Kristopher Henriqson is a 47-year-old state and federal felon and Palm Coast resident facing accusations of having routinely raped and abused his stepdaughter since she was 9. His admissions to the sexual abuse are recorded. The prosecution has DNA from his sperm found on the girl’s chest. He has turned down a deal to serve 45 years. He faces 11 felonies, including two capital felonies, and life in prison if convicted.
This afternoon, Henriqson, still sporting a ponytail, told Circuit Judge Dawn Nichols he does not want Assistant Public Defender Spencer O’Neal to represent him, because he claims O’Neal isn’t asking the right questions or deposing the right people. He wants to represent himself.
Henriqson also wants to depose the alleged victim, now 12. He would presumably get to cross-examine her at trial, too.
It was a startling development in one of the most harrowing cases in recent years–at least as far as the allegations are concerned–potentially setting up an unprecedented situation in local court cases where the accused would directly confront his alleged victim. O’Neal in his defense of Henriqson so far has intimated that the child victim does not have clean hands, and is making up stories.
It will be up to the judge to decide whether and how a deposition would take place. When the defense sought to depose a child victim in a similar case a few years ago, the judge required the questions to be turned in writing, avoiding a direct confrontation. A judge has the option of ordering the deposition held in the courtroom, in the judge’s presence, among other means. It is not a given, and it is very unlikely that Henriqson would find himself across the table from his alleged victim, questioning her at will.
The lawyers are also startled, but say they’ll cross that bridge if and when they get to it. Henriqson is due for docket sounding in December. That’s the last step before trial, which would be scheduled either in January or February. Much can happen between now and then, and Henriqson at any point can reverse his decision, or hire a private attorney. He has agreed to have O’Neal remain as his “stand-by attorney,” enabling him to ask questions and seek guidance. But for now, Henriqson is representing himself.
Last October 30, Henriqson wrote O’Neal a five-page letter claiming the girl has fabricated the accusations, and that “medical evidence” alone would exonerate him. He wrote that while the girl claimed in her forensic Child Protection Interview with a trained therapist that Henriqson had penetrated her vaginally several times a week, a medical report shows no signs of trauma (her hymen is largely intact), though that’s not unusual in cases of child sexual abuse, as his attorney told him, and is not an exonerating factor.
He also claimed “there is no DNA evidence of consequence,” “no medical evidence” of penetration, and “Ample evidence that the accuser is more than just unreliable, but indeed is an excellent storyteller.”
In a previous hearing, at today’s hearing and in suggestions made in court filings. O’Neal’s defense has centered on the girl’s resentfulness toward her stepfather and her brother, her immaturity, and her making up accusations over the fact that while her brother had been gifted an ebike in late January, she’d been punished by being denied access to electronics after she’d allegedly snuck a boy into the house while her parents were on a date. Henriqson enforced the punishment, angering the girl, who subsequently made the allegations of sexual abuse to a teacher at school.
In court today Henriqson said his attorney had been “ineffective” for, among other reasons, not deposing the “expert witness that did the examination,” meaning the girl’s medical examination. O’Neal said he had the examiner’s report. “There’s nothing that you’re going to get from the examination outside of what it says on paper,” O’Neal said.
The judge granted his demand even though he conceded, in answer after answer to the judge’s questions, that he has never studied law, has no idea how to run a defense, doesn’t know the definition of basic terms that describe basic legal procedures or tenets, doesn’t know the elements of the crimes he’s charged with, and didn’t know the terms used to describe jury selection, or the grounds for excusing a juror for cause.
Nichols told him that as a judge she would neither be able to help him try the case nor advise him. “If you represent yourself, you always have the avenue of appeal,” Nichols told him. “The one thing that you lose is ever claiming that your lawyer was ineffective. So if you go to trial and you do a really bad job, you can’t come back and say, you know, I had a really bad person defending me: myself. You can’t use that now. If Mr. O’Neal is representing you and he makes a mistake, you have that argument to make.”
Of course, Henriqson is making that argument now.
“I must advise you that, in my opinion, you would be far better defended by a trained lawyer than you can be by yourself,” Nichols told him, apparently reading from standard notes for those circumstances. “I think it is unwise of you to try to represent yourself. I would strongly urge you not to represent yourself.”
Assistant State Attorney Melissa Clark, who is prosecuting the case, offered Henriqson a deal that would have him serve 45 years in prison, day for day. That is, without the possibility of early release. He turned it down. He was to make a counteroffer, but on Oct. 20, declined to do so. He still did not want to make a counteroffer today.
Leave a Reply