The Supreme Court has affirmed the convictions and sentence of a Nashville man who was accused of sexually abusing his two young daughters.
In 2007, Fred Chad Clark II’s daughters, ages four and six at the time, told their mother that their father had been touching them inappropriately. The mother immediately left the house with the children and contacted the children’s guidance counselor who notified the Metropolitan Nashville Police Department. The mother agreed to cooperate with the police by having a recorded conversation with Mr. Clark for the purpose of obtaining his confession.
During a recorded conversation in a shopping mall’s parking lot, Ms. Clark urged Mr. Clark to tell her the truth and stated that the family might be able to get back together if he admitted what he had done. Mr. Clark confessed that his enjoyment of adult pornography had induced him to engage in inappropriate sexual acts with his daughters. Recordings of these statements were played to the jury at trial over Mr. Clark’s objections. A jury in the Criminal Court for Davidson County convicted Mr. Clark of seven counts of rape of a child and two counts of aggravated sexual battery, and the trial court imposed an effective 34-year sentence.
On appeal, Mr. Clark challenged his convictions based on four arguments – that his statements to his wife were inadmissible, that his confessions were not corroborated, that evidence regarding his use of pornography was inadmissible, and that the jury instructions defining the crimes of rape of a child and aggravated sexual battery were improper. The Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed three of Mr. Clark’s rape convictions and his two aggravated sexual battery convictions and affirmed Mr. Clark’s 34-year sentence.
In a unanimous opinion, the Supreme Court denied relief on all four issues. First, the Court found that Mr. Clark’s recorded statements were admissible because he made them voluntarily to a person he believed was a confidante. Second, the Court decided that Mr. Clark’s confessions were adequately corroborated because his daughters had testified that he had touched them inappropriately. Third, the Court found that the jury instructions, while somewhat confusing, did not mislead the jury.
Finally, the Court decided that the trial court had erred by permitting the State to introduce the evidence regarding Mr. Clark’s use of pornography before Mr. Clark testified. The Court noted that “bad acts” evidence should be used in rebuttal after the defendant has testified. However, the Court also decided that this error did not affect the jury’s verdict because of the strength of the evidence of Mr. Clark’s guilt. Accordingly, the Court affirmed Mr. Clark’s convictions and sentence.
Read the State of Tennessee v. Fred Chad Clark II opinion, authored by Justice William C. Koch, Jr.