The jury instructions seem critical in the jury's deliberation of sex crime charges against cult leader Tony Alamo, charged with multiple sexual encounters with children. Was sex the dominant reason he took the minors across a state line, as the law requires for conviction? (The definition of dominant is critical. Was there any reason other than sex that he had his child "wives" along for his journeys?)
A second day of deliberations begins today. The lengthy deliberations, after essentially uncontested testimony about sexual activities with minors, has to give some hope to the defense.
If Alamo is acquitted, the question arises anew about state prosecutions. A child can't give consent to sex. If I read this correctly, the statute of limitation would still allow prosecution for sexual assaults testified about in this case. The local prosecutor says he has no open investigation against Alamo or parents of children provided to him for sex. Why not?