As some of you may recall, about a year ago, a man named Huff was arrested in a neighborhood not too far from here. He was charged with the home invasion and attempted abduction of a young woman.
The story that was alleged is pretty creepy even by the low standards of sex offenses. Huff allegedly coaxed the victim out of her house under the pretense of asking her about a dog he had found. Once she stepped out he hit her in the head and dragged her back in. He then proceeded tied her up. But not before allegedly getting her to pick out items of her underwear and get some high heels for God only knows what reason.
As he was taking her and her wardrobe back to her car she resisted. She screamed. A neighbor who was taking a walk confronted Huff who allegedly told the neighbor that he was doing an intervention on the girl. When the neighbor expressed misgivings, probably because the Bridgeway typically does not bind the folks it does interventions with, Huff allegedly dropped the girl and hit the trail.
A couple of days after that, the cops raided Huff's house where he was having a quiet evening at home with his wife and popped him. They also did a search of the premises which unearthed the practical tools of the do-it-yourself home pervert. Ropes, knives, box cutters, twist ties, sterile gloves, a camera and a bandana. You know, stuff that was on the prop table on the set of "Silence of the Lambs." These items of evidence were the subject of the suppression hearing that was held earlier in the week.
The defense attempted to establish that the search was the product of an impermissable search. The witness claimed that she was never served with a search warrant. The witness? Why, Mrs. Huff, of course.
Now I will be the first to tell you that I am not the best expert on the dynamics of relationships. I have been cashiered by women for no reason other than they didn't like the look on my face at a particular given moment. And yet I know a woman who stayed with her husband after he pleaded guilty to public servant bribery and lost his license to practice law. None of the women I know would put up with me if I had screwed up so royally. Indeed, I have been jettisoned on flimsier evidence of misconduct.
But I can't imagine testifying on your husband's behalf when he is charged with being a major league sex offender. I also imagine that the prosecutors didn't initially see that one coming either. And it's not like she could provide an alibi or other exculpatory evidence. She testified that she didn't get served with a warrant. She said that in order to keep her husband's toys that he kept in the house they shared out of evidence.
Well, it didn't work. As is the case in 90% of suppression hearings, the search was upheld. The toys will come in at Huff's trial at the end of the month.
Sex offenders are different from you and I. We might be capable of larceny. But some people got way out there itches that they got to scratch. Special people get charged with attempting to abduct a young girl.
And I guess it takes a special person to testify in in his behalf.