People v. Spicola

Michael Spicola (defendant) sexually abused his young relative repeatedly over a roughly two-year period starting when the boy was six years old. Spicola was close with the boy’s mother, Spicola’s cousin, and the boy would frequently visit Spicola’s home to play with Spicola’s children. The boy did not report the sexual abuse to his mother, or to any other adult, until he was 13 years old, approximately six years after the last instance of abuse. The boy reported the abuse to his mother after watching a video about sexual predators in school. The mother immediately informed the police. The next day, the boy was interviewed and physically examined by a pediatric nurse-practitioner at the Child Advocacy Center (CAC). The nurse found no physical evidence of sexual abuse but reported that the boy was visibly embarrassed and upset when he recounted the abuse allegations. The abuse allegations the boy told the nurse matched what he had reported to his mother the previous day. The State of New York charged Spicola with child sexual abuse. At trial, the prosecution introduced expert testimony from (1) the CAC nurse-practitioner, who testified about the results of her examination and the fact that it was common not to discover physical evidence of abuse following a delayed abuse report; and (2) a clinical social worker who testified about child sexual abuse accommodation syndrome (CSAAS) and how abused children often act counterintuitively in response to abuse, for example, by delaying reporting and continuing to see their abuser. The CSAAS expert testified only in response to hypotheticals and did not opine about Spicola’s culpability. Spicola was convicted after a jury trial. Spicola appealed, arguing that the expert testimony was improperly admitted because (1) the nurse-practitioner found no physical evidence of abuse; and (2) the CSAAS testimony was prejudicial because it only served to bolster the boy’s credibility.