Respondent's Brief - Washington State Courts

mention of the rape-shield statute is simply not relevant to appellate
review of its decision.
Although the defendant argues that the disputed evidence "bore
directly upon the credibility to C.D.' s allegations and McCutcheon's bias,"
Brief of Appellant, p, 27, the record demonstrates otherwise. Indeed,
evidence of McCutcheon's drug use or addiction, her employment, and the
CPS investigation, has nothing to do with C.D.' s credibility, and the
defendant has failed to show otherwise.
While the defendant argues that the evidence of "McCutcheon's
drug addiction, the finding that she was negligent in parenting C.D., and
her 15-month involvement with CPS" gave McCutcheon an incentive to
offer testimony favorable to the State's case," Brief of Appellant, p. 25-
26, he does not explain why this is true. In fact, the opposite conclusion
seems warranted. Assuming that CPS had found McCutcheon negligent in
parenting C.D., it would seem that McCutcheon would have an incentive
to provide testimony favorable to the defendant. Indeed, if the defendant
had been acquitted, then McCutcheon could demonstrate to CPS that C.D.
had not been exposed to child molestation while in her care. This would
undercut any finding of negligence on her part and vindicate McCutcheon.
Although the defendant cites the fact that McCutcheon told C.D. that she
was going to "take Dennis to jail" as evidence of McCutcheon's bias,
30 - optest-pros m iscsp trial-m cdan iel. doc