Judge Blasts Teacher for Elementary School Sexual Assaults

You took advantage of those kids without. even being worried that someone else was. going to notice it. And you did it in. the sneakiest, slimiest way possible. You touched them when they were sitting. on your lap. How disgusting is that? How. disgusting are you? >> That was the blunt condemnation from a. judge as she sentenced a former. substitute teacher for sexually. assaulting multiple young girls. crimes. prosecutors say he engineered by. intentionally choosing to work in. classrooms filled with young children.

With this guy now behind bars, we're. going to break down all of the details. of this truly disgusting case. Welcome. to Sidebar, presented by Law and Crime. I'm Jesse Weber. Hey everybody, this is another Lawn. Crime Legal Alert. Did you know that. children are being diagnosed with. serious conditions like type 2 diabetes. and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. and the research is potentially linking. ultrarocessed foods to all this? Yeah.

Well, Morgan and Morgan, they're. stepping in to fight to hold these food. companies accountable. With decades of. experience fighting large corporations, they're ready to stand up for the. families who deserve justice. So, if. your child under 21 has been diagnosed. with type2 diabetes or fatty liver. disease, then visit. www.forthepeople.com/food. forthepeople.com/food. or scan the QR code on screen to learn. more. A former Oakland County, Michigan. substitute teacher will now spend at. least a decade in prison after being.

convicted of sexually assaulting. multiple young girls with prosecutors. revealing that he deliberately chose. elementary school to pray on children. Right, that's where he wanted to work. 61-year-old Timothy Allen Doherty was. sentenced on July 8th, 2025 to at least. 10 years in prison for assaulting girls. that were as young as 9 years old at. Spring Mills Elementary School in. Highland Township, Michigan. And this is. a case that has exposed systemic. failures. It has left families grappling. with lasting trauma with one mother.

telling the court she is haunted by her. decision to send her child to a school. where she had to face her monster every. day. This horrific nightmare began back. in April of 2024 when multiple girls. came forward and reported that Dherty. had touched them inappropriately and. concerned parents even contacted a local. news station WXYZ in Detroit to voice. their concerns and the Oakland County. Sheriff's Office launched an official. investigation into this. And now, one.

month after the investigation began, so. this is May of 2024, a board meeting was. held at Milildford High School, which. according to WXYZ, actually had nothing. to do with the investigation in Dohy. But that did not stop parents from. expressing their frustration. And that. is when things got tense in a hurry. At. that point, Dherty, who had been working. for the school as a third-party contract. substitute, had already been removed. from classrooms. But furious parents, they demanded answers. And now the Hiron.

Valley School District released a. response to the allegations, saying, "The Hiron Valley School District takes. any allegations we receive seriously, and we diligently follow all school. policies and procedures. The safety and. welfare of our students and staff. remains our top priority." So. prosecutors, they ended up charging DY. in October of 2024 with six counts of. criminal sexual conduct in the second. degree, which by the way, punishable by. up to 15 years in prison. Okay. Now, before I go any further, I want to bring.

on a special guest to help break all. this down. Somebody who unfortunately. has a lot of experience in this area of. law. Dan Shore, former criminal. prosecutor, municipal inspector. Uh Dan, thanks so much for coming on. By the. way, for people who don't know, you have. a book coming out about this very topic. Well, about not this this story, but. about this very unfortunately a series, a topic that we cover a lot here on. Sidebar. >> Yeah. I'm a former sex crimes prosecutor. and I investigate sexual misconduct at. schools now. So, I wrote a novel called.

Open Bar that comes out August 12th that. is about a child sex abuse scandal at a. school and all the toxic fallout that. happens. People can learn more about it. by going to Substack and searching for. me, but it definitely covers a lot of. these issues based on my experience. investigating these matters. And again, Substack, you can find me. I. have a lot more information there. >> Well, you are always a wealth of. information and I'm always so happy to. have you on. Um, let's talk about this. So, prosecutors say that this guy chose. elementary schools to prey on children.

How difficult is it to prove predatory. intent in cases involving child sexual. assault? I mean, we could put two and. two together, right? We can make that an. assumption, but for uh from a. prosecutorial point of view, how. difficult is it to say he deliberately. went to this school to essentially. target young victims? >> That is difficult to show, but I do. think it's more of a minor issue than. what they actually did while they were. there. I think the predatory nature of. it is important in order to try to weed.

out other future people who might also. engage in such misconduct. So you'll. know warning signs, you know, maybe in. interviews what to ask about in. background checks, what to look for. But. for this specific defendant, once he's. arrested, once he's being prosecuted, then it's less about the predatory. intent because when an older person is. touching an underage girl, it intent is. not important. you are just it is a. statutory crime where you it's not based. on consent. It's based on the fact that.

they're underage and you just per say. you cannot touch someone who's underage. especially when you're a teacher. >> Would you say that in your experience. the perpetrators here may go this is so. disgusting but I have to say it. They. target young people because they might. not recognize what's happening and. there's a less chance they report it. >> Absolutely. And also I see in a lot of. the cases I've investigated and. prosecuted that the offenders target. specific children who they think are. less likely to report it. Maybe they.

don't have as much of a support network. or they have other issues in their. lives. And some of them I can't speak to. this case specifically but I see it a. lot where the children are coming to a. teacher for help with something and the. teacher grooms them and takes advantage. of them over time when someone who had a. bigger support network might tell. someone else. And a lot of people who. are repeat offenders, they know who to. target. I see that a lot and it's very. sad. >> Is it tough to corroborate these cases. when you have young victims? How do you. corroborate it? Is it is it literally at.

a trial you have to put these young. children on the stand? Is that the And. then what do you do next? >> That's a great question. It's really. challenging. I've prosecuted cases with. children as young and younger than these. children. And first of all, this type of. crime is almost always done in private. because that's the very nature of the. crime where a teacher gets a student. alone who's underage touches them. inappropriately. And cases that involve. touching, you're not going to see. forensics that you would look for in. other types of sexual misconduct such as.

evidence of penetration or semen or DNA, things like that. So these cases are. really difficult if they involve. touching in private. There's no. forensics. But what do we look for? We. look at first of all cross. corroboration. If multiple students are. saying that the same thing was done to. them, then that could be. cross-corroborative. Also, who did. someone talk to? Very often people, even. kids, they don't report it to authority. figures because they're afraid of. getting in trouble themselves, but they. might have told a friend about. something, even if it's a general. comment, telling a friend, you know, this teacher makes me really.

uncomfortable. And that could be. corroborative also of something. happening. But ultimately, as you talked. about, we need often if you go to trial, you need to have the kids, and they are. kids on the stand testifying. And that. can be retraumatizing. That could be. extremely scary. And I've had to prep. kids to do that before they testify. And. it's very challenging. >> This guy worked as a third-party. contractor. What are we talking about in. terms of background checks, oversight to.

know who we're letting into our schools, >> right? So usually a school if they're. making a hire, they're going to do their. own background check. Usually they. outsource that to a background check. company, but very often when they're. contractors, they rely on that. contractor to vet the people that. they're supplying as substitute teachers. or other positions. So the question. would be, what kind of background check. was implemented? But sometimes. background checks just don't find. information that's helpful and that. would stop someone like this from being. assigned to a school. For instance, if.

someone had never been arrested, if they. never had a civil suit, if they never. gotten in trouble at another place of. employment, if they never put anything. disturbing on social media, then a. background check wouldn't find if they. just have this secret proclivity that. isn't publicly known. Nevertheless, background checks are extremely. important when schools are hiring people. or for third party contractors. >> You think 10 to 15 years is sufficient. for a charge like that, even if that's, you know, the maximum that's allowed. under the law. >> It does. It's look, anyone going to. prison for 10 to 15 years, that's a.

serious incarceratory sentence. But it. does it does seem on the lower end of. what I've seen from other cases when. someone has sexually abused multiple. people. But, you know, this judge went. through the whole trial, heard all the. evidence. So, definitely the judge is in. a much better position than we are to. say what's appropriate at a sentence. And at the sentencing, the judge. certainly was very stern with this. defendant and took it very seriously. >> Well, let's talk about that a little bit. more. So DHY appeared for this. preliminary hearing on October 23rd, 2024, where Fox 2 Detroit reported that.

three children took the stand to testify. about what he did to them. And the. outlet says it was not allowed to record. the minor's testimony, obviously due to. their ages and the horrific nature of. the accusation. So we don't know really. what exactly they testified to. But what. we do know, however, is at the. conclusion of that hearing, Dy's case. was quote bound over. you know, it was. sent to trial and a decision that was. met with great disappointment from DH's. attorney, uh, Roy Casar. He told Fox 2,

"The three individuals liked this. teacher. They all hugged him and said. everyone hugged him. All the hugs were. done in the classroom. Some of the hugs. were in front of the other teachers. It. wasn't until one of the other students. found or talked to her mother, who said. it might be inappropriate, that all of a. sudden they started to think this may. have been inappropriate touching." Now, despite his attorney's defense claiming. that the incidents were merely innocent. hugs, the jury saw through it and they. convicted him. In May of all six counts.

of criminal sexual conduct, and. following the guilty verdict, Oakland. County prosecutor Karen McDonald issued. this statement about the case. Quote, Timothy Doherty victimized the children. he was supposed to nurture and protect. Parents expect schools to be a safe. place for their children, and children. should never have to fear their own. teachers. Coming forward is never easy. for victims, especially children. Thanks. to them, Derty won't be able to harm. another student. And at his sentencing. on July 9th, Timothy Dherty stood before. Judge Jasmine Ples of the Oakland County.

Circuit Court, who delivered a. blistering condemnation of Dard's. actions, even calling him downright. disgusting. Now, we'll get we're going. to get to that, but first, how. significant is it that you had three. children who testified during the. preliminary hearing? I mean, I know they. have to testify at a trial, preliminary. hearing. They have to. >> It depends on the state law. I I assume. that the prosecutor would have had them. testify if they didn't feel it was. necessary because prosecutors generally. don't have especially boys and girls who.

are underage testify unless it needed. So, they must have felt it was important. to keep the case going and to move. forward to the next stage. >> What about the defense? These are. innocent hugs. Uh the the children like. the hugs. Maybe they even initiated the. hugs. Uh, how do you differentiate. between innocent physical contact and. crime? >> That's an interesting question. And what. what you just described, I wouldn't be. surprised if that's true because many. people I've seen who are child victims. of sex crimes at the time of the abuse,

they do see their abuser as someone who. is a friend, someone who's supportive, and they may like that person, and they. may not recognize because they're young, because the other person's an authority. figure. They may not recognize the. horrific nature of the sexual abuse. until years later. So that's part of the. grooming process where someone who's in. authority in power over underage people. will take advantage of that and befriend. them and then start with hugs and then. move on to other kinds of touching. And. there are a lot more worse kinds of. touching than hugs that were alleged. here that led to this conviction. No one.

is being tried in court for hugs or. sentenced to 10 to 15 years for hugs of. children. So there was much more than. that that was alleged and proven beyond. a reasonable doubt. But certainly that's. part of the grooming process in many of. these cases. >> And if other teachers had witnessed it, does that hurt the prosecution's case? >> It I don't think it really does one. thing or the other because again part of. grooming especially of underage people. is engaging in what would be seen by a. third party as innocent type of physical.

contact but then in private escalating. it to another level. I've seen that time. and again in many cases that I've. prosecuted and investigated. So, it. would not surprise me because I've seen. it elsewhere if a teacher did do what. looked like innocent hugs in front of. other people, but then in private use. that boundary blurring behavior to then. take it to the next level and engage in. what here was proven beyond a reasonable. doubt, which was sex abuse that was. extremely disturbing. So during the. sentencing hearing, DH's defense team.

pushed for a reduced sentence, citing. his cooperation with investigators, pointing out that many other children. had had interacted with him without. reporting any kind of issues. Take a. look. >> I want to reiterate, your honor, that. Mr. Dohy was working as an elementary. school teacher for 12 years. And over. that span of 12 years, he was in contact. with over a thousand children. Nobody from any other school came. forward. There were no other allegations.

from any other school. He never made any threats. There was never any victimportation. There was no secrecy and he comp fully. cooperated with the investigation. Like I said, he has an supportive and. loving family who are here and will. continue to support him. So, I'm asking, your honor, to.

sentence Mr. Dohy to the low end of the. sentencing guidelines. at 36 months. Thank you. >> But prosecutors, they pushed back and. they pushed for the maximum sentence, arguing that Doy's crimes went far. beyond typical sentencing guidelines. >> Defendant Doherty was uniquely aware of. his sexual proclivity for children. He is the one who knew. and he chose to work at an elementary. school.

The children trusted him. They liked. him. They hugged him. And he repeatedly sought sexual contact. And so I stand before you arguing that. the people assert that the advisory. guidelines in this case are not. appropriate and we ask this court to. exceed them. Thank you very much. >> And prosecutors requested 10 years. So, the maximum sentence that the court. could impose, Dan, back to you. How. common is it for the defense teams to.

argue for reduced sentences and it being. effective? Because, you know, you talk. about these crimes and you would think. somebody, a lay person would look at it. and say, "The judge should throw the. book at these people, right?" But is. there times when mitigation does weigh. in the jud in the defense's favor and. the judge is convinced? Well, I see a. lot of defendants and their attorneys. say, "Well, look at all these other. people who I interacted with without any. problems." And I never find that to be a. powerful argument. That's as if I was. walking down the street and I stole your.

wallet. And then as a defense, I said, "Well, I'm going to call all the other. people on the street whose wallet I did. not steal to show that I walked by them. without stealing anything." And that's. not really helpful information. But I. see that in a lot of cases. I. investigate sex abuse cases, sexual. harassments, and a lot of times the. defense is, well, here are all these. other people who I did not offend and I. did not act improperly with. But that's. not what this case is about. It's about. these children and here you have. multiple children who testified and they. did so persuasively. That's what led to. the guilty verdict here. So, I think.

that those arguments are standard. arguments, but they're very it's very. rare for them to be convincing and. helpful, I think. Can you explain uh how. sentencing guidelines generally work. maybe in Michigan uh for criminal sexual. conduct? Are judges bound to follow them. strictly? Is there can they deviate? >> I'm not sure about the flexibility there. because I was a New York prosecutor and. I prosecuted sex there. But certainly. the standard way is that there's usually. some range of sentencing that it so. judges don't have just celanch to do. whatever sentence they want. And it's.

really important because we want some. standards in society. It's important in. a free and fair society to have some. kind of consistency so you don't have. one person who commits the same crime. get a wildly different sentence than. someone else. But you do want some. flexibility because you want the judges. to take into account certain. exacerbating facts or mitigating factors. that maybe lessen the offense. They. don't excuse the offense, but they might. make a lesser sentence justified. So, usually there's some standard range and. then there's some flexibility. And I. when I was a prosecutor, I would often.

make those arguments to a judge about. what I thought was the pro the. appropriate sentence and the defense. attorney would argue for a much lesser. sentence and the judge would then make a. decision. >> So this sentencing hearing reached its. most emotional moment as parents. delivered gut-wrenching victim impact. statements laying bare just the lasting. trauma that Darity inflicted on their. families. In fact, one mother, her voice. breaking, expressed guilt. I made her. go. The guilt I feel for making her go.

to school and facing her monster. is eating away at me. Timothy Dhy used an elementary school as. his hunting ground for his assaults. Once I learned of what happened to my. daughter, I allowed her to stay home. many times. As I did not know how else. to help her, to make her feel safe. Her. schooling was affected badly. She missed. a lot of days, 35 plus. Her grades. dropped. She didn't sleep well. To this. day, she still wakes up with nightmares.

and comes to my room in the middle of. the night to feel safe. She gets angry, frustrated, sad, and fearful so easily. Now, it's hard for her to trust others. as he was supposed to be someone she. trusted. Our anger will linger on. Our. guilt of not being able to protect so. many children, including her own, will. haunt us. >> You know, Dan, hearing parents express. their pain, guilt, anger, mixed. emotions. How important is that for. sentencing? How important is that also. from a human point of view healing and. and saying this in an open forum?

>> Yeah. Well, first of all, the v victim. impact statements are very important for. sentencing because again, there's. mitigating factors. There's other. factors that make a sentence maybe you. need a harsher sentence. And for someone. to be able to tell the judge, this is. how it impacted me or this is how it. impacted my child. That's really. persuasive sometimes for a judge to be. able to hear the real human impact on. it. That's not just about an indictment. and words on a page that there are real. human beings here. And for that mother, it's heartbreaking talking about feeling.

guilty sending your child to school. where they were abused. And whether you. know, I'm sure the parents had no idea. this was going on, but there's always. going to be that feeling of putting your. child in harm's way. And remember, when. kids are sent to school, kids are told, "Behave, trust your teachers, listen to. your teachers. If your teacher tells you. to do something, you should do it. And. that's often how these predators take. advantage of students because they know. they're there and they're told to listen. to your teachers and behave. So, if. you're young and you don't know what's. right or wrong, and your teachers. blurring the boundaries of appropriate.

touching, that's really difficult for. someone this young to really understand. and also be brave enough and have the. strength to report when they don't know. what's right, what's wrong, and how. they're going to get in trouble for. reporting. So, that's a big concern I. hear a lot. And then we heard from Dy. So the defendant, his turn to speak. And. he delivered what could only be. characterized as an attempt and an. apology. It becomes a question if it's. hollow or not. >> I'd like to say I'm sorry for the.

situation is involved to these children. and all the families that are involved. um being the adult in this situation and. take responsibility, become a better person and. my approach to the children were never. for harm but being the adult I should. have realized some of the things that. may have happened. So I take. responsibility for that and I uh. go from there.

And that apology was not wellreceived by. Judge Polls, who immediately shut him. down. >> All right. So, I don't really hear you. taking responsibility. I hear you saying. that I'm the adult here, so I guess I. got to take the fall for this thing. I. get to talk now. You had your. opportunity. >> Yes, ma'am. >> All right. You done? >> Yes. >> All right. So, I sat here through your. trial and I heard all of the witnesses. testify and I can make my own. independent assessment as to whether or.

not I find that their witnesses are. credible. And of course, I make a motion. for directed verdict. And had I found. that they weren't credible, I could have. said, "Yeah, you're right. All of this. none of this should be here." But I. said, "No, it's a question of fact for. the factfinder. They're going to make a. decision." And then the 12 people went. back and they made a decision that you. sexually assaulted all of these. children. >> And by the way, her anger only grew as. she dismantled his excuses piece by.

piece. >> We all know what you did now because we. heard them testify and 12 of your peers. found you guilty of it. So there should. be no more confusion moving forward. Those children all testify truthfully. and honestly that you put them in. positions of ha of sexually assaulting. them, touching their body, their children, and you're the teacher. It's everybody's worst nightmare. You.

put these parents in a difficult. position. You have their children being. sexually assaulted. And then came the. judge's most devastating blow, accusing. Darity of calculated deception. >> So, you knew exactly what you were going. to do in that school. And you took. advantage of those kids without even. being worried that someone else was. going to notice it. And you did it in. the sneakiest, slimiest way possible.

You touched them when they were sitting. on your lap. How disgusting is that? How. disgusting are you as you stand before. this court? >> So, Judge Polls sentenced him to the. maximum penalty of 10 to 15 years in the. Michigan Department of Corrections. And. despite being convicted on six separate. counts of secondderee criminal sexual. conduct, the sentences will run. concurrently, meaning Dy will serve them. simultaneously rather than backto-back. one after the other. The judge also. ordered that he permanently register as.

a sex offender. And if he's granted. parole after serving the minimum of 10. years, he'll be released under lifetime. GPS monitoring, ensuring authorities can. track his movements indefinitely. You. know, Dan, we hear judges make. statements. This one was a little bit. different, right? This judge seemed very. offended by the defendant's lackluster. attempt to take responsibility because. that's often a factor at sentencing is. whether the defendant is taking. responsibility. and he threw out words. that seemingly in a weak way might have.

implied responsibility, but didn't. really take responsibility. And the. judge just clearly called him on it and. said, "You're not taking responsibility. You're saying things that don't show. that you understand the magnitude of. what you did or how responsible you. are." And there was one part where the. defendant tried to speak again and the. judge shut the defendant down and said, "No, you had your chance to talk. Now. I'm going to talk and I'm going to tell. you why what you did is so horrific.". So, this judge definitely did not take. well the defendants's attempts. And you. know, if someone's going to take. responsibility, I've seen this in court.

Sometimes people try to take. responsibility, but they do it in such a. a way that doesn't sound sincere, and. judges don't like that for good reason. >> I don't know if the judges was if the. judge was restricted. I don't have a. reason to believe this, but but you. could have there was a possibility, I. guess, uh you could you could have. sentenced him to uh consecutive. sentences unless there's some. prohibition under the law, which again. I'm not aware of. But what would be the. justification for doing it concurrently.

and not consecutively? >> That's an interesting issue that comes. up in a lot of these cases with multiple. victims. And often it's the judge. looking at the total time of. incarceration versus what they're. accused of doing. And if you're going to. run 10 to 15 years concurrently, then. you're talking decades in prison. And. maybe the judge didn't feel that was. appropriate for this crime. But a lot of. it is also based on local state law, which can deviate based on the crime and. based on other factors. Sometimes the.

judges look at prior criminal record. If. someone didn't have any criminal record. in the past, it's less likely that their. crime is going to lead to consecutive. sentences. So those are some of the. factors that judges consider, but it's a. huge difference. If you get consecutive. sentences and you're talking about when. one's done, you're then serving the. other. That's a huge difference than. running them all concurrently. >> So 10 to 15 years. Chances he gets. parole in 10 years, >> right? So he is, I believe, early 60s. now, right? So he would be a decade. older. Certainly is never going to be. allowed to teach again. There'll be sex.

offender restrictions on being around. other kids. Usually that involves where. they could live, where they could work, where they can socialize. So there'll be. a lot of enforcement hopefully of that. Some states are better than others in. enforcing those conditions, but that's. why we have sex offender parole for. people in every state in the country. And it's really important to monitor. people so that they don't just fall. through the cracks and are able to. offend again easily. And before I let. you go, h how effective is, I don't.

know, a lifetime of GPS monitoring, watching somebody, uh, you know, prevent. the sex offender registry and preventing. recidivism in your opinion. Um, is this. a challenge for law enforcement? Um, or. do you think that this actually does a. good thing? >> I think it's a good thing. I think that. it's not something that is complete and. I think sometimes it gives people too. much of an assurance. People think, well, if this sex offender, if there's a. sex offender near me, they'll be on the.

registry and someone will find out and. someone will take care of it. And that's. not true because people are don't always. follow through with the sex offender. conditions they're required to follow. and different states are have different. levels of enforcement. So, it's not. perfect, but I think it is a good first. step to have someone being monitored. Hopefully, it also sends some reason for. them to feel cautioned, for them to feel. they're being monitored, and therefore. they know that they need to behave in a. way that maybe they didn't feel that way. before when they weren't being. monitored. So, these are all things that.

make it more likely that someone won't. offend again, but it certainly doesn't. stop people from reoffending. Unfortunately, as you know, with the. many cases you've covered, people do. reoffend in terrible ways when they're. on sex offender probation or parole. But. it is one of the tools of many tools. that law enforcement has to try to stop. this behavior. >> Dan Shore, thank you so much for taking. the time. Again, encourage everybody to. pick up your book if they want to learn. a little bit more about this. Uh, thank. you so much as always. >> Thank you, Jesse. It's always good to. talk with you. >> And that's all we have for you right now.

here on Sidebar. Everybody, thank you so. much for joining us. And as always, please subscribe on YouTube, Apple. Podcast, Spotify, wherever you should. get your podcasts. I'm Jesse Weber. I'll. speak to you next time. [Music].