A Texas state appeals court tossed out the 1992 sexual assault conviction of an Austin couple whose fates became swept up in a nationwide frenzy over the perceived satanic ritual abuse at day care centers across the U.S.
Dan and Fran Keller spent more than 22 years in prison after three young children accused them of dismembering babies, torturing pets, desecrating corpses, videotaping orgies and serving blood-laced Kool-Aid in satanic rituals at their home-based day care, the Austin American-Statesman reported.
No evidence of such activities was ever found.
The state's highest criminal court threw out the convictions Wednesday, stopping short of declaring them innocent.
A unanimous Court of Criminal Appeals overturned their convictions based on false testimony by an emergency room doctor whose hospital examination had provided the only physical evidence of sexual assault during the Kellers' joint trial.
Dr. Michael Mouw later admitted that inexperience led him to misidentify normally occurring conditions as evidence of sexual abuse in a 3-year-old girl.
Travis County Assistant District Attorney Scott Taliaferro said his office will review Wednesday’s ruling, and await additional filings by the Kellers' lawyer Keith Hampton, before deciding how to proceed.
Prosecutors could dismiss the charges against the Kellers or press for a new trial. However, without Mouw’s testimony showing evidence of abuse, and with allegations almost 25 years old, a retrial would be a difficult proposition.
The nine judges did not explain why they rejected the Kellers’ innocence claim except to say their decision was based on the findings of the trial judge “and this court’s independent review of the record.”
However, in a concurring opinion, Judge Cheryl Johnson said she would have found both Kellers innocent.
“This was a witch hunt from the beginning,” Johnson wrote, finding fault with investigators who too easily accepted fantastic claims of abuse, including plane trips to Mexico during which children were abused and returned to Austin in time for afternoon pickup by their parents.
“It was not just Dr. Mouw who was too quick to believe,” Johnson said. “If he is to be blamed for the failure to provide applicant with a fair trial, the missteps of other persons and entities need to be examined also. We do not learn from our mistakes unless and until we are required to acknowledge those mistakes.”
Hampton said he is not ready to stop trying to prove the Kellers’ innocence, adding that he may file a “suggestion” that the Court of Criminal Appeals re-examine the evidence of innocence.
“I don’t know how in good conscience you can ignore the overriding claim in this case, which is not Dr. Mouw. The issue is they’re innocent,” he said.
About the Author
