It is not clear where Frontline came up with the claim that Frank Fuster’s business was profitable. There is no evidence in the record to support this claim and there is considerable evidence to the contrary. First, Fuster qualified for a state-paid defense lawyer. Second, his personal finances prior to his arrest were a mystery. How Fuster was able to write large checks for cash, without any visible source of income, was explored in detail in Jan Hollingsworth’s book, Unspeakable Acts. Finally, there are also several places in official records where Fuster says that his business was not profitable. For example:

1. Florida Presentence Investigation Report (11/18/82):

"Subject established a Corporation named K. D. W. (Kendall Decorators Warehouses) Enterprises, Incorporated. This is an Interior Decorating business, which specializes in window treatments. Subject states that although business is just starting, and for this reason provides very little income at this time, he has great hopes for its growth."

(Florida Department of Correction, Presentence Investigation, 11/18/82, Francisco Fuster Escalona, Docket 81-21904, p. 3).

 

2. Fuster’s civil testimony three years later:

back

Source: State v. Escalona [Fuster], Case No. 84-19728, Deposition of Martha Gonzales Fuster (August 8, 1985), tr. 58-60 ("he told me that he would kill me," "if I ever took Noel away," "he would kill me if I took Noel," "afraid of him.")

The things that Martha Fuster is willing to admit in this deposition are haunting, partly for the similarities to Ileana’s situation. Frank met Martha when she was sixteen; she lost her virginity and felt forced to marry Frank. Ileana confessed something similar to Shirley Blando and others at the prison, months before the psychologists were hired by her lawyer. And she used the word rape. (Blando deposition, State v. Fuster, August 1, 1985; tr. 78). Martha Fuster was kicked out of her house after Frank beat up her father (Martha Gonzalez Fuster Deposition tr., 13). Ileana’s mother remarried – and her new husband, Isreal Mendosa, called the police when Frank Fuster pulled a gun on him during an argument.

Further contradicting the "American Dream" image painted by Frontline, Fuster has acknowledged (and Jan Hollingsworth reported) that he was the subject of a criminal complaint for rape 1980.

Fuster was also the victim of a close-range gunshot to the face in 1980. The authorities were told it was a robbery; but nothing was stolen and the act appeared to be personal. The authorities speculated that it was an act of revenge. Also during this time, the police were called when Frank Fuster, in the heat of an argument, pulled a gun on Ileana's step-father. In the year before the Country Walk case broke, Frank Fuster hit Ileana in the face repeatedly in front of other people at a Halloween party after she mentioned that he owned a gun.

Having a gun was a violation of Frank Fuster’s parole conditions—for his 1982 conviction for lewd and lascivious assault on a nine-year-old girl.

back

Frank Fuster’s documented history of deception about this case

In his own testimony in the Country Walk trial, Frank Fuster told so many lies that his lawyer was forced to admit as much to the jury in closing arguments. His most outrageous lie was one he maintained throughout the case: that he did not run a day care operation and that there was no Country Walk babysitting service. He also said "there were only a few children." Then in an impromptu press conference while the jury was out, Fuster argued "she babysat 50 kids and they only had seven here, how come"? (The answer, of course, is that many children were too young to testify, others did not want to, and other’s were not thought to have been abused by the Fusters.)

Fuster also lied to his lawyer. Exasperated, he told the judge that he was tired of "only getting abuse" from Fuster. (Magistrate's Report, p. 25) Later, he used his lawyer’s conclusion that he was "an unmitigated liar" as one of his alleged grounds from appeal! (Magistrate's Report, p. 113) Fuster eventually lied to the judge about why his own lawyer wanted out of the case. The judge called him on this lie.

Fuster’s most recent "description of the facts" in the Country Walk is similarly suspect. As Magistrate Judge Charlene Sorrentino put it in her decision of March 8, 2002:

Lacking citations of any sort, the judge concluded, "these often hyperbolic statements are unworthy of credence." (Magistrate's Report, p. 93)

This was not the only place where the Magistrate concluded that Fuster was fiddling with the facts. The 124-page opinion is filled with examples. "Fuster has embellished his first claim [in the petition]" (Magistrate's Report, p. 34) Fuster’s present portrayal of the facts underlying this claim is exaggerated when compared to the record." (Magistrate's Report, p. 36) Fuster claimed unfair pretrial publicity, arguing first that there had been 1,456 newspaper articles about his trial; later he produced three articles.

The Magistrate concluded that any claims of actual innocence by Fuster were, to put it mildly, "without merit." (Magistrate's Report, p. 118) As Frank Fuster’s second wife, Martha, who lived with Fuster for eleven years, said:

Frank Fuster was taken at his word by Frontline. Why didn’t Michael Kirk or Peter Boyer feel an obligation to inform their viewers about Frank Fuster’s documented record of dishonesty?

Magistrate's Report (PDF format)

back