TimesArgus.com - We Are Vermont

Lawyer raises competence of child sex-assault suspect

Court rules Robert J. Pratt will be held without bail pending his trial.



Toolbox

By PATRICK McARDLE Rutland Herald Staff - Published: July 17, 2009

BENNINGTON – The lawyer representing a Bennington resident accused of sexually abusing and virtually imprisoning a boy for almost six years said Thursday he will be investigating whether his client is competent to stand trial.

Robert J. Pratt, 37, will be held without bail pending his trial after a ruling on Thursday by Judge John Wesley in Bennington District Court.

Pratt is facing six felony charges including kidnapping a person to commit aggravated sexual assault and repeated aggravated sexual assault, charges that each carry mandatory minimum penalties of 25 years in prison.

The other charges are sexual assault, lewd and lascivious conduct with a child, first-degree aggravated assault with a weapon and second-degree unlawful restraint.

Three of the charges against Pratt are punishable by life in prison.

During Thursday's hearing, Patricia Smith, who identified Pratt as her "stepson," said he had a learning disability.

"He cannot read. He cannot write. He cannot spell. His mom has to make out … all his checks and take care of all his bills because RJ doesn't understand that kind of stuff. Also, if RJ is under a lot of stress, RJ will say 'yes' to anything," she said.

Smith told Wesley later in the hearing that she was not actually legally or biologically related to Pratt but said she had helped raise him since he was very young.

After the hearing, Bennington County Public Defender Frederick Bragdon, who represents Pratt, said his office would be investigating whether he is competent to stand trial given the learning disabilities described by Smith and others who know Pratt.

Smith, Pratt's brother Joseph Pratt and Joseph Pratt's girlfriend, Kristy Bell, testified that they would be willing to stay with Robert Pratt at a four-season camp in Woodford owned by Smith's husband.

Wesley rejected the idea, saying it was "particularly problematic in Mr. Pratt's case that no one in his family thinks he's guilty of these charges, they don't believe any aspect of what is very strong evidence from the court's point of view." As a result, he said, he didn't believe the court had the "robust assurance" it would need to release Pratt.

"(Pratt's family and friends) are particularly unreliable in terms of any obligation that I might attempt to put on them to supervise, literally, his every move," he said.

Bell had earlier told Wesley that Pratt was "harmless" and that she thought he had "buckled under the pressure" of police interrogation.

However, Bennington County Chief Deputy State's Attorney Christina Rainville said Pratt had terrorized the boy, who is not related to Pratt but knew him, in a way that the boy had been afraid to tell his mother for years about what was happening.

Rainville said police had also found evidence that corroborated the boy's story.

The boy told police that Pratt would keep him locked in his room without access to food, water or a toilet for hours at a time. The boy said Pratt used a homemade device to lock the boy's door and rigged up a system with a magnet that let Pratt know if the boy tried to leave the room.

The boy, who lived with Pratt for almost six years, said Pratt had sexually abused him and cut him off from friends, relatives and counselors.

According to police, the boy said Pratt had abused him by hitting him, cutting him with knives and pointing a loaded rifle at him.

Pratt also told the boy, in a phone conversation recorded by police, not to talk to a counselor because it would get Pratt into trouble, Rainville said, which proved that Pratt had not simply agreed with police under questioning.

Rainville said the boy, who is now 17, was not in the courthouse on Thursday because the state did not believe his testimony would be needed for that hearing.

Two of the crimes against Pratt, who did not testify on Thursday, were among the new Vermont laws created after the 2008 murder of 12-year-old Brooke Bennett of Braintree.

patrick.mcardle@rutlandherald.com








READER COMMENTS


I agree Melissa but our legal system allows the test comptence and also a test sanity at the time of the crime. In this case the defense appears to be going for competency. Once more that is does Mr Pratt under the charges and can he assist in his defense.
-- Posted by Zachary Hughes on Sun, Jul 19, 2009, 1:34 pm EST

report this comment



He was clever enough to conceal this 'alleged' crime for 6 years, but he's not smart enough to stand trial.. BS!
-- Posted by Melissa B. on Fri, Jul 17, 2009, 11:58 am EST

report this comment



Thank you, Zachary. I understand the question of establishing competence. (BTW, the headline of the article should have read "Lawyer raises question of competence," not "Lawyer raises competence," but that's yet another quibble.) What I was trying to point out was that the term "learning disabilities" is not the best term to use in this sort of case. People with learning disabilities have normal intelligence (or better). A learning disability may occur in the area of reading, for instance, but there are learning disabilities in other areas: math, spatial relations, organization, to name a few. What I object to in this article is the use of the term "learning disabilities" apparently to suggest that Mr Pratt is deficient in intelligence and/or the ability to manage areas of life that adults of adequate intelligence do not normally need help with.
-- Posted by gina on Fri, Jul 17, 2009, 11:38 am EST

report this comment



Gina
The issue is not about the conduct. It is about if Mr Pratt can understand the charges. Also wheather he can assist the Defense in his case. If he is found incompetent to stand trial he would be confined most likely at the State hosp until he is competent
However in order to detemine incompetence he will be evaluated. It appears the defense has not yet requested this. I must wonder how much his family knew about this. This given his mom was helping with his checks and stuff
-- Posted by Zachary Hughes on Fri, Jul 17, 2009, 11:28 am EST

report this comment



Sorry, that should have read "his alleged conduct with the victim HAS nothing to do with 'learning disabilities.'"
-- Posted by gina on Fri, Jul 17, 2009, 11:08 am EST

report this comment



"Learning disabilities" do not mean low intelligence or psyschosis. Whatever this man's difficulties with reading or writing or "understanding" how to pay bills, etc., his alleged conduct with the victim have nothing to do with "learning disabilities."

If his "mom has to make out all his checks" and so forth, where was she when this man was allegedly keeping a boy prisoner in his home?

There are still too many gaps in this story. And the Times Argus proofreaders need some help, too. The last lines of the story read "Two of the crimes against Pratt"; this makes no sense at all.
-- Posted by gina on Fri, Jul 17, 2009, 11:06 am EST

report this comment


You must be logged in to leave a comment. Register | Log In

Logout