## Facts

- Thomas Adair sexually abused his granddaughter, G.T., repeatedly from about ages five to nine, including one instance of penetrative rape.
- Adair told G.T. the sexual encounters were their secret.
- G.T. told her brother about the abuse at one point, but he did not believe her.
- When G.T. was nine, she told Adair she would tell her grandmother, Paula, if he touched her again; the abuse stopped after that.
- About two years later, G.T. told her mother, Shelli Miller, that Adair had sexually abused and raped her; Miller contacted law enforcement.
- During the investigation, G.T. completed a forensic interview with Mindy Graber, describing the abuse and rape allegation and identifying body parts on a diagram.
- G.T. was also examined by Kassy Havel, a sexual-assault nurse examiner, and repeated her description of the abuse and rape.
- The State charged Adair with aggravated sexual assault of a child.
- During jury selection, the prosecutor showed potential jurors a photograph of Ted Bundy to illustrate the point that appearances can be deceiving.
- At trial, the State called Dr. William Carter, a child psychologist, and asked hypotheticals closely resembling G.T.’s allegations; Dr. Carter testified about common patterns in child sexual abuse, including that abuse is often by relatives and that delayed disclosure is common.

## Issues

1. Whether the trial court erred by admitting Dr. Carter’s testimony because it effectively vouched for G.T.’s truthfulness or improperly bolstered her credibility through case-mirroring hypotheticals.
2. Whether the prosecutor’s use of a Ted Bundy photograph during voir dire was improper and so prejudicial that it required reversal.

## Decision

- The court of appeals affirmed the judgment of conviction.
- The court held that Dr. Carter’s testimony was admissible as general testimony about child-sexual-abuse dynamics and did not amount to an improper opinion that G.T. was telling the truth.
- The court rejected Adair’s complaint about the Ted Bundy photograph used in voir dire, concluding it did not warrant reversal on the record presented.

## Legal Principles

- Trial courts have discretion to admit or exclude evidence; appellate review of evidentiary rulings is for abuse of discretion.
- In child sexual abuse cases, an expert witness may testify about general behavioral characteristics of child victims (such as delayed reporting, secrecy, and abuse by family members) to assist the jury.
- An expert generally may not directly opine that a particular complainant is truthful or that the abuse occurred as alleged; courts distinguish between background testimony and direct credibility opinions.
- Hypothetical questions to an expert are permitted when they address matters within the field and are tethered to evidence, but they cannot be used as a substitute for telling the jury that the complainant should be believed.
- Voir dire allows counsel to test juror attitudes and explain general concepts, but arguments or displays designed mainly to inflame the jury or equate the accused with notorious criminals risk being improper; reversal depends on preservation, context, and harm.

## Conclusion

Adair’s conviction for aggravated sexual assault of a child was affirmed because the appellate court concluded the State’s child-abuse expert provided permissible general testimony about child sexual abuse dynamics rather than a direct credibility opinion about G.T., and the prosecutor’s use of a Ted Bundy photograph during voir dire did not require a new trial.


Adair v. State of Texas, 2013 WL 6665033 (2013)