Top evidence in sex crimes key to appeal's successful bid

It's been two years since Dennis Gould's victim testified about her memories of a hotel room and a Lucas County Common Pleas Court jury saw photos of her as an obviously drugged 7-year-old in sexually explicit poses.

This week, the girl's mother said their family was shocked to learn evidence that put Gould in prison for life was determined to be illegally obtained.

Described as a "friend of the family," Gould was found guilty Sept. 11, 2008, of two counts of rape, one count of gross sexual imposition, six counts of pandering sexually oriented matter involving a minor, and five counts of illegal use of a minor in nudity-oriented material.

He was sentenced in October, 2008, to two life sentences for rape and an additional 13 1/4 years and for child pornography.

"She remembers going to court for Dennis, she knew that Dennis was in prison for bad things, but she didn't exactly know everything," said the mother of the victim, who is now 15. "We decided it was in her best interest to let her know about what was going on and what happened, and to give her the family support she needed and counseling she needs."

Gould was convicted after a three-day trial of possessing images of child pornography on a hard drive his mother gave to police. Also found on the hard drive were photos of Gould engaging in sex acts with the victim.

The Sixth District Court of Appeals reversed Gould's conviction when it determined the hard drive was not "abandoned property" and the images had been illegally searched. This week, the prosecutor's office filed a notice of appeal with the Supreme Court of Ohio.

Filed this week was a motion asking that the appellate court's ruling be put on hold pending the appeal. If granted, the motion would mean Gould would stay in prison pending the outcome.

During his trial, his mother testified that she gave a hard drive to police in 2006 because she said she was concerned about its contents. His court-appointed attorney filed a motion to suppress, but the trial court ruled the hard drive was "abandoned property."

The appellate court disagreed. Attorney Deborah Rump said while the crimes involved are unpleasant, the issue is about the nature of the investigation. "There really is no such thing as a technicality," she said. "It really is something egregious that would get the Court of Appeals to overturn on a suppression hearing."