Thompson arraigned on several abuse charges

Posted August 4, 2020 at 1:14 pm

Clifton Thompson 2020.psd

A man indicted by a Clinton County Grand Jury this past spring of multiple counts of first degree sexual abuse of a minor under 12 was arraigned during the July session of Clinton Circuit Court.

Clifton Thompson was arraigned on 15 charges of sexual abuse first degree, all felonies, and one count of voyeurism during the circuit court session before Judge David L. Williams on July 9.

Thompson was indicted on the charges by a Clinton County Grand Jury on April 17 of this year.

The alleged crimes were committed between the period of August 14, 2017 through February 9 of this year, according to court records. The sexual abuse charges are all Class C felonies, while the voyeurism charge is a Class A misdemeanor.

The indictment alleged the defendant, “committed first degree sexual abuse…by subjecting a vulnerable victim and a minor child under the age of 12 and incapable of consent, to sexual contact.”

Further, the voyeurism charge alleges Thompson “used or caused the use of any camera, videotape, photo-optical, photo-electronic, or other image recording device for the purpose of obtaining, viewing, photographing, filming, or videotaping the sexual conduct, genitals, an undergarment worn (by the victim) without being publicly visible, or female breast of a minor child.”

During the arraignment proceeding, Thompson, through his Public Advocacy attorney Brad Shuffett, entered a not guilty plea and a pretrial conference date of August 13 has been scheduled in the case.

Due to the COVID-19 pandemic and judicial limitations on court proceedings at this time, the court calendar for the month was briefer than usual with fewer cases being on the docket.

The following are cases on the docket in July that received some type of formal resolution and/or future court proceeding dates being scheduled.

* During a pretrial conference, a plea agreement was reached in the case of Commonwealth vs. Steven A. Swift.

The Commonwealth recommended dismissing the charge of resisting arrest. Upon a plea of guilty to the charge of possession of a controlled substance 1st degree, he would receive a one year sentence. Upon a plea of guilty to wanton endangerment 1st degree, a one year sentence. The two sentences would run concurrent for one year and consecutive to a separate Clinton County indictment.

The defendant shall forfeit a 22 caliber pistol and pay a fine and court cost.

Final sentencing is scheduled for August 13.

* During a pretrial conference, a plea agreement was reached in the case of Commonwealth vs. Tony Lowhorn.

The Commonwealth recommended dismissing the charge of persistent felony offender 1st degree (two counts) and amending the charge of theft by unlawful taking to receiving stolen property under one indictment.

Upon a plea of guilty to receiving stolen property, the defendant would receive a five year sentence. Upon another plea of guilty to receiving stolen property under a separate indictment, a five year sentence.

The two sentences would run concurrently for five years, probated for five years with supervision, and the defendant would pay $700 in restitution.

Final sentencing is scheduled for August 13.

* A trial date of December 15-16 has been scheduled for Joseph D. Evener, with a pretrial conference for September 10.

The defendant is charged with burglary 3rd degree, three counts of persistent felony offender 2nd degree, assault 1st degree, and burglary 1st degree.

* Sentencing was set for August 13 for Bobby Joe Amonett who was originally charged with theft by deception under $10,000 and persistent felony offender 2nd degree.

*During arraignment in the case of Commonwealth vs. Trenton Tucker, charged with persistent felony offender, fleeing or evading police and several traffic violations, the defendant did not appear and a warrant of arrest was issued.

Several other defendants were arraigned during the court session, each entering pleas of not guilty and having pretrial conference dates scheduled.

Other cases were continued for various reasons.

For the time being, in-person criminal court proceedings are limited and are being conducted via nontraditional methods due to the COVID-19 pandemic.