A Lexington police officer and top prosecutor misled a grand jury to secure a trumped-up sex crimes charge against their client, two attorneys allege in a new lawsuit.
Now they are asking a judge to dismiss the charges.
Jerry Wright and Noel Caldwell, attorneys for William Henry Clay, filed a motion in state court in Fayette on April 22 to dismiss criminal charges of first-degree sexual abuse, third-degree rape and first-degree sexual abuse against them. reject client.
Wright says Fayette County District Attorney Kimberly Baird and Lexington Police Detective Paul Hogan committed misconduct by presenting “manifestly false” and “perjured statements” to a grand jury by saying Clay child had penetrated, leading to charges of rape.
“The Commonwealth knew that the testimony of Det. Hogan was false and the Fayette County Grand Jury would not have indicted the defendant had it not been for the perjured testimony,” Wright wrote in his motion.
Baird denies the claims, saying the accusation is “unfair” and the situation boils down to a “misunderstanding.”
She claims her office immediately attempted to resolve the situation by filing amended charges. When Clay was not offered a plea deal, Wright filed a motion to dismiss, she said.
Wright denied that claim when speaking to the Herald-Leader, saying he looked forward to a resolution that was acceptable to everyone.
Unlike a trial jury, grand jurors do not decide a defendant’s guilt. Their responsibility is to determine what charges, if any, a defendant will face in court or at trial, based on evidence presented to them by prosecutors. Jurors can strengthen or reduce prosecutors’ charges.
Grand jury proceedings are conducted in secret and consist of 12 citizens who are randomly selected to serve. During the proceedings, evidence is presented by a Commonwealth’s Attorney who may call witnesses such as law enforcement officers. Defense attorneys do not present themselves to grand juries, and an indictment requires only nine of the 12 jurors to agree that there is sufficient evidence.
Wright wrote that a trial, in theory, gives a suspect a full opportunity to contest the charges against him or her. In practice, issuing an indictment often has a devastating personal and professional impact that an acquittal can never undo.
Wright said Clay has maintained his innocence all along.
“We have no choice (but to file the motion),” Wright said Thursday. “We have an ethical obligation to our client, and if it turns out that there was something wrong with the testimony that was given to the grand jury, how will that impact the overall case? We have an obligation to try to protect him.”
What Happened in the Grand Jury Testimony
Hogan testified during the September 2021 grand jury hearing that the victim told investigators during a forensic interview that Clay had digitally penetrated her “more than once” after asking the victim to change clothes in front of him, according to court transcripts.
The penetration is a legal requirement to secure a rape charge.
The defense reviewed the victim’s forensic interrogation, which showed that the victim did not accuse Clay of digital penetration.
According to court documents, the forensic interview was conducted nine months before the grand jury proceedings and was in the possession of the prosecution the entire time.
Last month, Baird responded to the motion to dismiss the charges, saying the defense’s claims against her and the detective were “unfair” and unfounded.
Prosecutors and Hogan believed, based on the victim’s interview with a therapist, that Clay had penetrated the victim, not that he had touched the inside of the victim’s pants.
Prior to the original trial date in March 2024, the Commonwealth met with the victim on February 29 to review the facts of the case. It was then that they became aware of the “misunderstanding” of the statements made during the forensic interview that Hogan referred to during his testimony before the grand jury, Baird recalled.
Public Prosecution Service wants to amend charges
Baird wrote that her office sought to remedy the situation “immediately” by amending the charge in a motion filed on March 1, 2024. They proposed amending the rape charge to first-degree sexual assault.
Baird said her office notified Clay and spoke with Wright to discuss the confusion.
Wright asked for a postponement before the upcoming trial date, but then began discussing alternative plea offers and requested a misdemeanor in exchange for not filing the motion to dismiss, Baird said.
“When the Commonwealth indicated it would not do so, defendant filed this motion,” Baird wrote.
Baird says the prosecutor and detective committed no misconduct because they did not “willfully or knowingly” give false testimony to the grand jury.
She said the defense would have to prove that Hogan disbelieved his testimony, that the Commonwealth knew of it and elicited the testimony anyway, according to the law.
“It is unfair for the defendant to say that the State engaged in misconduct and blatant abuse of the grand jury process by eliciting false and perjured statements to ‘enhance charges,’ and then promptly remedy the situation as soon as became aware of it, and to disclose it to the defendant before the trial rather than filing a motion at trial to amend the indictment to conform to the testimony at trial…” she wrote.
Baird added: “If the intent was to commit any fraud on the court, then the Commonwealth would proceed with the original charge and remain silent on the victim’s statements.”
The Herald-Leader was unable to reach Baird for comment.
Fayette Circuit Judge Lucy VanMeter will preside over a hearing on August 15.
