recognition of their own schedules. I have no doubt in my mind that i made the right judgement, you can continue to argue from a position of ignorance or you can wait for the transcripts of the trial to be released.

    1. I am not clear, what was the evidence that convicted him of these charges, beyond a reasonable doubt.

    2. juror,

      Certainly no physical evidence is required, but with such an accusation you would expect a burden of proof besides the accusation. No DNA found. No one witnessing the incident. No audio. No video. Authorities arrest a man at the airport based on an accusation without an investigation and no evidence and we call that due process? The detective admitted under oath that he did not conduct an investigation before the arrest! You’re right… there are a lot of child molestation cases where no evidence is presented. It sets quite a legal precedent and unfortunately any child can make an accusation and without any tangible evidence or proof can send a man or woman away for life. All personnel working with children are at tremendous personal risk.

      I just checked up on your status as a juror and even know where you were sitting, but I will not mention you on this page by name. I do appreciate you taking the time to comment. Be that as it may, saying DNA does not matter is reckless. It matters when someone’s life hangs in the balance. Would the verdict have been different if the outerwear had been tested and also turned negative? You said there was no coaching of an 8-year old taking the stand. Are you saying that the prosecution and the accuser’s family would allow a minor to take the stand without coaching? Someone (a relative) was even kicked out of the courtroom for signaling to the girl while testifying… tantamount to “witness tampering”. You also say that Wilson was evasive and calling people liars? I don’t know at which point you are referring to in the trial, but if you are trying to prove yourself innocent (and contrast) to your accusers, how do you avoid saying someone is “lying”… at least theoretically? That’s the whole point.

      There was convincing witness testimony in the form of his two victims who had never met, had no reason to accuse Mr. Wilson of any act (according to F. Leon Wilson himself), and told the same exact version of events.

      In the second trial, you are claiming they had the same story. Not hard to believe. The respective attorneys for both plaintiffs had knowledge of the first trial (and initial testimonies) so it is expected that there would be some consistency. Is that what you and the jurors were basing your decision on … that they had the same exact story? You are subsuming that the second girl to accuse Wilson didn’t hear about (or had no knowledge of) the first accusation, but just came forward separately with the same exact story (coincidentally)?

      Anyway, you agreed with the conviction and performed a civil duty, but there are several points of the process that need to be investigated … even the composition of the jury. There was no search for the truth in this case, no proof, no evidence, but a preconceived notion of guilt.

      Thanks for your insight.

  8. Testimony of victims is enough to convict if believed by the jury. There is no requirement that the State produce physical evidence. Some cases have physical evidence, some don’t.

    In every criminal jury trial, one of the jobs given to the jury is to weigh all of the evidence, including the testimony of witnesses. Jurors may believe or disbelieve any or all of the evidence in a criminal case.

    As stated above, I believed the testimony provided by Mr. Wilson’s victims.

  9. Thank you and you’re welcome. I’m not aware of anything that occured in the first trial so I can’t speak to that. The expert witnesses testified that they would not expect to find DNA on the undergarments given the allegations. The outerwear was not tested because they knew Mr. Wilsons DNA would be on it given that he was in close proximity and the DNA would only prove he was near the victim. I can say confidently that if they had found DNA on the outerwear i would not have believed it meant anything as it could simply have gotten there by Mr. Wilson sneezing. I can only speak for myself but I had no preconceived notion of guilt and don’t believe any of the other jurors did either. We combed through every piece of evidence before expressing any opinions and it seemed that everyone weighed every piece of evidence. As far as the girls relative being removed. I did not notice that. are you sure this happened in this trial? If so where did you hear this from?. Also as far as the coaching comment, I realize the girl was most likely prepared to take the stand and was speaking of her interview the day after the disclosure. The defense questioned pretty extensively on cross whether anyone had told her what to say and she was convincing that the only thing people told her was to tell the truth and be herself. The girls testimony in the initial interviews had consistency, so it’s hard to argue that it is simply because this is the second trial. As a final word; I would have preferred not to be on this trial. I knew regardless of the decision there would be scrutiny and I did my best to make the right judgment. I only ask that you wait until the transcripts are released to pass judgement.

    If I can ask a personal question. Did you know Mr. Wilson personally?

  10. I am not a child psychologist but it is my personal experience that a respectful and emotional bond does develop between a very young student and a chess coach. Sometimes so strong that a pattern of parental envy can erupt and create a discordant relationship between parent and child. The simple fact that a chess coach teaches a student to think for themselves is quite conflicting for a parent who has a strong inclination to control their child’s logic, reasoning and decision-making. Could this be a motive in this case, I do not know but it is possible. I personally would never teach a child of the age of 4 chess since I do not feel they have fully bonded with their parent. As mention before, parent have become incense when I have suggested that I teach them and they teach their young child. I continue to pray for Mr. Wilson and the total truth be made known.

  11. Cleveland, sometimes it makes sense when we think it over. Teaching a kid how to think cannot be a reason for a parent to want to terminate the life of a coach. We have to wait for the Transcript, maybe Leon just f- up on the stand. I am hoping that he is innocent, but let’s focus on the logic.

  12. Does anyone know how many years he got, or where he’ll be serving time? I want to write him once he’s in. I’m sure that he needs a friend more than anything right now.

  13. Frank: “I know Mr. F. Leon Wilson and I can say that I am 100% confident that he is being attacked.”

    I also know Mr. Wilson personally and disagree with your statement.

  14. Personal. But I will say he came into the chess teaching world with false/embellished qualifications. I was on the other side of his deception and lies. This has no bearing on what is being discussed here but he does have character issues.

    Do we forget there was another girl that accused F. Leon Wilson some 10 years ago?

    1. Mate,

      If it’s personal, it’s hard for you to be fully objective here. I understand you are (or were) a chess coach in the Columbus area, involved with OCCS and had run-ins with Wilson over a number of matters. That may explain the tone of your messages over the past year.

      Yes he was accused and the young lady who is now 23 came forward last year after the story broke, but her case was not admitted. At that time, police who filed a report, did not find her accusations to be credible. Why didn’t the mother pursue the case? That is more puzzling than anything else.

  15. Agree, not objective.

    However, except the posts today my previous posts were not “toned”. I wish
    F. Leon was not found guilty or was found not guilty if you prefer. These are troubling accusations no doubt.

    I believe the 10 year ago accusation was dismissed as a “He said, she said”.

    PS: Thanks for divulging my identity. I could tell you some stories, one involving a gun at a chess tournament.

    1. Mate,

      Yes… guns are an anathema in society. I am a professor and we are having to deal with this for the first time… students ability to bring guns on the campus. Now some teachers are being allowed to carry to protect themselves. It is not ideal, but of course, those are not relevant to this case. I will not carry a firearm in my classrooms. If have to go in the classroom with an Uzi slung around my shoulder, then I need to find another career.

      As for the case, there appear to be a number of irregularities when comparing the two trials… according to documents I’ve seen. There are also some other issues that are being researched about how the case was tried. It should be interesting, but if you are a chess coach or a teacher of any kind, we should hope that this case was done right. If not, all educators are vulnerable to any student who gets mad and who wants to get even. I read of a referee who was cited because a player accused him of touching her breast when he was telling her to take a metal bracelet off during a soccer game… which upset her. He was suspended and reprimanded. Ridiculous.

      In the Ohio v. Wilson case, it is amazing that such a severe case can be decided with no tangible evidence and only a testimony by an 8-year old (who prosecutors say had no coaching). I would say that Mr. Wilson is disaffected and many people may not like his persona and think he is a bit pompous, but I would hope this is not a sick vendetta begin played out.

  16. If the aunt was escorted from the courtroom for passing signals then an appeal should be granted (just guessing). I thought the defense attorney did a good job in the first trial. Did he move for a mistrial after this incident?

  17. Lots of rumblings leading up to the sentencing. According to court records, in the first trial, there was a 12-0 not guilty verdict on count 3 (Count 1 was evenly split, Count 2 was 9-3 guilty, Count 3 was 12-0 not guilty) and a mistrial was never filed. This could have led to a “double jeopardy” situation if in the second case he was tried on count 3 once again. In fact, some of the evidence from the acquitted count 3 was reentered in the second trial. Sloppy work.

  18. Hello;

    I have followed this trial from the beginning. Let’s face it, his biggest issue was a Black Man in a White County. I find the comments of “the Juror funny. Kids lie everyday. They see things on TV ect..and sometimes can’t separate fiction from reality. Maybye the parents had heard things about Mr Wilson and wanted some payback and sue the schools after a conviction. I find it pathetic that the Gazette ran the story about the girl 10years ago before this trial was over. What a joke. Remember, this man is going to Prison on the testimony of an 4-8 yr old girls period.

  19. Mr. Wilson:

    Sentenced to 8.5 years in prison for allegations with zero evidence.
    Man kills girl in Alum Creek with Speed-Boat and gets 20days.
    Difference you may ask????? Mr. Wilson is Black – Other is White.
    Its that simple. This is the worst case of injustice I have ever seen
    in my 47 years of life. Also, I am a White person. I pray for you Mr Wilson.

    1. It is certainly a terrible ending, but bear in mind that there are many, many cases like this, that we never hear about. The admission that a prosecution doesn’t have to have any evidence is laughable. If we go only by the testimony of a pre-teen, no teacher is safe liability. There is no way I would coach at any type of chess program at this point.

  20. Mr Shabazz;
    Do you know if he will be free pending Appeal? I hope so. If you find out please post.

  21. I am still waiting to hear more. And when I do, nothing will surprise me. Real judgement is not and cannot be decided by man. Very unfortunate .

  22. Clearly many, if not all, of the people leaving comments on this page are partial to Mr. Wilson. Having more information than anyone who has posted other than the one impartial person, the juror, it’s clear that many comments are simply ignorant. Mr. Wilson has been accused by at least 3 different minors independent of each other of sexual molestation. Not sure how that fact seems lost on everyone here. Do any of you know another person with 3 such separate accusations? How many more victims would need to come forward before you consider that maybe the person you think you know is actually a child molester?
    Frank’s comments are particularly ignorant. It seems he’s contending that race is the only factor in the jury reaching a verdict. I’m sure the testimony of a number of witnesses including the victims, who have absolutely nothing to gain, are meaningless. And that they made very similar allegations with details that weren’t made public, as the juror stated. But yet according to Frank, kids lie all the time, so they shouldn’t be believed. Kudos for being stupid Frank!
    it makes no sense to comment any further. The conversation here has always assumed Mr. Wilson was innocent, regardless of the actual facts presented in the trial(s). Might be worth considering that the world is now a safer place now that a child molester is behind bars.
    One final bit of advice… If you’re worried about being accused of molesting your chess students, don’t grope their private parts and tell them you’re doing it because it feels good. That was Mr. Wilson’s mistake! Pretty simple.

    1. Jeff,

      Where you a juror? I have vetted the person posting above and I know their identity. You say you have more information than all of us. There was no one named “Jeff” on the jury of the second trial, but if you are a friend or relative of the accuser, then you cannot be objective either. Some of us have information concerning the trials and much of it is in public domain. There were people who attended the trials. There were those who knew Wilson. There were people with information not made public. I am not a friend of Wilson’s, but I am very familiar with the case… let’s put it that way.

      “The conversation here has always assumed Mr. Wilson was innocent, regardless of the actual facts presented in the trial(s).”

      That is the irony. Unfortunately, Mr. Wilson was NEVER presumed innocent even before the facts were presented. In fact, these types of child cases are famous for that type of character (guilty until proven innocent). He was arrested at an airport without so much as an investigation. The arresting officer testified to his shoddy work.

      There were three charges presented and only two plaintiffs in the case, not three. The 10-year old case was not found to be credible and was not admissible. Those are the facts. The issue with many is that a verdict was reached without tangible evidence provided. No audio. No video. No witnesses to the acts. No DNA. For such a serious offense, what is the precedent for being accused of something without tangible evidence? How does a defendant prove he DID NOT if someone says he DID??? Many legal opinions state that it is very difficult to disprove a negative.

      As far as the trials are concerned, there were many inconsistencies in the first with the testimony and the case declared a mistrial after a hung jury (jury reaching an impasse). However, there was also a 12-0 jury “not verdict” (on count 3) that apparently was never registered. How is that possible? On June 6th, Mr. Wilson faced another trial on all three counts even though one was 12-0 not guilty in the first trial.

      Unfortunately the defense did not present this issue until after the second trial had been completed. Not sure whose mistake that was, but the inclusion of that ruling could have affected the second trial. In other words, because that mistrial (and counts) was not officially recorded, Mr. Wilson was being tried for an offense (count 3) a second time. Yes… Wilson was convicted and sentenced. That is a fact. What is not clear is whether the mistakes made in recording the result of the first trial affected the second.

      Your idea that because there were three accusations that the accused must be guilty is spurious.

      Yes… if you are concerned about being accused of molesting students, take precautions to ensure the safety of child AND teacher, or don’t teach. It will not prevent accusations and incidents, but it will provide evidence and protect all parties.

      Was there a racial element as Frank is suggesting? We will never get total agreement on that in a society that denies that any part of its justice mechanism is broken.

  23. I wonder why Mr. Wilson did not take the opportunity to address the court when he was invited to speak. It’s a sad outcome, but we have to accept and move on. Thankfully, out of the many people who are coaching kids, few are ever accused of this type of shameful behavior.

    1. Guy,

      I missed the sentencing, but it is my understanding that he did not make a statement. I believe they plan to appeal. Wilson is in custody of the county and was denied bail.

  24. Jeff;
    Kids do lie. I never sd kids lie all the time. Please get your facts straight. Jeff I feel the main issue on this thread is the way these cases are prosecuted. A simple allegation with zero evidence is very hard to defend period. Anyone at anytime can be accused including yourself. Imagine you were at a Walmart restroom and there was a boy next to you at the urinal and no one else. You looked over at the boy for a second. The boy leaves the restroom and tells his mom or dad you looked at him weird. Parent ask him a couple times if you touched him. To please them, he says yes! Jeff, now have a problem. It can happen that fast. Boy mis-interprets you looking at him for a second as “weird”. If you ask a child 2-8 a question such as did he touch you (several times) the child will always try to please the parent at this age and say yes. Just my 2 sense. I hope you have a great weekend.

  25. Daaim;

    I read in the paper there was a Prosecutor that had a first name of Jeff. He claims to have more info than anyone. I wouldn’t think a prosecutor would post on public forum? Heck if it is, I respect the man for speaking his mind. Not happy that he called me ignorant though. I felt that was kind of crappy . Also, if it is, I hope he can post the Trial Transcripts somewhere on the internet.

    1. This “Jeff” posting does not appear to be related to the prosecution team, but I’ll continue to look.

      Attorneys for the Plaintiffs are Doug Dumolt and Mark Sleeper.

  26. Daaim/Jeff

    Sorry about that. You are correct. Jeff Sorry about that as well. I am
    getting old and my memory is not as sharp. Lol.

    1. Well… your concerns about the case are valid indeed. There a number of questions that come up in the process. What anyone would want is to know was that the procedures were followed. Not filing the mistrial after the first trial was careless. Also when you have a relative passing signals to one of the plaintiffs and had to be escorted from the courtroom, this was an example of interference. That relative could have been accused of witness tampering.

  27. Daaim/Frank,

    You are both dead set in your belief that Wilson is innocent so i have no idea why i continue to respond. Your subtle threats of stalking/ attempting to stalk out the identities of anyone who disagrees with you is unacceptable. Your release of confidential court documents with the names of the victims is cowardly and shows you are willing to expose and bring potential harm against any who would dare accuse Wilson. I trust you will not attempt to encourage damages and/or criminal behavior against me.

    I have already answered most of your questions but I’ll detail them again.

    DNA- doesn’t matter. See previous response regarding expert testimony that DNA would not be expected in this sort of crime. Witnesses did not testify that he touched articles of clothing that were tested.

    Aunt signaling witness- Didn’t happen. I was in court room, you weren’t. Again, where is your information coming from? You’re pretty big on objectivity so i can’t imagine it came from someone who was a supporter of the Wilson…

    Three charges/2 victims- Prosecution tried to make claim that Wilson touched butt and vagina of one victim. We as jurors didn’t think that made sense as testimony was not clear enough about that detail to support the burden of proof.

    Racism- If we were a bunch of racist hicks from Delaware, Ohio we would have found him guilty on all three counts.

    Third case from past- Had no idea it had happened till after trial was over. Who cares if media reported it? I did not read and was not allowed to read news stories about case. Probably was not prosecuted this time due to statute of limitations. The media making this report had no effect on the outcome of the trial.

    Coaching- You have no idea how forensic interviews of children are undertaken. After this trial i do. No coaching occurred. I watched an 8 year old turn into a shell of who she was when the subject turned to the abuse. You can’t train an 8 year old to do that. This was on video conducted by someone who is trained in these interviews. You can complain all you want about coaching but you have no educational background in this and have no qualifications at all to make an opinion that I would have any reason to listen to.

    Mistrial- we were not allowed to know about mistrial.

    No evidence/no eyewitnesses- What? If i am shot and survive i am an eyewitness to a crime and my eyewitness account is treated as evidence. If a 55 year old is shot and survives, they are an eyewitness to a crime and their eyewitness account is treated as evidence. If an 8 year old is shots and survives they are a witness to a crime and their eyewitness account is also treated as evidence.

    Frank, your metaphor is quite frankly a straw man. A good metaphor would be a man went into a bathroom, touched a boy who knew the man personally, and then touched another boy who also knew him personally at another bathroom and both told their parents that man who they identity and knew personally touched them and said touching was to “make them feel good”. The metaphor is only complete if both boys have no contact with one another prior to making these accusations on video to a professional who specializes in such interviews and use the same identical phrase, “to make them feel good”. Straw-men arguments are for people who have no argument.

    I believe your information is coming from supporters of Wilson and probably Wilson himself prior to yesterday. You seem to refuse to even consider any evidence from outside of those two sources. I believe that young chess students everywhere are safer with Wilson behind bars.

    1. Juror,

      Thanks for your information. No… there is no danger from me, but of course this is a public forum you are posting to. I have to check who is posting to make sure they are who they are saying they are. Plain and simple. My identity is given and it is not beyond reason to know who’s posting comments. Some people posting here admittedly had personal issues against Wilson. When you claimed to be a juror, I had to be sure. When someone says they have as much information as a juror, who would that be? Perhaps the two of you know each other. Not sure.

      Nevertheless, I appreciate your courage in speaking out. Wilson was convicted and you as a juror came to that conclusion. However, you not knowing about the mistrial has nothing to do with the fact that it was not filed. It’s not your fault and you are not being blamed. BTW… the issue with the signaling was during the first trial. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

      Given your answers, I see the line of reasoning on the jury. The accuser was the witness in the case. Of course I know that. There were issues with the way this case was handled and Wilson was already painted as guilty from the beginning. There certainly was an initial media bias. This man was arrested at the airport without much of an investigation. Fair? I’m curious… where did I invoke racism? Is that a reflex in trying to predict my rationale for questioning the process of the trial?

      You say “DNA doesn’t matter,” right? DNA would’ve mattered if they found it, wouldn’t you say? Of course it matters. An expert saying that it is not expected that a specimen would be found is not the same as saying it doesn’t matter. You say the third case 10 years ago didn’t matter. During the sentencing a relative tried to sneak “an incident 10 years ago” into the deliberation. It was out of order of course.

      Let’s close this conversation and allow the justice process to evolve. Thank you for your time.

  28. Juror
    I appreciate your detailed response and respect your thoughts. I really mean that sincerly.

Back to top button