Iowa appeals court 'exorcises' 1993 decision that cast doubt on child sex abuse witnesses - Opinions vary

[Jim Burton]

https://eu.desmoinesregister.com/story/ ... 973280007/

A 1993 Iowa appellate decision has been criticized for perpetuating myths about sexual abuse victims, particularly children.

A new ruling upholds the conviction of Daniel Lang for child sexual abuse and formally invalidates the 1993 case.

Judges found the old precedent was "wrong when it was decided, and it is wrong now."

[...]

Lang's attorney did not respond to a message seeking comment on the decision. But Des Moines lawyer Alfredo Parrish, who represented Smith in his 1993 appeal, told the Des Moines Register it was "disturbing" to see the court go out of its way to reverse its prior holding. Parrish noted, as Tabor did, that the Iowa Supreme Court has had multiple opportunities to overturn Smith and has declined to do so.

"I don't believe that the Court of Appeals can reverse an opinion that the Supreme Court has addressed at some point and did not reverse," he said. "... It may be outside of the mandate of the Court of Appeals to have reversed it, and there were other ways to decide the Lang case."

Parrish also said overruling Smith doesn't make sense in a case that doesn't match the facts of that earlier decision.

"I agree with (Judge Tabor) that you didn't have to reverse Smith to be able to decide the Lang decision because the facts are so different," Parrish said. "(The Lang prosecutors) had a lot more supporting facts than the Smith case. ... If you look at Smith, there was so much contradictory evidence that did not have any verification."