Child sexual abuse case dismissed without prejudice | New


There is not enough evidence to support the allegation against a beautician accused of sexually abusing an 8-year-old boy, Associate Superior Court Judge Joseph N. Camacho said.

After hearing the testimony of Detective Anthony Santos, Judge Camacho dismissed without prejudice the case against Christian Harys Santos Manuel, also known as Christy.

Without prejudice means the case can be refiled.

Judge Camacho, in his order finding no probable cause, said that “basically, the only material information about the current allegations that was testified in court is: (1) the allegation that oral sex allegedly been able to happen in the last six years.”

No other corroborating information is available at this time, the judge added.

To be clear, the judge said, the detective’s testimony raises reasonable suspicion that the allegation should be investigated further.

“However, reasonable suspicion is a lower standard than probable cause. Probable cause is required to make an arrest. The government has the burden of showing that there is probable cause that a crime has been committed and that the ‘accused committed the crime,’ the judge said.

“Therefore, there is reasonable suspicion to continue to investigate further. The court dismisses the charges without prejudice, which means the government can press charges if or when it is able to obtain more evidence” , he added.

The judge also canceled the arraignment scheduled for June 27, 2022 at 9 a.m. before Presiding Judge Roberto C. Naraja.

Any bond, surety, passport or other travel document is hereby exempt, Judge Camacho said.

It was alleged that Manuel, 36, downloaded pornographic videos onto the minor’s tablet and forced them to watch them.

It was also alleged that the defendant told the boy to perform a sexual act and not tell anyone. In return, the defendant said he would buy the boy a brand new Nintendo game console.

Initially, Manuel, who works in a beauty salon, was charged with first-degree child sexual abuse and public order offences.

Later, the attorney general’s office changed the information and charged him with five counts of child molestation.

The sexual abuse of a minor is punishable by imprisonment of up to 30 years and a fine of $50,000.

According to the detective’s testimony, “The allegations of fellatio may have taken place within the last six years (when the child was between 4 and 6 years old); the male child is now 8 years old.

The child’s mother is currently incarcerated at the Department of Corrections.

Additionally, the child’s mother has an adult boyfriend who has never been interviewed by police, Judge Camacho said.

When the mother was incarcerated in 2021, the child stayed with the mother’s boyfriend for several months before being taken in by an adult guardian. Judge Camacho said there was no information as to why the child had to be removed from the custody of the mother’s boyfriend and placed with the guardian.

The guardian has an adult son who has also not been interviewed by police to find out if he has any information that could shed light on the case, the judge added.

According to the guardian, the child said the accused had downloaded pornographic material onto the boy’s tablet.

But this could not be corroborated as the tablet was erased/cleaned by the custodian, Judge Camacho said, adding that the pornographic material could have been used to establish a timeline.

“According to the guardian, the child said that the accused had made him perform oral sex.

“The child gave no other details other than the vague allegation of fellatio. The police obtained no other details to at least make a physical collaboration, such as, but not limited to, if the accused was uncircumcised /circumcised, birthmarks, tattoos, size or shape, etc.

“The police did not interview the mother’s boyfriend or the guardian’s adult son, or any other possible witnesses.

“The police did not see the pornographic material, or even see and take the tablet into custody as evidence; no attempt was made to try to recover the data to corroborate a timeline.

“No medical tests or other scientific tests have been carried out or carried out as part of the police investigation.

“When the police questioned the mother at [Corrections] she said once in the past, the child told her that the accused had touched her [privates]. She provided no further details. »

The accused was not charged with this incident.

The court noted that this statement by the mother is inconsistent because the mother continued to use the defendant as a babysitter even after this alleged sexual contact.


Comments are closed.