Misrepresentations of Children's Testimony

Ms. Manning makes four claims about the children's testimony in the Halsey case that would, if true, undoubtedly raise questions about the verdict. These arguments are quite broad. The support cited for them, however, is extremely thin. A comprehensive look at the few snippets of testimony on which Ms. Manning relies reveals that her broad claims actually constitute massive misrepresentations of the record.

1. "The children had trouble remembering some things one might suppose were impossible to forget."

One of Ms. Manning's major critiques is that the children "had trouble remembering some things one might suppose impossible to forget." [1] Even though Ms. Manning used the plural twice in that sentence - "children" and "things" - she cites one single answer in one child's testimony as her support for her sweeping claim. In context, however, even that testimony does not support her claim.

The single question and answer upon which Ms. Manning bases her broad attack appears near the end of the first specific testimony that this boy has given in open court about being sexually assaulted. Describing events some three years earlier, this boy provided substantive answers to twenty-one questions in a row before that single answer. He described where "the uncomfortable things" happened, he demonstrated how his hands and knees were positioned when he was assaulted, he explained what happened to his underwear ("all the way off"), what Halsey then did ("moved my legs out"), and how Halsey was positioned ("kneeling down"). Then, when asked "What did it feel like?" the boy responded "I don't remember." But he did remember that Halsey moved his finger around, and he indicated the kind of swirling movement a mere five lines later. (But one would never know this from Ms. Manning's account-she omits all of the surrounding testimony that undermines her assertion.) Moreover, when asked later "Did you feel it go inside your butt?" the boy provided sickeningly real details: it felt "like a slug", "he was wiggling it around," and "he went to the bathroom on my back." All this, from the boy who Ms. Lanning accuses of not remembering "things one might suppose were impossible to forget."

The single answer that Ms. Manning blows out of proportion appears on line 7 of transcript page 629. Click here to read all of the questions that surrounding the single "I don't know." The line of questioning begins on line 14 of transcript page 626. Click here to read the entire three-plus hours of direct testimony that day (August 30, 1993).

Apparently determined to ignore every one of the numerous signs that Robert Halsey terrorized the kids in his charge, Ms. Manning claims that the only mentions of fear or being scared were "prompted" by the questioner. [2] But that assertion is contradicted by at least a dozen exchanges in the testimony of the twins alone. Both boys gave detailed descriptions of Halsey's taunting and of his threats throughout their 250-page of combined direct testimony, all of which is included on this Site.

Ms. Manning overlooks instances where a question about Halsey's actions resulted in an answer about "scaring" the kids in various ways. For example, this question to Andrew:

There were six other times that Andrew volunteered specific threats that were made by Halsey. His brother described being threatened in five other passages, also without prompting. Click here to read the other eleven excerpts. There is an additional passage of note, also never mentioned by Ms. Manning, where William says that Bob is making him afraid in the courtroom (tr. 830-1).

3. The DA "had a hard time pulling the same story" out of the second one of the twins who testified. [3]

Ms. Manning claims the prosecutor had "a hard time pulling the same story" out of William. [3] That is utterly false. William testified on direct for 112 pages. Click here for the full testimony. Ms. Manning uses the earliest minutes of that testimony to mischaracterize the hours that followed.

William was especially anxious at the beginning of his testimony. Even Mrs. Halsey-a source Ms. Manning cites with utter credulity-called him "fidgety." Unfortunately, in Ms. Manning's world, deviations from adult-like language or the logical, linear progression of testimony are deemed somehow sinister, relegating such testimony to the trash. Ms. Manning never acknowledges that there were adults in this case who expressed extreme nervousness and emotion on the stand. Mrs. C, for example, was so flustered when asked a direct question of Robert Halsey that she responded "Right at this point, I’m so nervous I can’t even think" (tr. 1194, lines 13-14). (She identified Halsey as the bus driver, but also confirmed what none of the children expressed in adult terms: that the proceedings were nerve-racking, as was the immediate glare of Robert Halsey.) The "stoic" children were assumed to be entirely fear-free because they did not volunteer the kind of nervousness that Mrs. C. blurted out in her testimony.

There is no question that William was anxious to tell his story and be done. He blurted out things about the abuse while the prosecutor was still establishing the factual foundation for that testimony (see, e.g., tr. 807, lines 4-6; tr. 812, line 3). But he also settled down and provided devastating testimony that Ms. Manning mischaracterizes with the insinuation that the boy's story did not match his brother's-or that the story had to be "pulled" out. The prosecutor did not, by any stretch of the imagination, have difficulty establishing that William witnessed, experienced, and could describe, in response to numerous open-ended questions, significant details that directly corroborated the testimony of others. Click here for a table of 14 selected similarities in their testimony.

4. One boy was improperly "prompted" and "coached" on the stand. [4]

A fourth claim that Ms. Manning makes about the children's testimony is that is was improperly "prompted," even "laboriously coached." She cites two specific examples, both from William's testimony: (a) the "help" that he allegedly received from the prosecutor in pointing out how to get to Robert Halsey's house, and (b) the "laborious coaching" that he allegedly received near the beginning of his testimony. Again, note how much of William's testimony Manning ignores: 103 of the 112 pages of direct testimony! Even more telling, neither of Manning's "examples" withstands close scrutiny. Both are debunked below. [Also note: no examples cited from the lead witness, Andrew. Also, nothing about the oldest child to testify, the older sister in Florida].