By RODNEY L. SHERMAN
Clarion News Editor
A district judge last week dismissed indecent assault charges against a 40-year-old Leeper man.
Edward Ervin was charged with indecent assault of a person less than 16-years-old, a second-degree misdemeanor and a summary charge of harassment on Feb. 10 in Clarion Township.
State police Tpr. Steven Manns investigated an incident which occurred on Feb 10 between 4:30 and 5 p.m. on Robinwood Drive.
During the investigation, Manns interviewed a 14-year-old female who said Hall allegedly touched her in sexual ways which she had asked him to stop in the past.
She also said Hall allegedly entered her room while she was not fully clothed and watched her.
The victim said Clarion County Children and Youth Services had warned him to stop which he did until CYS recently closed the case.
Clarion County CYS confirmed on April 12, 2016, Hall was ordered to have no physical contact with the victim and had recently stopped regular home visits.
At a Sept. 5 preliminary hearing before District Judge Jeff Miller, the alleged victim testified for about seven minutes. The courtroom was closed while the girl testified.
When the courtroom re-opened, defense attorney Blair Hindman moved for dismissal of the charges, arguing the alleged victim’s testimony offered no evidence a crime had been committed.
Clarion County Assistant District Attorney Drew Welsh asked Miller to allow further testimony from Manns and Miller agreed.
Manns said CYS records indicated Hall had been told several times not to touch the girl.
“He did stop while monitoring was in place,” Manns said of Hall. “When the monitoring stopped, he started again.”
At the center of the case, apparently, was a slap on the girl’s rear end.
“He (Hall) said he smacked her rear end?” Hindman asked Manns.
“Yes,” said Manns.
“Did he say he did it for sexual gratification?” asked Hindman.
“No,” replied Manns.
Hindman referred, apparently, to the girl’s closed-door testimony, saying, “She said was not uncomfortable around (Hall).
In closing Hindman said, “Is this what we are teaching this generation, that anything that makes them uncomfortable is a crime?”
Hindman argued the commonwealth did not offer evidence to support the definition of indecent assault.
“There certainly was summary harassment,” said Hindman. “But no indecent assault. This is what this court (preliminary hearing) is for to get rid of this kind of BS.”
Miller said he agreed with Hindman on the indecent assault charge and dismissed the charge, leaving the summary harassment charge in place.