The Charge, the Evidence, and the Decision I Faced

---

This page exists to explain a reality that many people never expect to encounter: how someone can be charged with a serious felony despite evidence contradicting the allegation, and how decisions are made when the risks involve children, prison, and permanent loss of parental rights.

This is not a justification.
It is an explanation.

I was accused by my former spouse of biting our 1.5-month-old son on the shoulder.

Based on that allegation alone, I was charged with Class 3 Felony Child Abuse.

This charge carried immediate and severe consequences before any evidence was fully reviewed.

Independent medical evaluation later determined that the mark in question was not a bite mark.

Despite this finding, the felony charge remained active for an extended period.

At that point, the legal process was no longer about whether the injury was a bite. It was about risk.

Once formally charged, I faced a decision that many defendants—especially parents—are forced to make.

While the evidence strongly supported my innocence, trial outcomes are never guaranteed, particularly in cases involving alleged harm to a child.

Cases involving alleged child abuse are among the most emotionally charged a jury can hear. Even when medical and professional evidence contradicts the allegation, emotional reactions can outweigh facts.

My daughter was 4.5 years old.

She could have been called to the stand and questioned about events that occurred when she was much younger. Over the course of more than a year, a child can be influenced, confused, or unintentionally coached—especially in high-conflict situations.

The risk of placing a young child in that position was profound.

If convicted at trial, the consequences would have included:

• 6 months to 7 years in prison
   
• Up to 8 years of probation
   
• Placement on the violent offender's registry for 10 years
   
• Loss of custody and parenting rights to my children
   

These outcomes were possible even though the medical evidence did not support the allegation.

The alternative offered was a plea to an unrelated charge:

• Domestic Battery (provoking manner)
   
• Touching of my 1.5-month-old son’s face
   
• 2 years probation
   
• No admission to biting or serious injury
   
• Guaranteed shared custody and expanded parenting time
   

This plea did not reflect the original allegation and did not align with the medical findings, but it removed the risk of incarceration and ensured my continued, active role in my children’s lives.

The decision I made:
I chose the plea option to eliminate the risk of incarceration, protect my children from further harm, and guarantee shared custody and expanded parenting time. 

Plea decisions are often misunderstood.

Accepting a plea is not always an admission of guilt. In many cases—especially those involving children—it is a decision made under extreme pressure to avoid irreversible harm.

This decision ensured:

• My children would not lose their father
   
• My daughter would not be placed on the witness stand
   
• A wrongful felony conviction would not permanently define my life
   
• Shared custody and expanded parenting time were preserved
   

This experience is not unique.

Across the country, parents face similar choices when allegations move faster than evidence. Even when facts contradict the charge, the risk of trial can be so severe that accepting a plea becomes the only way to protect children from further harm.

When accusations carry life-altering penalties, the decision is often not about guilt or innocence—but about risk, children, and survival.
 

This page exists to explain that reality clearly, honestly, and without distortion.

Facts Over Rumors exists because evidence should matter before lives are upended—not after.