Staff reports
An omnibus hearing in the case of the state vs. Kevin Robert Thompson and Susan Ann Thompson of Grand Marais took two hours at the Cook County courthouse Tuesday, November 3, 2009. It included presentation of detailed information on the case and testimony by two Cook County deputy sheriffs.
Omnibus hearings are held to determine whether sufficient evidence exists to continue to trial, to determine whether police followed proper procedures in their investigation, and to give defendants and their attorneys opportunity to request that certain evidence be kept out of a trial.
On May 16, the alleged victim reported to the Cook County Sheriff ’s Office that he had been held hostage, tortured, and threatened over an eight-hour period starting around 9 p.m. the night of May 15.
Thecharges against Mr. Thompson are second degree criminal sexual conduct with intent to cause fear of great bodily harm, kidnapping with the intention of terrorizing or committing great bodily harm, second degree assault with a dangerous weapon, making terroristic threats with intentional disregard of risk, false imprisonment with intentional restraint, and domestic assault with intent to cause fear of immediate bodily harm or death.
Mrs. Thompson is charged with second degree criminal sexual conduct with intent to cause fear of great bodily harm, kidnapping with intent to terrorize or commit great bodily harm, and false imprisonment with intentional restraint. Two other charges had been dropped by the Cook County Attorney’s office prior to this hearing. On the witness stand, Sheriff ’s Deputy John Hughes said he felt the victim did not know whether Mrs. Thompson was a willing participant or not.
The other police officer to give testimony was Sheriff ’s Deputy Leif Lunde.
Mr. Thompson’s attorney, Richard P. Holmstrom of Duluth, asked Judge Kenneth Sandvik to throw out the domestic assault charge against Mr. Thompson, saying that his wife could not be both a victim and a co-defendant. He also asked that the criminal sexual conduct charge be dropped because the victim never alleged that Mr. Thompson touched him in a sexual manner.
County Attorney Tim Scannell argued that a person could be both a victim and an aider and abetter in a crime. He also argued that the criminal sexual assault statute does not require that a victim has been touched physically.
Attorney Holmstrom asked the judge to not allow as evidence material taken from the Thompsons’ cell phones and computer, saying that nothing in the affidavit of probable cause explained why they should be seized.
County Attorney Scannell argued that they had reason to believe that the incident might have been videotaped.
Attorney Holmstrom asked Judge Sandvik to remove the County Attorney’s office from the case because two interviews of Mr. Thompson included statements of opinion from County Attorney Scannell. If a jury heard those statements, Holmstrom said, they would have to be considered witness statements, disqualifying Scannell from prosecuting the case.
County Attorney Scannell stated that Minnesota Supreme Court law clearly allows prosecutors to prosecute cases in which they have been part of the interviews. In addition, Scannell said, the officers present during those interviews could testify to what was said in the interviews. Statements of the county attorney’s opinion could be expunged from the audiotapes, allowing a jury to hear everything else.
Scannell asked the judge to allow complete copies of all written statements, summaries, and interviews, plus a DVD of material found on the Thompsons’ computer and audiotapes of interviews with the alleged victim and the Thompsons.
Mrs. Thompson’s attorney, Christopher G. Stocke of Duluth, declined the opportunity to make any oral arguments at the hearing but asked for three weeks to submit a brief. County Attorney Scannell asked for another week to review Stocke’s brief, and Stocke asked for a week after that. Judge Sandvik granted those requests and will decide how the case should proceed after that time.
Leave a Reply