Jury Finds Man Not Guilty of Sexual Indecency with Child After Two Days of Contradicting Testimony

SAN ANGELO, TX – This evening, at 5:50 p.m., and after about two hours of deliberation, a Tom Green County jury found 28-year-old Jonathan W. Gould “not guilty” of Sexual Indecency with a Child Sexual Contact, a second degree felony.

Gould and his wife Erica breathed a sigh of relief at the verdict, which was unanimous. During closing arguments, the Defense told the jury the State has what’s called the Burden of Proof. The State had to prove that, beyond a reasonable doubt, Gould touched the then 12-year-old victim’s breast for gratification or desire.

“With all the contradictory testimony, I don’t think you can find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt,” said Mr. Davis with the Defense.

Undoubtedly, Mr. Davis was on point with that statement.

From the moment the first witness took the stand, as reported in our previous story here,  all the witnesses gave conflicting testimony. It was hard to determine who spoke the truth because all the witnesses changed their stories during questioning between the State and Defense, and when the incident initially occurred.

However, Assistant DA Jason Ferguson told the jury the two stories that had more commonalities were those told by the victim and her friend—the girl who was in the room with the victim on the night of Aug. 20, 2015, when Gould allegedly touched the victim in an improper way.

During his closing arguments, Ferguson told the jury that these girls are children, and Gould was an adult. He should not have been alone in his bedroom with an 11- and 12-year-old girl on a bed.

“They do have inconsistencies,” Ferguson admitted; however, he said the victim had just been “molested by this guy,” while the friend was just at a party.

“It is amazing [the friend] remembered so much,” he added. “Imagine what we have to remember; now think of a child. Differences exist, but the story is the same as to what happened here. This is a touching case. There’s no DNA. This is a he said/she said kind of case.”

Ferguson noted that Gould on the other hand changed his story, not only from the night he spoke to San Angelo Police Officer Jeremy Cannady, but during his testimony on the stand today.

Initially, the Defense and State were scheduled to meet at 8:30 a.m. to listen to the audio provided by Officer Cannaday, but that didn’t happen until later that morning. The jury got to listen to the contents.

During the interview with Officer Cannady, which the jury heard from the audio, Gould said he went into the bedroom and talked to the girls in his room on the bed with the door open. He said the 11-year-old friend of the victim was sad that his stepdaughter, who was her best friend, was leaving, so he talked to her. Gould also said they talked for 20 minutes, and he was never alone with the victim. They all left the room together, and he said he asked the girls if they wanted to play a game.

However, when Gould took the stand this afternoon, he told a different story. Gould told the court he works at Stripes as a sales associate, but prior to that he worked at Sitel as a sales manager. He also told the court that he has epilepsy, and suffers both absence seizures and physical convulsions. This is a side effect from a surgery he had when he was younger.

Gould also mentioned he takes medication for his epilepsy and Ritalin for Attention Deficit Disorder. One medication he took previously, Dilantrin, was toxic to his system and destroyed his teeth in such a way as to make him look like a meth addict. The medication caused gum overgrowth and eroded the enamel of his teeth. Gould also said he suffers from back pain after a seizure caused him to hit a rock in such a way that damaged his back. When he’s about to get seizures, he said he gets a “hollow feeling” and his “hands start shaking.”

That night, he said he had that feeling, so he went to his room to lay down. He added that, because of the effects of his medication, he processes information, so he can’t remember specific timeframes of events. But he noted that, on the night of the alleged incident, when he went into the room, after pulling laundry off the line, he saw the victim and her friend in his room.

“I told them to get out because I wasn’t feeling well,” he said.

Gould said he laid down, and he remembered hearing talking by the bathroom. He said the girls never laid down on the bed, nor did any cuddling take place. He then said he didn’t touch the victim, but when she was getting up to leave, her shirt went up above her midriff.

“I told her to pull it down,” he told the court.

Gould said the victim told him no, so he pulled it down.

When Ferguson questioned Gould, the defendant said the friend never left the room, and he wasn’t sure if he or the girl changed his daughter’s diaper. Also, although both the victim and the friend said the friend left with the baby, leaving the victim and Gould alone, the defendant said that never happened.

Ferguson then asked Gould where the friend was when he pulled down the victim’s shirt. Gould said he didn’t remember.

“She may have been there,” Gould told Ferguson.

Sarcastically, Ferguson asked, “So she was there, just hiding?”

“Yeah,” Gould said. He couldn’t answer though whether she was in the corner, or behind the victim.

He then said he, the victim, and the friend walked out of the room together, but then said they did so shortly after one another.

When Ferguson asked sarcastically again, “So you all left the room in a single file line?” Gould responded, “Pretty much. Yes.”

Gould also said the baby stayed with him the entire time.

“So [the friend] is lying?” asked Ferguson.

“Yes,” Gould responded.

“[The victim] is lying?” Ferguson asked again.

“Yes,” Gould continued.

“So you don’t really know what happened?” Ferguson asked.

“I don’t understand the question,” Gould responded.

When Ferguson clarified by pointing out inconsistencies, Gould said he knows what happened, but doesn't know the time frame. He said his memories are so jumbled that there’s no way he can give “a step-by-step” order of the events that took place.

In addition to Gould and the other confusing witness testimony, the victim’s credibility came under fire once more. The Defense called two additional witnesses to the stand. One was Gould’s stepdaughter, the girl who moved to Fort Worth and who the going away party was for. She told the jury that the victim did indeed tell her that she thought Gould was “hot and stuff like that.” The victim claimed yesterday that she never said that.

A family friend of the victim was also called to the stand. The jury had to leave the room again while the Defense and State debated the relevance of the new witness testimony to the case. The family friend told the court outside of jury hearing that the victim’s mother talked to her about the victim, and said the girl had a tendency to lie. She also got punished frequently, even when she was telling the truth.

Contrary to what the mother and victim said, the friend stated the victim did have an improper relationship with a married man during a summer camp, which was brought up yesterday. There was no sexual relationship, but flirting took place, so there was intervention.

The family friend also told the court that the victim had a fascination with breasts and would compliment her own. She said she hopes hers are as big as the friend’s one day. The friend also said the victim was caught with a sexual device and tried to lie about that. The witness also confirmed the victim has “mental health” issues.

After further debate of relevance, Judge Woodward determined that the Defense could ask general opinion questions with yes and no answers of the family friend, but that there was no relevance of this testimony overall to the case. However, the friend could give her opinion on the truthful nature of the victim, which she did.

Ferguson asked the witness when the last time she had interaction with the victim, and the friend said in 2015 when she came to town for a visit. The friend lived with the victim and her family in 2014, but moved to College Station in December of that year. She said she talked to the victim by phone and text, but that was just to confirm how the victim was doing.

During his closing arguments, Gerald Ratliff said there’s been false accusations since the days of the Bible, before Jesus. He then read the story of Joseph in Genesis from the Bible, which discusses how his master’s wife falsely accused him of sexual deviance, so he went to prison. Ratliff added that this type of false accusations happened this year during the presidential election. He was referring to the accusations by many women against President-Elect Donald Trump.

Ratliff told the jury Gould’s record was spotless before this, but this victim “is a girl with issues. Her credibility and truthfulness are questioned by friends and family.” He said it’s seldom that someone will come in and testify against a victim’s truthfulness, but that happened here.

“The story of the spurned woman, as in the story of Joseph, is what we’re hearing today,” Ratliff said. “She responded as if she had been coached. When she said, ‘Ewww!', that was the most telling story of this all because she told the other girls [Gould] was hot. That’s enough to throw the entire case.”

Ratliff added that the friend was believable, but the victim was not based on her contradicting statements.

“Those are all discrepancies of the victim, who cannot be believed,” Ratliff said. “This is a very simple case of reasonable doubt. You are the judge of that credibility.”

Therefore, whether it was the Defense’s reading from the Bible and discussion of the spurned woman, or all the contradictory testimony, the jury did not find Gould guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.