Fourth charge added in assault case

A 12-year-old boy testified for three hours Friday about the alleged sexual abuse inflicted upon him by his mother's ex-boyfriend.

At the end of the preliminary hearing, East Fork Justice Jim EnEarl found there was enough testimony for probable cause that the alleged crimes were committed by defendant Ronald J. Smith, 42.

Prosecutor Mark Jackson added a fourth felony to the criminal complaint. If convicted, Smith could be sentenced to life in prison.

He is charged with four counts of sexual assault against a child under 14 categorized as a class A felony, the most serious level.

Smith is to appear in District Court on Oct. 31. He is in Douglas County Jail on $500,000 cash bail.

EnEarl cleared the courtroom except for relatives of the alleged victim and defendant and the news media before the boy took the stand.

"This is very difficult testimony for this young man," EnEarl said. "It makes it that much more difficult with 30-40 people in the courtroom"

He opened the court at the conclusion of the boy's testimony.

A Family Support Council caseworker who works with sexual assault victims sat with the boy as he testified about the abuse that allegedly occurred from April until his mother discovered the suspect hiding in the child's bedroom Sept. 4.

The boy told investigators that he didn't report the alleged abuse because he was afraid of Smith who threatened that he and his 7-year-old sister would be taken away from their mother if he told.

Defense attorney Kevin Walsh argued the charges should be dropped because there was no evidence other than the boy's allegations.

He described the child's testimony as "canned."

"Every incident was identical and there were a lot of contradictions," Walsh said.

Jackson disagreed.

"Mr. Walsh kept trying to change the facts," he said. "But that boy sat on the stand, looked him back right in the eyes and let him know that, 'No. That was not correct.'"

In sending the case on to District Court, EnEarl said the boy was very credible.

"When the facts were misstated, this witness was capable of correcting you (Walsh) and telling you what was right," EnEarl said.

"There is ample probable cause to determine all these offenses occurred and the defendant committed them," he said.