|
'Did
Daddy Do It?'
With Michael Kirk
Producer/Director, "Frontline"
Friday, April 26, 2002; 11 a.m.
EDT
In 1984, Frank Fuster was living in the Miami suburbs with
a new wife and his 5-year-old son. Then the couple was charged
with sexually abusing more than 20 children who attended their
unlicensed home day-care center. Fuster, who had prior
convictions for manslaughter and child molestation, was
branded a "monster" by parents and the local media, and was
convicted and sentenced to 165 years in prison.
The case established a successful method for prosecuting
similar day-care abuse cases nationwide, and it boosted the
political fortunes of a state attorney named Janet Reno. But
was Fuster guilty of the sexual abuse charges for which he was
convicted? Or was he the victim of a tainted investigation?
FRONTLINE's "Did Daddy Do It?" airing Thursday,
April 25, at 9 p.m. EDT on PBS (check local listings),
reveals new evidence that questions the seemingly ironclad
case against him. It also includes new allegations by Fuster's
former wife that Reno personally participated in a campaign to
break her down psychologically in order to force her to
testify falsely against her husband.
Award-winning producer and documentary filmmaker Michael
Kirk will be online to talk about the case and his film on
Friday, April 26, at 11 a.m. EDT. Submit
your questions and comments before or during the
discussion.
Kirk, a former Nieman Fellow in Journalism at Harvard, was
Frontline’s senior producer from 1983 to 1987, and has
produced more than 100 national television programs. He was
online in February to discuss "American
Porn," in November to discuss "Gunning
for Saddam," and in October to talk about "Target
America." Other films include "The Clinton Years," a
week-long co-production with ABC News on the presidency of
Bill Clinton that aired in January 2001; "The Choice 2000,"
comparing the lives, beliefs and experiences of Vice President
Gore and then-Gov. George W. Bush; "The Killer at Thurston
High," the first comprehensive TV profile of high school
shooter Kip Kinkel; and "The Navy Blues," a 1996 Emmy
Award-winning look at the post-Tailhook Navy.
Editor's Note: Washingtonpost.com moderators retain
editorial control over Live Online discussions and choose the
most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts
can decline to answer questions.
Hutchinson, Kan.: I am very disgusted and appalled
after watching your program which aired on April 25, 2002. I
think that an investigation needs to be filed into the visits
made by Janet Reno to Ileana Flores. Would these not be on
camera? I feel that all of the testimonies against Mr. Fuster
were coerced by Reno and her associates to help her public
appearance and standing. She should be investigated deeply to
find out what she gained by this trial and the outcome.
Since the other cases were re-opened due to the way the
children were intereviewd, why wasn't this? What keeps this
from happening to any of us? I think that the punishment fits
the crime, but I don't agree with the way that he was
prosecuted. In a way, I believe he was framed just to prove a
point. This is very scary!
It makes me sick to think that a possible innocent man has
been incarcarated for so long.
Michael Kirk: It's unfortunate that former attorney
general Reno would not talk at length with "Frontline,"
because we would have asked her all the questions you're
asking. My personal sense is that many people, most people, on
the prosecution and media sides of this story had the best
interests of children at heart in the beginning, and that was
their primary motivation. But I worry that when the panic set
in as a result in some measure of their actions, that cooler
heads didn't prevail. And that's really what the film is about
-- was justice done?
Providence, R.I.: During the "Frontline" show last
night, you show a clip of Ileana Fuster getting yelled at by
Frank during her testimony. It appears to me that Frank's
reaction is quite violent, don't you think?
Michael Kirk: Frank's life story is one of
occasional bursts of anger and at least once, violence (he was
convicted of involuntary manslaughter in a road rage
incident). Which is not to say any of us might not have wanted
to jump out of our chairs and yell at a moment like that. But
it is true that in front of a jury, that was definitely not
the right move, and may have belied a truly violent and
fearsome nature.
Somewhere, USA: You didn't do TRUE victims of child
sexual abuse any favor tonight with your tainted presentation
of the suffering of a convicted child molester and his
ex-wife.
Why don't you follow this up with a "Frontline" about the
suffering that adult child sexual abuse survivors had to go
through? Or maybe that's not sensational enough for you? Or
you won't get as high a rating? Shame, shame on you.
Michael Kirk: In the film we made, I feel great
sympathy for the 20 children who may or may not have been
abused sexually. Part of my sense of sympathy grows out of the
treatment they were subjected to by the process -- the
prosecutors, the psychologists, the media should ask
themselves whether they added to or inflicted other kinds of
abuse on these children.
Colleen, Va.: It appears that the "Miami method" of
interviewing young children in crime investigations is flawed
due, in part, to the desire of such children to tell adults
what they want to hear. Obviously, though, children who are
victims of molestation need to be able to tell their story.
Are there other techniques that will acquire accurate
testimony?
Michael Kirk: The answer is absolutely yes. Methods
have been specially developed in the last decade for asking
open-ended and non-invasive questions designed to truly elicit
information. It isn't easy, but psychologists tell me they're
getting better at it, partly because they've learned what not
to do from cases like the ones we showed last night.
WGHB Viewer: Why did "Frontline" rely on the defense
lawyer's assertion about the STD test being uneliable, when
there is documented evidence that his claim is wrong?
Shouldn't Frontline have found that evidence?
(It's
now online for everyone to read.)
Michael Kirk: Without question, in my mind, as a
journalist with a variety of resources available to me, the
STD tests performed in the Snowden case and the Fuster case
were problematic. There's no doubt that there are other
well-intentioned people who want to believe Frank Fuster
committed these crimes, who could read this evidence in
another way, especially if it confirmed opinions long held and
well formed. Obviously, the experts we spoke with (including
the CDC) are not confident the tests used were reliable.
Fair Haven, Vt.: Why wasn't a lie detector test
given to either one of them, or given to them now?
Michael Kirk: Ileana took polygraphs. The results
were inconclusive and inadmissible.
Providence, R.I.: Michael,
Does Ileana's bias, track record of changing her story, and
admitted self-interest question the validity of her "new
statement" to you at all?
Michael Kirk: The question to me is not whether
Ileana is a liar. Ileana is a liar. The only question is when.
When she pled guilty, or now?
Red Hook, N.Y.: It appears to me that Noel Fuster
did not deny his father abused him. He never really denied it
from what I saw last night. Where is his adamant denial?
Michael Kirk: Yes he did. I disagree. He strongly
denied it in all kinds of ways, including over many six-hour
sessions with Joseph and Laura Braga as a 6-year-old child.
The most he ever admitted, which we showed being extracted
from him, is that maybe when he was asleep, his father had put
his penis in Noel's mouth. And now, ever since then, including
when he left the building, and talking to his mother, he has
denied the allegation.
Camden, N.J.: How was Fuster able to wed a
15-year-old girl, and why wasn't he charged with statutory
rape?
Michael Kirk: Well, she never charged him. And he
contends that he believed that she was 22, and that it was not
until he went to get the marriage license with Ileana, that
she arrived with her mother, and the mother said that she
would have to sign, that Ileana was underage, that Frank knew
that his two-month courtship with Ileana was a relationship
with a 15-year-old.
Cambridge, Mass: My comments? How can you claim any
semblance of investigative journalism when you repeat Frank
Fuster's ridiculous claim that his homocide conviction stemmed
from an "accident." Public records in New York show that he
was charged with TWO felonies, including depraved indifference
to life! Did Frontline look at those records? Did they know
that he was indicted for murder. An accident?! And shot
that man with a rifle -- twice. And then he menaced the
witness.
Shame on "Frontline."
Michael Kirk: Yes, obviously we read the charges
against Frank Fuster. I've been a reporter and a producer for
30 years, and know that documents and charges and charge
sheets and everything else are often more one-sided when used
by police and prosecutors to file charges than they turn out
to be when adjudicating the case. The question is not whether
Frank Fuster committed this crime in New York or not. Its
relevance to child molestation escapes me. Frank Fuster was
charged with molesting 20 children in his house. The relevance
of the involuntary manslaughter conviction, for the purposes
of this story, is only to indicate why the panic spread about
Fuster in the media, among the parents and the prosecutors.
The evidence of his past crimes would never have been admitted
in a court of law trying the molestation cases. And that's
really what our program is about: Was justice done? Were Frank
Fuster's civil liberties diminished as a result of an
overzealous prosecution and community hysteria?
Augusta, Ga.: Mr. Kirk, I must say that I am
appalled at American justice.
Why is it that all the "white" folks were released but the
Cuban wasn't? As a veteran of 22 years I bow my head in shame.
Michael Kirk: It is true that inordinate numbers, in
relative terms, of people convicted of crimes are people of
color, or whatever the politically correct term is now. And
there are well-documented factors associated with race,
including lack of appropriate counsel, bias on juries, rush to
judgment by police and authorities, racial profiling in the
first instance, that contribute to this. Those factors in
Miami, I think, were less relevant to Frank Fuster, a
Cuban-American, than they might have been in other places. And
I think the vast majority of people charged with
multiple-victim sexual abuse in the vast majority of cases
around the country, were white people.
Albuquerque, N.M.: Over the years there has been a
public outcry over prosecutor's tactics to coerce defendant
into false testimonies. In my opinion, the Fuster case has
taken this tactics to the limit. I was sickened when I saw how
these children were been interviewed. Has there been any civil
suit against the prosecutors of this case? Can't we consider
the prosecutor's tactics as child abuse?
Michael Kirk: Many people who have seen the program
have reacted in a similar way to what happened to those
children. There does seem to be no doubt that they were
abused. The question that remains is by whom? By Frank Fuster
or the prosecutors and psychologists? No civil lawsuits have
been filed to date by those children.
Civil suits were
filed, however, by the parents of those children by the major
American corporation that owned the Country Walk housing
development. That corporation settled with each family over
each incident in the aftermath Fuster's conviction. The amount
of money paid to these families was at least $1 million per
child. The corporation was the Disney.
Novato, Calif.: If Ileana Fuster cannot be believed,
if we can't know which of her stories is the true one, and if
it was her testimony that clinched the prosecutor's case in
Superior Court, how can any appellate court, in any state not
agree to re-open Frank Fuster's case? My heart is heavy
knowing that he remains in prison.
Thank you for this expose. If nothing else happens, it
should ensure that Janet Reno is denied the Democratic
candidacy for governor of Florida.
Michael Kirk: Thank you.
Those are the very
issues that we tried to raise with the program. The fact is,
as recently as I think three weeks ago, a magistrate in
Florida denied another Frank Fuster appeal.
Toronto, Canada: What are the actual qualifications
of the states' justice system? Should there be an
authoritative panel, of highly educated forensic investigators
available to help in these situations?
Rather than relying on the budget of the defense, the
defense could use this panel to explain to the jury, interpret
to the state, and the defense just what is and has happened.
Something better than justice is needed for the people
caught in these situations!
Michael Kirk: Well, the theory is that in a
democratic society, where the rule of law and the system of
justice presumes innocence, that the burden would be on the
state to prove guilt. And they would have to provide, beyond a
reasonable doubt, expert testimony. And that system has been
the cornerstone of American liberty. The question is whether
in cases like Fuster, and others that Frontline has reported
over the years, the system is flawed and needs to be
reconsidered.
Alexandria, Va.: Did you get to talk to any of the
jury members? I'd be interested to know how much they were
influenced by Fuster's outburst during the trial. It certainly
didn't help to mollify his image as a "monster."
Saint Janet's remarks were certainly amusing. If the young
woman's (sorry, forgot her name) recollections are so
untrustworthy, then why should we believe she told the truth
during her testimony.
Michael Kirk: Clearly, the outburst in court did not
help Frank Fuster's case.
And as to whether we should
believe Ileana during the trial, that's the heart of the
matter. As the adult eyewitness, her testimony, more than any
other element of the "Miami Method," probably convicted Frank
Fuster.
Former Frontline Fan: Why didn't you air any of the
interviews you did with members of the CDC about the gonorrhea
test? You said you spoke with them but the only information in
the program about the unreliability of the test was from a
defense attorney.
The Gonorrhea test seems to me to be the most damning
evidence in the case and your program glossed over it,
mentioning it only once. Why?
Michael Kirk: An appeals court, the 11th Circuit
Court of Appeals in Atlanta, had found in the Grant Snowden
appeal that the gonorrhea test in that case, taken at the same
lab, performed by the same doctor, was unreliable. Noel
Fuster's gonorrhea sample is subject to the same criticism,
and the CDC and others have on the record, in the literature,
testified to that fact, in addition to talking to Frontline.
Because the appeals court released Snowden based on the faulty
gonorrhea evidence and the way the testimony was elicited from
the children, we spent less time on those issues than what
seemed to be the most important single moment in Fuster's
case, which was his former wife Ileana's testimony against
him.
Fremont, Calif.: I feel that Janet Reno is
responsible for destroying many lives, including but not
limited to the innocent people who were killed (murdered) in
Waco and Ruby Ridge and now Mr. Snowden, Mr. Fuster and
Ileana. Can Reno be held financially or criminally liable for
her actions and their losses?
Michael Kirk: The answer is I don't know if Janet
Reno can be held civilly responsible for her actions as a
public official performing her duties. She can certainly be
held responsible by the voters of Florida in the upcoming
Democratic primary race for governor.
Arlington, Va.: Great work
I assume that exposes on the wrongfully convicted are a
core element of any investigative filmmaker's reportoire, so I
wonder why you think prosecutors are so reluctant to admit
that they made a mistake. Is it ego (I assume it requires a
healthy ego to be a successful prosecutor)? Are they just be
protective of the system -- i.e., turning the old maxim of
"its better for a guilty man to go free than for one innocent
man to be imprisoned" on its head? On the latter point, in
your experience, are you aware of any cases were a prosecutor
admitted his error in a flawed conviction, and the result was
a flood of frivolous appeals?
Michael Kirk: I don't know about a flood of
frivolous appeals, but I do know the rare occurrence of a
prosecutor admitting a flawed prosecution occurred just this
week in Brooklyn, when Barry Scheck and the Innocence Project
brought DNA evidence forward, which exculpated a young man in
prison. And the prosecutor immediately, without even requiring
the necessary filings from Scheck, released the young man,
saying (at the least the way the New York Times reported it),
that no person should spend one unnecessary minute in jail if
evidence exists that they didn't commit the crime.
Colchester, Vt.: I am so glad that "Frontline" has
finally thrown light on the Fuster/Country Walk case. I wrote
about the case in my book, "Victims of Memory," along with
many other cases of false allegations of sexual abuse based on
"recovered memories" and suggestive interviewing of young
children. Could you comment on other cases where innocent
people remain in prison? For instance, Gerald Amirault and
Bernard Baran in Massachusetts. Also, could you comment on how
prosecutors such as Janet Reno and Scott Harshbarger built
their illustrious careers on the bodies of such innocent
people?
It is unfortunate but understandable that the "Frontline"
show didn't go into detail about Frank Fuster's first
molestation conviction. I interviewed him about it and
included a long footnote on it in "Victims of Memory." I don't
think he was guilty of that, either. Did you ask him about it
and then just not have room for it in the program? --Mark
Pendergrast
Michael Kirk: It's certainly true that these cases
helped build Janet Reno's reputation, or at least bring her to
the attention of Bill and Hillary Clinton (it augmented her
well-known interest in child issues). Scott Harshbarger, who
prosecuted the Amiraults in Massachusetts, is now head of
Common Cause and continues to believe in the guilt of Gerald
Amirault, and presumably other members of the Amirault family.
We didn't explore, inside the body of the television
program, the facts surrounding the molestation charge for
which Frank was convicted, for the same reasons we didn't
spend much time on the involuntary manslaughter charge. Which
is, while they are inflammatory and no doubt contributory to
the community feeling about Fuster and the media's impulse to
consider him a monster, it doesn't really have standing in the
factual question of whether he sexually assaulted these
children at Country Walk.
Washington, D.C.: What happened to the children who
were interviewed for the trial? Could it be poetic justice
that he is now being punished becuase he got away with child
molestation before? I think Mr. Fuster was a likely suspect
and subsequently asccused because to me, he seems to show a
propensity for child molestation. There is something
disturbing about a 34-year-old man who marries a 15-year-old
girl. Overall, I think he is not guilty of what he was charged
with in Florida, based upon Frontline's invstigation.
Injustice for one person amounts to injustice for all.
Michael Kirk: Marrying a 15-year-old with her
mother's consent is not against the law. There were no charges
for statutory rape. And they are in no way relevant to the
molestation case. However, Fuster himself admitted during his
interview with Frontline that he had not led a perfect life.
But his allegation is, he should not be serving 165 years for
those imperfections.
New York, N.Y.: I don't know if you are aware of
this, but the guilty plea that Iliana offered in court prior
to testifying against Fuster would not have been accepted in
any court in any state at any time other than in that
courtroom in Florida at that time. In all my years of
practicing law, I have never heard anything like that. A plea
is supposed to be unequivocal and often it is required that
the person taking the plea provide details of the crime. I'd
think that weighs in favor of Iliana's statements thta the
abuse did not happen and her seeming catatinic state weighs in
favor of the methods used on her to make her provide that
testimony, don't you think?
Michael Kirk: Well, we included that piece of
videotape because it certainly raises the very questions you
highlight. It is in that respect very different than reading a
transcript or a magazine or newspaper article about this case.
Television can show the halting manner of a defendant like
Ileana at that moment, helping viewers to form conclusions
about what they really believe happened in this case.
Burton, Mich.: Where is Robert Rosenthal from? And
does he have an e-mail address or phone number where his
office can be contacted?
Michael Kirk: He is from New York City.
Reality, USA: Hey Michael,
I don't believe that
you and the other Frontline investigators actually
investigated anything in this case beyond asking defense
attorneys and people sympathetic to Fuster. Moreover, the
interview with Janet Reno was clearly hacked apart by video
editing. What did you actually ask her, and why did you feel
the need to overdub the interview later?
Michael Kirk: Thank you for your skepticism. It is
also in my nature to be skeptical of things I'm told. Which is
why I do what I do for a living, and investigated the
government's role in prosecuting Frank Fuster, Grant Snowden
and Bobby Fijnje. I take exception to your allegation that we
didn't investigate this case. Members of our team have worked
on this story, on and off, for four years. As to our handling
of the Janet Reno interview, there was no overdubbing
involved. Anything that was edited out was the usual
equivocation from a public official reluctant to talk about
their performance in office.
Boston, Mass.: So Mr. Kirk, what's the answer to
your own question -- Do you think justice was done?
Michael Kirk: Clearly, we would not have made this
film if we didn't think a question marked belonged at the end
of the sentence. There are serious questions about what
happened in Miami during these years that need to be discussed
in the cool, calm light of day. If our broadcast can help
achieve a dispassionate airing of the way evidence was
gathered and a conviction achieved, whichever way the question
is ultimately answered, then "Frontline" has done its job.
Automatically
Update Page | Get New
Responses | Submit
Question
© Copyright 2002 The Washington Post Company
| 
