In re Rachel J. et al., 2002 ME 148

Summary

The Supreme Judicial Court of Maine affirmed a jeopardy determination removing two children from their father's home based on a threat of sexual abuse. The court held that excluding reputation evidence was harmless error and upheld the admission of evidence concerning the father's prior sexual abuse of family members, while a concurrence disagreed that the exclusion was error.

Holdings

1. The District Court erred in refusing to admit Rachel's testimony about K.B.'s reputation for truthfulness because the testimony described contacts with K.B.'s family, school acquaintances and their families, and other people in the community sufficient to establish an adequate foundation.
2. The erroneous exclusion of the reputation testimony was harmless and did not require vacatur of the jeopardy determination.
3. The District Court did not err in admitting testimony that the father had sexually abused his nephew and nieces when he was a minor.
4. Competent evidence supported the District Court's finding that the children were in jeopardy because the father posed a threat of sexual abuse, and the court was entitled to credit the testimony of witnesses other than the father.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the District Court improperly excluded testimony concerning K.B.'s reputation for truthfulness.
2. If exclusion of the reputation testimony was error, whether the error was harmless.
3. Whether evidence of the father's prior sexual abuse of family members was admissible in the child-protection proceeding and whether its probative value was substantially outweighed by unfair prejudice.
4. Whether competent evidence supported the District Court's finding that the children were in jeopardy because the father posed a threat of sexual abuse.

Disposition

affirmed