Evaluation not required for Ewing case witness, judge rules

Despite mental health concerns raised over the alleged victim in one of six sex-related criminal cases against a Holton man, Jackson County District Court Judge Norbert Marek said Tuesday he would not order the alleged victim to undergo a mental health evaluation prior to trial.

The first of six week-long trials on criminal cases involving Jacob C. Ewing, 22, as a defendant is scheduled to begin Monday, March 27. Ewing has been charged with aggravated criminal sodomy and aggravated indecent liberties with a child in this particular case, stemming from alleged activities occurring in the spring of 2014 with a girl who reportedly was 13 years old at the time.

On Tuesday, Ewing’s family members and supporters gathered in the Jackson County Courtoom to see Marek answer a handful of pre-trial motions filed by defense attorney Kathleen Ambrosio of Topeka, granting requests that Ewing appear in “street clothes” and unshackled during the trial and that certain prejudicial terms such as “victim” and “perpetrator” not be used by witnesses during all six trials.

However, Marek said he would not grant a motion filed by Ambrosio to have the alleged victim undergo a mental health evaluation, adding that Ambrosio’s citing of a 1979 court case, State vs. Gregg, that set “the standard for ordering a psychiatric examination of an alleged sex crime victim in Kansas” was not matched by evidence presented about the alleged victim.

“Mental instability is only one Gregg factor,” Marek told Ambrosio. “The court is supposed to look at totality… This is not a case that meets all the compelling reasons.”

In filing the motion to have the girl undergo a psychological evaluation, Ambrosio said the girl has “a mental health treatment history,” told law enforcement that she had “been physically abused by a family member in the past” and initially denied having any sexual contact with Ewing before allegedly being encouraged by another alleged victim of Ewing’s to make allegations to that extent.

During Tuesday’s hearing, Ambrosio — supported in court by Lenexa clinical psychologist Dr. Mitchell Flesher and former Holton police officer Jeff Draper — laid out a case for the girl’s examination. Flesher said he had reviewed information related to the case and suggested the girl’s reported history of mental health issues could impact her ability to be an effective court witness.

Draper, who now serves as codes enforcement officer for the City of Holton, said he interviewed the girl in April of 2014 about an unrelated matter and was told that she “had previously been admitted” to a mental health facility after it was revealed that she was “cutting” herself. Draper also testified that the girl was “very passive” and “very indifferent” during the interview.

At the time of that interview, Ambrosio said the girl did not report her allegations against Ewing and did not do so for more than two years until August of 2016, after several other women had made such allegations against Ewing.

Based on that evidence, Ambrosio said that the motion for a psychological evaluation of the girl did not amount to “a fishing expedition,” but proof that the girl may not be fit to serve as an effective witness for the prosecution.

“Both sides need access to this evaluation,” Ambrosio said.

Marek disagreed, but told Ambrosio that if new information regarding the girl were to be presented prior to the trial, “you can bring it back.”

The next pre-trial hearing in the first of the six cases against Ewing has been scheduled for Friday, March 3, at which time initial pre-trial motions in the second case will be heard, Marek said.

Deputy Jackson County Attorney Brian Yearout — standing in for Jackson County Attorney Shawna Miller, who was not present for Tuesday’s hearing — also had filed a motion asking for a continuance of the hearing, noting that Miller had contacted Shawnee County attorney Jacqie Spradling about taking over the Ewing cases as “special prosecutor.”

Ewing remains at the Jackson County Detention Center. Defendants in all criminal cases are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty in a court of law.