LOS ANGELES, CA – JUNE 2020. A 26-year old teacher’s aide was freed from jail after facing mandatory life in prison. He was accused by 7 children of lewd acts on a child under 14 years old in violation of California Penal Code Section 288(a). The third graders claimed he would carry them improperly and seat them on his lap. He insisted he only carried them or sat them on his lap to console them and never touched them improperly. His bail was $1.7 million, which he was unable to afford.
Mr. and Mrs. Khojayan began litigating the case immediately. They hired an investigator very early on. They investigated witnesses for and against the defendant’s cause. They compelled the court to order a visit to the school to take pictures and videos of the classrooms where the alleged incidents occurred. They sent subpoenas to all persons and entities that had any contact with the accusers. They filed motions to compel against third parties to obtain evidence about the children. They learned that the accusing children were led by one child who missed her old teacher, had watched music videos about “butts,” and spread the dangerous ideas to other children about the defendant. A few of the children admitted in interviews that they were bullied by the lead accusing child to say things about the defendant.
Through a preliminary hearing that lasted several days, Mr. and Mrs. Khojayan cross-examined the children and the lead detective. The lead detective admitted not following up on evidence that the defendant was never previously accused of such crimes at his prior schools and that at least one child and her mother had said that the lead accuser was a liar. The Firm also called witnesses at the preliminary hearing – a strategic move rarely used as defense attorneys usually wait for the trial to call witnesses. One of the defense witnesses was a former head of a school that provided a code of conduct policy that stated that teachers’ aides could console third grade aged children by placing them on their laps.
After the preliminary hearing was complete, the Firm sent the DA a resolution letter pointing out the inconsistencies in the children’s statements, sworn testimony and other evidence. In response, the DA agreed to release the defendant from jail on his own recognizance and dismiss the charges in exchange to a plea of no contest to annoying children. Out of jail, the defendant is now on informal probation (no probation officer) and at home with his family.
