In re Keala XX.
Appeal from an order of the Family Court of St. Lawrence County (Rogers, J.), entered August 26, 1993, which granted petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 10, to adjudicate respondent’s child to be abused.
Petitioner commenced this proceeding alleging that respondent had sexually abused his daughter, Reala (born in 1989), during two weekend visitations in August 1992 and September 1992, respectively. A fact-finding hearing was conducted in February 1993, at which respondent appeared and testified, and Family Court, although characterizing the testimony offered by petitioner’s validation expert as "almost valueless”, ultimately concluded that petitioner had established by a preponderance of the evidence that respondent had sexually abused Reala. Following a dispositional hearing Family Court, inter alia, placed respondent under petitioner’s supervision. This appeal by respondent followed.
In accordance with Family Court Act § 1046 (a) (vi), a child’s out-of-court statements relating to abuse or neglect may be
Although "validation testimony from an expert investigating the allegations of sexual abuse is sufficient to corroborate an abused child’s statements” (Matter of Vincent I.,
In sum, we find Nixon’s validation testimony woefully insufficient to corroborate Keala’s statements. As to other evidence in the record, although Keala did repeat the allegations of abuse to several people, mere repetition is not sufficient to corroborate a child’s prior statement (see, Matter of Nicole V.,