Kiwi Forums' Marvin's Account of the Trial

Ok, so, interesting trial today.

Huge wall of text coming. If you want the end result, just skip to the bottom of my post.

It's great news.

Unless you're Nick Bate.

This took place at the Lancaster County courthouse.

So, the floor that the courtroom it took place in didn't allow any photography. Like, so you can't catch a picture of someone coming out of the courtroom. You have to hang around the exits of the building, or maybe in the lobby, and catch a picture of them there. (Well, either way, they brought Nick in through a special door in the courtroom anyway, so, I don't know if I could've encountered him anyway.)

When I got into the courtroom, I talked to the detective a bit. She talked to whoever went to the earlier hearing so she was expecting me, I think.

I overhear that the prosecution is going to be having four people testifying, and the defense is going to have two people testifying. The prosecution also mentioned having a youtube video, but I didn't get the details on that.

Nick Bate gets marched in wearing a yellow jumpsuit and crocs. He's looking pretty skinny. Also I thought his hair looked kind of thinning on top. He had kind of a Charlie Manson look to him, y'know?

So, then the trial gets going. First AO testifies. First the judge asks if there's any opposition to her testifying because she's under 14. No one objects. Both the defense and the prosecution question AO about the detailed specifics of the allegations. Defense tries a bit harder, I think.

The defense seems to be trying to get AO to say that she didn't immediately report molestation to her father, but she just mentioned some weird behavior on Nick's part that her father just inflated. At some point, the defense asks very explicitly if AO was being coached.

Next the prosecution puts the cop on the stand. Nothing much of interest is said. Then they put a social worker (or someone in a similar position) on the stand. I think she just commented on physical evidence.

Also, by the way, during this whole thing, it seemed that Nick Bate was shaking. Kind of like sustained shivering. Later I figured it was because he was jiggling his leg, but, I don't know, it seemed to be pretty vigorous leg shaking. He was pretty nervous.

Next they put the detective on the stand. They entered some chat logs between Nick and Anna into evidence. I think you guys know which logs these were, the ones where he explicitly admitted to these crimes. They read the chat aloud in the courtroom, aboots included.

Next they put AO's mother on the stand. She defended Nick in really bizarre ways. She said that her husband had never liked Nick from the beginning. She said that he was kicked out of the house in sixth grade. She made a few statements about how after he was kicked out, he was never in the house. Oh, except for Christmas. But he was never, ever alone with AO.

Under questioning, she admitted that she worked, AO was home alone sometimes, Nick was within walking distance during those times, and easily could've been over at the house.

Then the prosecutor mentioned that she might have a video of Nick and AO at a birthday pool party that would've been around the time that these crimes were committed. This didn't really phase AO's mother.

After all this, the prosecutor asked AO's mother "if someone said AO was alone with Nick at one point, would they be lying?" ... "Yes."

Without batting an eye.

Then the defense just went and rehashed all of AO's mother's claims with her. "Was Nick ever left alone with AO?" "No." etc

The prosecutor asks "do you love your son?" "Yes." The defense asks "do you love your daughter?" "Yes." Fair enough.

Next Nick himself is on the stand.

He speaks more coherently than I expected. He claims he made up the molestation story in the chatlog. He says that all the "Nick: ..." parts are legitimately his writing, but that some of the Anna parts were omitted. He also brings up internet harassment and claims he was hacked and that's how the log was leaked.

His excuse about the molestation story is that Anna was telling him about a sex encounter she had. He didn't want to be left out, so he says he made up his own sex story. But no one would believe he banged an adult, so... the logical option is... child molestation.

After that, Nick admitted to be a pedophile in court, as well as a coprophile. Contradicting what his mother said, Nick said he visited AO for Christmas, Thanksgiving and birthday parties.

Part of an earlier claim was that before one of the incidents, AO and Nick were in AO's bedroom and they had just finishing playing wii or a board game or something. Nick's mother claimed that they never had the wii in AO's room, it was always on the downstairs TV. Nick also contradicted that.

One question literally asked of Sick Nick was "do you enjoy butts or feces, Mr Stoutzenberger?". Yes, of course. Nick's lawyer is pretty much setting up the "but I really like poop!" defense to show that the chatlog was fake.

Closing arguments:

The defense basically argued that lots of people are giving varying stories about the same events. AO can't keep her story straight. Also AO's father really hated Nick, so he was trying to manipulate AO into getting him arrested for pedophilia. Also Nick lives in cyberspace, so he's just indulging in his weird edgelord fantasies online. At one point, the words were pretty similar to, "Why would he say he wouldn't lick a shitty butthole? As we know, he's a coprophile. He'd love it!" I don't think they were exactly that, but that sounds pretty close. It at least shares a few phrases in common.

The defense was literally using the "if he likes shit, you must acquit" defense.

The prosecution said that AO's stories weren't inconsistent. She remembered the important details. She obviously didn't remember the miscellaneous details, like what clothing he wearing or what they were doing beforehand. Also the Anna chat matches what AO claimed very closely. AO's mother's testimony is worthless. And very importantly: It's not like Nick is denying that he'd want to molest a child. He's just saying he didn't do it this time.

Verdict

Invol. Deviate Sexual Intercourse W/Child

Guilty!

Indecent Assault Person Less than 13 Years of Age

Guilty!

Indecent Assault Person Less than 13 Years of Age

Guilty!

The docket lists four charges and I only remember hearing three charges announced. So I don't know if I missed something or what.

(Also, these notes are my written notes, distilled into a text file, then distilled further into this post, in a hurried manner on the train before I have to switch trains in Philly in ten minutes. I can clean stuff up later.)

Ed Note: Here's a link to the post: https://kiwifar.ms/threads/nick-bate-3-judgement-day.16562/page-17