Many are doubting whether the prosecutor is competent to go to trial.
If the prosecutor had done her homework in the first trial and brought on witnesses from the only place where Ayres trained in child psychiatry, at Judge Baker in Boston, to state that child psychiatrists were never permitted to touch children in any shape or form in therapy sessions, the prosecutor would have had a conviction. And we wouldn't be going through this joke of a mental competency trial now.
Right after Ayres was arrested, one of Ayres' former medical partners told both the prosecutor and the San Francisco Chronicle that Ayres had told him that he had been trained to give genital exams to boys in therapy during his training in Boston.
The prosecutor failed to investigate and never bothered to look at how Ayres was trained. As a result, all of the jurors in the first trial believed that Ayres was trained to give genital exams to boys in therapy. Hence, a mistrial.
And yet: the prosecutor had the audacity to call up a child psychiatrist who was a prosecution witness at the first trial and tell her that she blamed the witness for losing the trial !!!!!!!
The prosecutor is also known for doing things like interviewing witnesses at the very last minute before a trial.
Word is that the defense for Ayres' in this mental competency trial is very organized and has lined up at least seven witnesses. Word is the prosecutor only has two.
Edited by pluckmemory (01/11/11 10:07 AM)