Major Blow in Case of Stepmom Allegedly Caught Having Sex with Stepson

A crushing blow for the Florida. stepmother allegedly caught having sex. with her 15-year-old stepson. A judge. has just ruled that the teen's. statements after the alleged assault can. be used against her at trial. And the. judge made some pretty interesting. points in the order that we're going to. break down with Florida Judge Elizabeth. Sharer. Welcome to Sidebar, presented by. Law and Crime. I'm Jesse Weber. [Music]. We first told you about Alexis von Yates. a few weeks ago. She's the 35-year-old.

whose husband walked in on her, allegedly having sex with her stepson. when she thought he was going to be at. work. Remember this story? The incident. reportedly happened last summer when the. 15-year-old was apparently spending time. with his father in Ocala, Florida over. the summer break. He typically lives. with his mother in Washington DC. And it. wasn't until later that he confided to. his mom about what allegedly happened. So what does she do? She calls in a tip. to Ocala police. Now Yates was arrested. in November, initially charged with lewd.

or lascivious battery on a child aged 12. to 16, but prosecutors upgraded that. charge to sexual battery on a person 12. to 17 years by a person in familial. authority. So Yates's arrest affidavit. included graphic details that the teen. apparently shared with a forensic. interviewer. And according to the. alleged victim, his father was working. overnight as a lineman. And after his. younger half siblings went to bed, he. and Yates stayed up late playing video.

games, watching movies, and apparently. also using Yates's marijuana vape pen. According to the arrest affidavit, quote, "The suspect and child victim. kissed. As the suspect began escalating, the suspect said, "A man, I wish you. were 18 because you're not old enough.". Now, despite this alleged statement, the. teen victim told the interviewer that he. performed oral sex on Yates, and this. escalated with the two then having sex. The interviewer noted that the way the. teen described the acts were consistent. with someone who actually experienced.

all this rather than someone, you know, just telling a story that they've heard. And he also apparently told the. interviewer what allegedly happened in. the aftermath. He claims that his father. told him to pack his things up, go stay. at his grandparents' home, and as he was. packing, he claims he overheard Yates. telling his father that she was sorry. and that the child victim looks like his. father when he was younger. So just take. that for a second how disturbing those. allegations are. But according to the. teen, multiple family members.

discouraged him from talking to the. police or disclosing what happened to. his mom. His aunt also allegedly told. him that Yates had been telling people. that he manipulated her into having sex. So when police arrested Yates in. November, according to the affidavit, quote, Yates advised she did not wish to. speak with me without a lawyer present, but made several unprovoked statements. about believing that since the. Department of Children and Families had. closed their case, she was in the clear, saying the incident was so accusatory,

attempting to put blame on the child. victim. Yates was released on a $10,000. bond and since then there have been. several motions that were filed in the. case and attorneys from both sides have. conducted depositions and this includes. one that was done by the defense via. Zoom with the alleged victim. So, a. hearing was recently held to determine. whether the boy statements made in the. weeks and months after the assault could. in fact be heard by a jury at Yates's. upcoming trial. The judge released an. order this week allowing that testimony.

to come in. So to talk about why the. court was so concerned about these. statements and the reasoning behind the. decision, I want to bring in retired. judge Elizabeth Sharer, who as many of. you know oversaw the case of the. Parkland school shooter in Florida, is. now in private practice with Conrad. And. Sharer, uh, Judge, so good to see you. Thanks so much for coming back here on. Sidebar. It's been a minute. It's. really, really good to see you. First of. all, this is one of the craziest stories. and most disturbing stories that we've. covered on Sidebar, at least in recent.

memory. What's just your initial. reaction when you hear something like. this? I mean, you don't hear it as often. when it involves a child victim being a. male and the the the accuser being a. female. You more often hear about the. accuser being a accused being a male and. the victim being a female. So, it's sort. of not your ordinary uh set of. circumstances, but also the way that it. that it unfolded and and and the excuses. that she gave like, "Oh, he seduced me.

and all these kinds of things." We're. talking about a 15year-old child here. who who was left in your care and. custody. Um, as an adult, you're. supposed to look after these children. And and and research shows that that. actually boys minds develop even slower. than girls minds. So, often times boys, there's a ton of psychological. um testing and and research that's been. done to show that boys are are actually. less mature than girls at this this age.

of 15 years old and that they don't in. fact mature until they're in in their. mid20s. So, this was a child. He may be. built like a man. He may have the. stature and the ability uh to do things. like a man, but he but he's a child. And. um this is this is a crime and one that. that everyone should take very. seriously. Hey, so we know that you guys. are true crime fans, but are you also in. a business of some kind? If so, I want. to tell you real quick about our. sponsor, Odo. So ODO is a powerful.

all-in-one business software that helps. you manage everything from sales to. accounting and yes, inventory. Their. inventory dashboard makes it easy to. track receipts, delivery orders, POS. orders, and you can see what's waiting, late, or backorded all at a glance. You. pay for receipts, automate vendor. reminders, and schedule deliveries, all. in just a few clicks. Plus, you get full. warehouse management, the ability to set. picking strategies, and real-time stock. visibility. And the best part, ODO's. inventory app syncs seamlessly with your. sales and e-commerce apps, so everything. stays connected. Do you want an. inventory software that comes fully.

packed? Well, if so, check out ODU for a. free 15-day trial at. odo.com/sidebarinventory. Yeah, we've covered a lot of these cases. where and I'm glad you mentioned that. and we always have Chris Hansen on who. says, "Oh, you know, we cover the cases. where you have a female educator or. teacher who has sexual relations or is. accused of having sexual relations with. a male student and he's like, you know, everybody thinks, oh, this is a young. boy's dream." It it's really not. It's. incredibly damaging and hurtful and can. have longlasting effects not only for. the alleged victim but the family.

members as well. The issue here, I. understand, I think it has to do with. hearsay, right? So talk to us about two. things. A a lot of people just what is. hearsay? Just if you could explain what. is hearsay and what why was the defense. so worried about hearsay in your. opinion? Okay. So hearsay is the. statement that one makes that's. overheard by someone else. So as opposed. to me saying I was on the Jesse Weber. show this morning and I saw him drinking. a bottle of whatever he's drinking and.

he's got books in the background. Uh, you say it's water, by the way, in case. anybody thinks I'm drinking alcohol on. here. I'm not. I didn't know. I didn't. This interview is going fine. This. interview is going fine. I don't need a. I don't need a drink just yet. Flat is. all I was saying. Um, I couldn't tell. whether it was perier or flat tap water. Flat water. Anyway, so as opposed to me. saying that, then you saying Judge Sher. was on and she saw me and she said that. she saw me. She said that she did this. and she said that she did that. That's. hearsay. And in most circumstances,

hearsay is not admissible. But there are. a few exceptions to that rule and one is. the child hearsay exception and that is. uh it was passed in the 80s by the. Florida legislature and most states have. similar laws where children the harm to. the child and being brought to a. courtroom and having to testify in front. of the accuser the accused about these. very sensitive issues um is said to be. that that drama outweighs the the. confrontation clause issues that the.

defendant may have in being able to. confront the witness uh under their. constitutional rights. So the the. legislature has found that the the harm. to the child outweighs and and the need. to protect the child outweighs some. aspects of the confrontation clause in. that this type of hearsay is admissible. So if a child goes to a doctor, a child. goes to their teacher, a child goes to. their caregiver and says, um, this. happened to me and and in great detail, uh, many times the person that the child.

said those statements to is permitted to. testify. as opposed to having the child testify. um because of the harm that it would it. could possibly do to the child. Is it. also the rationale that a child of that. age is more and and I hope I'm saying it. the right way is more likely than not. telling the truth is more credible than. an adult uh when you have hearsay issues. or is it purely as you said hey listen. we don't want to further damage or. traumatize somebody in this situation or.

is it that you know sometimes we have. hearsay exceptions right where the. hearsay exceptions would say you know in. those certain specific moments there. could be a reason to believe that. statement more than in other kind of. circumstances. Do you think there's. something to this that in those specific. instances having a child recounting. these alleged episodes to a doctor or a. teacher or a parent um there is a. credibility issue there is it makes it. more credible I think ordinarily.

and I hate to have to sort of justify. this but I've seen kids that have been. abused for years and those kind of kids. are are sort of in a different category. but if you take a child who this is. their first instance being in this in. this situation it it I would say it is. unlikely that a child is going to make. up. something so traumatic as as you can. imagine this 15-year-old kid had sex. with his stepmother that's not just his. stepmother that's his father's wife so.

in looking back this child is is. traumatized not not only by the act. itself but look he's he's defied his. father not defied him but he's but he's. he probably thinks I let him down I. upset him I I I broke his trust I did. all of the things that that a person. would think of if they say had an affair. with a married person. So all of those. things going through this child's head. um would be very traumatizing to this. child and very unlikely uh to make up. those types of allegations. And one of. the most important things to note is in. order for this child hearsay to be.

admissible is there has to be other. corroborating evidence. So it can't just. be the child's testimony in and of. itself. there has to be other evidence. uh of to support the the hearsay. statements in order for them to be. admissible. Let me get into the uh the. latest court order and let's dive into. it a little bit. So, it says at this. juncture, it is the duty of the court to. determine whether the statements of the. child are reliable and trustworthy. To. do this, the court must find that the. time, content, and circumstances of the. statement provide sufficient safeguards.

of reliability to be admissible. And the. court laid out 13 standards that are. considered when making a decision about. child here today statements. I'm going. to go over a few of them in more detail. First, the court considers the mental. and physical age as well as the maturity. of the child. The order reads, "He. appeared to be a particularly. intelligent, mature young man. He also. appeared to be somewhat worldly and. familiar with adult things. Example, he. described using a THC vape pen before. having sex with the defendant and. smoking weed pretty much every day he.

was in Florida." Quote, "The court does. not find that the child's marijuana use. impacted his ability to accurately. recall the events that occurred in a. material way, his memory of the events, while they may have been better had he. not used marijuana, was still highly. detailed." Judge, let's stop there. Your. reaction to that? This judge is very. smart. I'll tell you why. This is a. extremely detailed or order with. findings of fact that are so airtight. that it would be very hard for an.

appellet court to find fault with it. A. lot of times judges are, I don't know, overworked, sloppy, whatever you want to. call it, and they just slap together. some kind of an order that just says, you know, A, B, C, and D, they're all. met, and therefore the hearsay comes in. This judge went through and made very. detailed findings. And the reason I. believe he went over the marijuana use. is because Jesse, I know you know this, but one thing about um testifying in. court is if you're under the influence. of any kind of um substance that can be.

used against you in cross-examination. So ordinarily a defense attorney would. be able to say, "Well, isn't it true. that you were high when you made these. statements, or isn't it true that you. were high during the the this alleged. incident?" So it could have affected. your memory. It could have affected your. judgment. it could affect your ability. to recall the events factually and. accurately. So, the judge not only is. going through making factual findings. about this young man's intellect, about. his ability to recall events, but he's. also saying he's shutting down the. potential argument that the defense, I'm.

sure, made very strongly. And one of the. reasons that they absolutely need to. confront this young man is about his. marijuana use and how that could have. affected his ability to recall. And the. judge is shutting that down in what I. would call it an airtight order. Very. well written um and very um. teflon. I would compare it to teflon. when it goes up on appeal, which is the. best that you can do as a judge because. what you don't want to happen is you. don't want your decision to be reversed. and then god forbid the child has to go.

through all of this again and the. defendant. Also, real quick before we. move on to the other factors or. considerations, even if the statements. are allowed in based on the judge's. analysis, can the defense be free during. a criminal trial in front of a jury. raise the issue of marijuana use to talk. about the reliability of the statement? Can they still bring it up? Is. absolutely I think that they would. absolutely be able to bring that up. I. think that they would be able to bring. that up through the the um forensic. examiner who the um in Broward County we.

call SATC the the uh sexual assault. assault treatment center. I don't they. have something to that effect in Okala. So the person would be a trained. professional who would have interviewed. him who would have known to ask. open-ended questions as opposed to young. man isn't it true that she touched you. first and then and then she did this and. then she did that. No, that's not what. you do. You say what happened? tell me. in your own words what happened and. after the child finishes the statement. you you would say okay tell me what. happened next. I've had to take uh.

there's there's another um exception in. the Florida law which says that a. child's testimony can be taken in camera. during trial where the judge goes back. to a separate room with the child and. you're on closed circuit TV so that the. lawyers and everyone in the courtroom. can watch and what you do is you bring a. list of questions back to the child but. in the room it's just the judge and the. child in engaging. So when I did that, so I I was sort of uh in the same. position as this um examiner. You have.

to make sure you want to make the child. feel very comfortable. You you want to. make sure the child is not afraid to. tell the truth. You want to make sure. you want to make sure the child. understands the difference between a. truth and a lie. You have to ask them. many many questions to set that. foundation so that you're absolutely. sure that you can believe what the child. is saying uh and that the child. understands the ramifications of what. happens if you tell a lie. And then you. ask very open-ended questions and you. follow up with those questions but you.

get it from the child's point of view. Um and you try your best not to. influence the child in any way. whatsoever so that you can get the. truth. Absolutely. Absolutely. And look, the judge had other considerations here, too. So, the next two considerations are. nature and duration of the abuse and the. relationship between the child and the. offender. So, the judge notes that the. alleged sex acts only occurred once, so. it's unlikely that details would, you. know, get mixed up. And while he's known. Yates for a while, she's been married to. his father for years, so he has some.

familiarity with her usual behavior. The. next consideration is whether the child. is still emotionally affected by the. situation at the time of the report as. well as the time of the incident. relative to when the statement was made. The judge writes, "In this case, the. child did not make statements to CPT, that's child protective services, until. 4 weeks after the incident occurred.". With that said, the manner in which this. incident is purported to have come to. light. Example, flagrant delecto with.

his stepmother by his father, her. husband, after which the child had. interaction with his father and other. family members about it during which the. child was dissuaded from telling his. mother or otherwise disclosing it and. where as a result the incident was not. immediately reported to law enforcement. does not cause the passage of time to. diminish the reliability of the child's. statements. Judge, do you agree? I I. absolutely agree and here's why. For one. thing, you would expect a child would h. would be less likely to remember after.

four weeks and after being manipulated. by family members not to tell the truth, you would be you you would be more. inclined to believe that the child is. going to downplay the events as opposed. to exaggerate the the events. So, the. fact that he's able to recall the events. with specificity four weeks later, even. after being told by his family members. not to disclose what happened for. whatever their reasonings were or or. was. Um, I think that this goes to the. credibility of the child. I think that. that these two considerations are meant.

for situations where a child is abused. over a period of years. And. unfortunately, sometimes children are. abused so many times that it's so hard. for them to recall. You know, the events. kind of all blend together because it. happens so frequently. Thank God in this. case that this child was only alleged to. have been um abused one time. Um, and. you know, I say thank God for that. because of so many other children who. are not as fortunate as this young man. Not that he was fortunate, but you know. what I mean. It could have been much. worse. In many cases, it is worse. But I.

think in this in this these two. considerations are meant uh for children. who unfortunately this happens over a. course of years and their memories are. sort of fade into each other where this. child is recalling a specific one night. incident that happened um he's very. familiar with his stepmother. It's not. like he just met her or had any reason. to not like her uh had any reason to do. harm to her. Uh, I think that those are. important considerations and I and I. would agree based on what I see. Now,

obviously, Jesse, I wasn't there. I. didn't hear the testimony and evidence. I can't judge whether or not it's. credible for a fact because I don't know. exactly what was said and I didn't see. and hear those who testified. But from. what the judge is is saying, I think. that this is a a sound decision. If I'm. the appellet court, I'm going to affirm. his decision because I think it's very. sound and based on the facts and the. law. A and you make a great point. because there are so many cases that I. cover where it's not reported and nobody.

knows it's going on and you have conduct. these allegations as true that can go on. for months that can go on for years and. that's a real problem. Now according to. the order this teen was apparently. incredibly conflicted when he went back. to his mom's house in DC almost feeling. as if he'd gone through a breakup. He. said that he'd been infatuated by his. stepmother and was a virgin when they. allegedly had sex. So, you think about. the impact that these, you know, if. these allegations are true, everything. we're talking about here, but I want to.

go through some of the other. considerations that were uh brought up. by the judge. There's childlike. description of the act. On this one, the. judge noted that the teen was 15 at the. time it happened and did not describe. the acts in a childlike way. So, this is. kind of important when you think about. the impact on his decision. Next, you. have a lack of motive to fabricate. So, the judge noted that there was no. apparent reason for this boy to make. this up. And then making a statement to. a number of people, the teen disclosed. to multiple family members, including. his father, grandfather, cousin, mom, as.

well as the interviewer. And the next. two are mental competency of the child. and the ability to distinguish fantasy. from reality. And the judge notes that. he has no doubt that the alleged victim. understands his duty to tell the truth. Judge, these are important. considerations. The amount of people he. apparently told the way he's describing. these events. I I see these I I get it. I understand why these are important. considerations and uh maybe helped with. saying why these statements should come.

in. I mean, no, think about it. No child. wants to be walked at 15 years old wants. their parents to walk in on them in a. sexual act, much less with their. stepmother. This must be horrifying for. this young man. The way and the manner. in which it happened are are very. realistic and very believable. And. again, I think that these considerations. go towards as far as mental capacity. When you're dealing with a six or seven. or even five year olds, four year olds,

some of them, they know exactly what. happened and they can tell you, you. know, what happened and and and they. understand the truth. They understand if. they lie, they get in trouble. You know, you have to ask these questions in sort. of an elementary type of way. But this. young man is 15 years old. He certainly. should know the difference between the. truth and a lie and understand the. difference between reality and fantasy. But again, I think the judge is going. through every single factor and he's uh. dotting his eyes and crossing his tees. to make sure that this again withstands. appellet scrutiny. Uh I think he did a.

good job in doing so. I think yes, by. the fact that this child was forced to. tell well his dad I mean his dad walked. in and then his stepmother contacts him. or he contacts the stepmother the. following day and and then he's get he. gets sent home to his mother and and his. and the that night he's sent to his. grandfather's house. So all these adults. know he's telling the same story to all. of these adults. And again, it's very. important to remember that his testimony. has to be corroborated by other. competent substantial evidence. Uh.

meaning somebody else's testimony, physical evidence. Um maybe the. defendant made a statements um even. though she invoked her right to counsel. Perhaps she made uh spontaneous. statements that corroborate it. Whatever. it is, there are cor there is. corroborating testimony to this child's. hearsay statement. Text messages, right? Social media posts, diary entries, those. are all can be come up in cases like. this. Now, let me go through some of the. more considerations and I and I want to. get your perspective on it, judge. So, the next consideration is whether the. alleged victim's statements are vague or.

contradictory. And we talked about this. a little bit earlier that the affidavit. was incredibly graphic, went into a lot. of detail. And the judge wrote in this. case the child's statements were. particularly detailed, even though the. child himself indicated at one point. that he felt he may have been too. detailed and that he didn't want to make. the interviewer uncomfortable. Now, some. of the details provided by the child. include situations preceding the. incident where defendant may have been. testing the waters to see how the child. reacted to her making statements that. were sexual in nature, but were anything.

but vague. And the next couple of. considerations are the possibility of. improper influence on the child by. participants in a domestic dispute and. absence of evidence of coaching. So, this is key because there are a lot of. adults in this situation who could. potentially have had an effect on the. teen and his account. But the judge. notes that any allegation of improper. influence is purely speculative. He also. noted that the interview with the teen. was done privately. So it was just him. and the interviewer. So coaching during. the interview itself wasn't possible. Doesn't seem like anybody else was in.

the room. And the final consideration is. just any other factor. And the order. reads, "This court also considered that. during the interview, the child did not. shy away from making statements that. would cast himself in a negative light, using marijuana the night of the. incident and frequently in the months. leading up to it as part of an overall. description of the act." Judge, your. thoughts on those final considerations, you know, the coaching, uh, saying. things that were, you know, maybe. against interest, the level of detail. What do you think?

So, I think that the fact that this. young man has the wherewithal to know. that not only were these acts wrong, but. that he's afraid to offend the the. interviewer. I'm assuming the. interviewer was probably a woman, and. he's he knows enough to say, you know, men are not supposed to talk about these. kind of things. I don't want to offend. this lady by by using these terms and. telling her all of these things because. it's it's not polite. that that shows.

that that he has not only a factual. understanding but sort of a moral. understanding of what's going on as. well. Um I would say he seems like a. well-mannered young man, you know, what. happened happened, but but the fact that. he doesn't want to sort of um. offend the the interviewer by telling. her her again her or him uh what. happened um in detail. I think that that. goes to the child's credibility. I I. also think the fact that um being.

influenced those situations I feel are. normally where let's say mom and dad are. getting a divorce. There's been no. allegation of sexual abuse ever and then. all of a sudden the child accuses dad of. doing something to her while she's in. mom's custody. Mom's very vindictive. Mom's mad about the situation. Those are. situations where you have to worry and. you have to wonder is the child being. influenced because of a divorce that's. ongoing. But this was just a a vacation, a summer vacation where the child's. spending a few weeks with dad, mom lives. in another state. This happens and the.

influence on the child was not to tell. as opposed to to make things up. And so. I think that the fact that the child I. think that also goes more to the fact. that the child understands his moral and. and legal obligation to tell the truth. because a child that has people and. parents and caregivers um in a in a. power position over him telling him not. to tell what happened and the fact that. he understands that he has a moral and. legal obligation to tell the truth I.

think also um affirms the judge's. findings that he does in fact understand. the ramifications that he does in fact. understand uh what was going on that he. he did speak in detail um and that it. was not influenced by the family. members. And just to be clear about. something, so this is all about. pre-trial. This is all about what could. come in potentially into evidence. She. is innocent uh until proven guilty. She. will have her opportunity to present a. defense. Right now, she's scheduled to. go on trial in Marian County, Florida in.

July. So, this is actually 2 years after. her stepson apparently first disclosed. this alleged abuse. If she's convicted. of a first-degree felony, she faces a. maximum of 30 years in prison. That's. our understanding. But look, again, this. all goes to the analysis that the judge. went through about how the jury may. ultimately hear this evidence. But she. will let have an opportunity or her. attorney will have an opportunity to. cross-examine the witnesses that are. presented against her, try to refute. this narrative. So, it is a very. distressing situation, but an ongoing. situation nonetheless. Judge Elizabeth.

Sher, thank you so much for taking the. time. It was great seeing you. Thank you. for having me, Jesse. It was nice to see. you. nice to chat with you and um I hope. you have a great day. 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 get your podcasts. I'm. Jesse Weber. I'll speak to you next. time. [Music].