’WPC2 ģĖ9ä]²§!:FJĮj·ĖŠ“rØų¼”5g Ģ„š+Æ“zé“šėāgāq®°2Ģȍø‘<3ęõ÷xū§×6ŽÓ| ‘‡”æ“]žōć cė8BNk1¬nSC°~j-@žø“»Rjė–c$6°mNŹI‹ŠXĀLžOf?±ŹŠR/”œX„Ą"žŪYĢāŖj¾ß6†bń§{ĪeŒŁmöąM¶hŻź&J(Ķ¦V²ūƒŻTŠõūGą®Kėś”l<č€Ū;’¶0`ā” Ėž¶„?M]&(‘ō6‹K¦Ņ#Ų¢‰qŃ „ōf+œXŲÄīÄl`}&Ža¶Ċ&q„YņKjÉ>‰dśɁI8Ųt-ÖŅL±•Æ¾ˆ#]’ų›‡ą”#œŪįC9Ń |†N“žßąĶÆĀ«}äZ1 6·]żčUE6¼’ģķā^E62zz.čģ(Š—æK`žßcƒŚb %\^ b 0ˆnU NöwD4H\ zkŅå· m¹ #ĮŠ ‘ ʧ Ęm Ę3 Ęł æNÕÕÕE××××××××UNŁŁŁŁŁŁŁŁŁŁŁŁŁŁŁŁb'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' 0ė//// B 0¤7 D3Ū D- 0K;; AS†ĘŁ 0¤Ÿ 0DC A«‡»Ąœ9-s (`£Ŗ$””Ń€.ŃŃ8€½­»»d»»d8ŃŃ ż ŃÓ  Ó(ķ€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular3j1,¢Ų+003|x ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wptU’U‹’ĄĄĄ˜HP LaserJet 4050ČČČČČČČČ0 Ń H сLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5 Ń ° Ń (@ųŠ Z ‹6Times New Roman Regular- ł-(|G2üż$¤¤Ż ƒ£Ŗ!ŻŃ€.ŃŃ8€­»»dd8ŃŃ ż ŃÓ  ÓŻ  Żą  ąņņŚ  Ś0Ś  ŚóóŌ€ō“…ņ»»Ō d(|3?q$££Ż ƒ£Ŗ!ŻŃ€.ŃŃ8€­»»dd8ŃŃ ż ŃÓ  ÓŻ  ŻVVVV'’’dxd)!ČČČČdxdx( ±ž$’’ņ ņFigure€Ś  Ś1Ś  Śó ó^_X`YEž’<<C’’ƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3?q$¢¢Ż ƒ£Ŗ!ŻŃ€.ŃŃ8€­»»dd8ŃŃ ż ŃÓ  ÓŻ  Ż($$””ņ ņŚ  Ś1Ś  Śó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8’’’’’’’’’’C’’ HKKKKŻ ƒ£Ŗ!ŻŃ€.ŃŃ8€­»»ddČ8ŃŃ ż ŃÓ  ÓŻ  ŻŌ_ŌŃ  ŃŌ€¼­»»»ŌŃ8€OqXXdģ»»d8ŃŃ€ ?TYŃŃ€OaZŃą@ttģąŌ‡ī Üī»¼­ŌIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆŠ ° Šą@WW$ģąAT€KNOXVILLEŌ#†¼­»īī Ü"#ŌˆŠ Ö& Šą@¶¶ģąApril€23,€2002€SessionˆŠ üL ŠĢņ ņą@aaģąSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE€€v.€Ō_ŌEVANGELINEŌ_Ō€COMBS€and€ˆŠ  p Šą@ĪĪ#ģąJOSEPH€D.€COMBSó óˆŠ 4 „ ŠŌ€XOqX»¼­ŌĢą@§§ģąņ ņConsolidated€Direct€Appeal€from€the€Criminal€Court€for€Sullivan€CountyˆŠ 4 „ Šą@č č ģąNos.€S41,992€&€€S41,993€€€€€R.€Jerry€Beck,€JudgeˆŠ  p ŠĢĢą@ģģ*ģąßA€V) °°` d€÷E<ć` A߈Š ä4  ŠĢą@ÕÕģąNo.€E2000„02801„CCA„R3„CDˆŠ ß/  Šą@ÕÕģąNo.€E2000„02800„CCA„R3„CDˆŠ Ė  Šą  ąą ` ąą ø ąą  ą€€€€€€€€€€Ō_ŌŌ_ŌŌ_ŌŌ_Ō€ą h ąSeptember€25,€2002Š · ŠßA€V) °°` dE<¢` Aߊ £ó Šó óĢThe€Defendants,€Joseph€D.€Combs€and€Ō_ŌEvangelineŌ_Ō€Combs€(husband€and€wife),€were€charged€by€Š žī Špresentment€returned€by€a€Sullivan€County€grand€jury€with€numerous€offenses:€Joseph€Combs€wasŠ ŠŚ Šindicted€for€one€count€of€especially€aggravated€Ō_ŌkidnappingŌ_Ō,€two€counts€of€aggravated€assault,€oneŠ vĘ Šcount€of€aggravated€perjury,€one€count€of€aggravated€rape,€and€seven€counts€of€rape.€€Ō_ŌEvangelineŌ_ŌŠ b² ŠCombs€was€indicted€for€one€count€of€especially€aggravated€Ō_ŌkidnappingŌ_Ō,€three€counts€of€aggravatedŠ Nž Šassault,€two€counts€of€assault,€and€four€counts€of€aggravated€child€abuse.€€Following€the€close€of€allŠ :Š Šproof,€the€trial€court€dismissed€one€count€of€aggravated€assault€in€the€presentment€against€bothŠ &v ŠDefendants€and€three€counts€(one€for€aggravated€assault€and€two€for€simple€assault)€againstŠ b ŠŌ_ŌEvangelineŌ_Ō,€finding€the€offenses€in€these€four€counts€were€barred€by€the€statute€of€limitations.€Š žN ŠFollowing€deliberation,€the€jury€found€Defendant€Ō_ŌEvangelineŌ_Ō€Combs€guilty€of€especially€aggravatedŠ ź: ŠŌ_ŌkidnappingŌ_Ō€and€four€counts€of€aggravated€child€abuse,€and€not€guilty€of€one€count€of€aggravatedŠ Ö& Šassault.€Defendant€Joseph€Combs€was€found€guilty€of€especially€aggravated€Ō_ŌkidnappingŌ_Ō,€aggravatedŠ Ā Šassault,€aggravated€perjury,€and€aggravated€rape,€in€addition€to€€seven€counts€of€rape.€€Ō_ŌEvangelineŌ_ŌŠ ®ž ŠCombs€received€a€sentence€of€65€years,€and€Joseph€Combs€received€an€effective€sentence€of€114Š š ź Šyears.€€The€Defendants,€represented€by€different€counsel,€filed€separate€notices€of€appeal.€€Thereafter,Š †!Ö  Šthe€two€cases€were€consolidated€to€form€the€instant€appeal€which€presents€the€following€issues:€(1)Š r"Ā! Šwhether€the€trial€court€properly€conducted€voir€dire€proceedings;€(2)€whether€the€trial€court€erred€byŠ ^#®" Šallowing€the€State€to€amend€the€presentment€for€especially€aggravated€Ō_ŌkidnappingŌ_Ō;€(3)€whether€theŠ J$š# ŠState€properly€complied€with€Defendantsšš€request€for€a€bill€of€particulars€regarding€the€charge€ofŠ 6%† $ Šespecially€aggravated€Ō_ŌkidnappingŌ_Ō;€(4)€whether€the€trial€court€improperly€admitted€evidence€of€priorŠ "&r!% Šbad€acts;€(5)€whether€the€evidence€was€sufficient€to€support€the€Defendantsšš€convictions;€(6)€whetherŠ '^"& Šthe€trial€courtššs€instructions€to€the€jury€included€all€appropriate€lesser„included€offenses;€(7)€whetherŠ ś'J#' Šthe€trial€court€failed€to€fully€and€properly€instruct€the€jury€concerning€the€especially€aggravatedŠ ę(6$( ŠŌ_ŌkidnappingŌ_Ō€charge;€(8)€whether€the€trial€court€erred€by€failing€to€merge€the€convictions€for€certainŠ Ņ)"%) Šoffenses;€and€(9)€whether€the€sentences€imposed€on€both€Defendants€were€proper.€€Defendant€JosephŠ ¾*&* ŠCombs€additionally€presents€the€issue€of€whether€seven€of€his€eight€rape€convictions€should€beŠ Ŗ+ś&+ Šreversed€because€the€State€failed€to€allege€sufficient€facts€in€the€presentment€to€properly€toll€theŠ –,ę', Šstatute€of€limitations€for€these€offenses.€€After€a€thorough€review€of€the€record,€we€reverse€DefendantŠ ‚-Ņ(-ż ŠŌ_ ŌJoseph€Combsšš€conviction€for€aggravated€perjury€and€remand€the€matter€for€a€new€trial€on€thatŠ ° Šcharge.€€In€all€other€respects,€we€affirm€the€judgments€of€the€trial€court€as€modified.Š œģ ŠĢņ ņą@ņ ņ ģąTenn.€R.€App.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;ˆŠ tÄ ŠJudgments€of€the€Criminal€Court€Affirmed€in€Part,€Reversed€in€Part,€and€Modified€in€Part.€ó óŠ `° ŠĢņņThomas€T.€Woodall,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€ņņJerry€L.€Smithóó,€J.,€joined.€Š 8 ˆ ŠņņGary€R.€Wade,€P.J.,óó€filed€a€separate€concurring€opinion.Š $ t ŠĢStephen€M.€Wallace,€District€Public€Defender;€Terry€L.€Jordan,€Assistant€Public€Defender;€andŠ ü L  ŠJoseph€F.€Harrison,€Assistant€Public€Defender,€Blountville,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellant,€EvangelineŠ č 8  ŠCombs;€and€Richard€A.€Spivey,€Kingsport,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellant,€Joseph€D.€Combs.Š Ō$  ŠĢPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€and€Reporter;€Peter€M.€Coughlan,€Assistant€Attorney€General;Š ¬ü  ŠH.€Greeley€Wells,€Jr.,€District€Attorney€General;€and€Barry€Staubus,€Assistant€District€AttorneyŠ ˜č  ŠGeneral,€for€the€appellee,€State€of€Tennessee.Š „Ō  ŠĢą@66'ģąņ ņņņOPINIONóóó óˆŠ \¬ ŠĢą@!ģąņ ņFACTUAL€BACKGROUNDó óˆŠ 4„ ŠĢą  ąOn€February€18,€1997,€the€Bristol€Tennessee€Fire€Department€was€alerted€that€a€911€call€forŠ  \ Šassistance€was€received€from€the€Emanuel€Baptist€Church€(š šEBCšš)€located€on€Weaver€Pike€inŠ ųH ŠBristol,€Tennessee.€€Timothy€Estes,€James€Gouge,€and€Jewel€Rogers,€paramedics€with€the€BristolŠ ä4 ŠFire€Department,€arrived€at€EBC€at€approximately€11:10€a.m.€to€discover€a€nineteen„year„oldŠ Š  Šwoman,€later€identified€as€the€victim,€Esther€Combs,€laying€on€the€back€seat€of€a€van€in€the€parkingŠ ¼  Šlot€of€the€church.€€Estes€testified€at€trial€that€Esther€was€demonstrating€š šseizure„like€activityšš€andŠ Øų Šš šthrashing€about,šš€with€her€arms€and€legs€waving€when€he€found€her.€€Although€she€was€awake€andŠ ”ä Štalking,€Estes€believed€that€she€was€not€coherent€or€aware€of€her€surroundings.€Š €Š ŠĢą  ąDefendant€Joseph€Combs€was€present€when€the€paramedics€arrived.€€He€told€Estes€that€EstherŠ X Ø Šwas€initially€discovered€in€the€bathroom.€€The€family€removed€her€from€the€bathroom,€placed€herŠ D!” Šin€the€van,€and€then€telephoned€911.€€Estes€asked€Joseph€to€show€him€where€they€discovered€her.€Š 0"€  ŠJoseph€unlocked€the€door€to€a€yellow€building€nearby.€€They€entered€a€foyer,€traveled€through€aŠ #l! Šsecond€door€and€proceeded€through€the€fellowship€hall.€€Estes€testified€that€the€hall€was€windowlessŠ $X" Šand€contained€two€or€three€sofa€beds,€flanked€by€a€regular€wall€and€two€large€plastic€sheets.€€ClothesŠ ō$D # Šand€trash€were€strewn€about€the€floor,€with€pathways€formed€between€the€piles€of€debris.€€EstesŠ ą%0!$ Šfound€nothing€extraordinary€in€the€bathroom€and€returned€to€the€parking€lot.€€Meanwhile,€JamesŠ Ģ&"% ŠGouge,€another€paramedic,€had€been€working€with€Esther.€€Gouge€testified€that€he€asked€a€youngŠ ø'#& Šman€who€was€sitting€on€the€other€side€of€the€seat€near€Estherššs€head€how€long€she€had€been€like€this.€Š ¤(ō#' ŠThe€young€man€turned€away€and€said€nothing.€€Gouge€repeated€the€question,€but€again€received€noŠ )ą$( Šanswer.€€When€Estes€returned,€the€paramedics€transported€Esther€to€Wellmont€Bristol€RegionalŠ |*Ģ%) ŠMedical€Center€(š šMedical€Centeršš).Š h+ø&* Š‡ą  ąEsther€turned€away€from€the€paramedics€and€curled€up€into€a€fetal€position€on€the€way€to€theŠ ° ŠMedical€Center.€€As€she€did€this,€her€shirt€raised€a€bit.€€Estes€and€Gouge€observed€scars€on€her€back.€Š œģ ŠWhen€Gouge€and€Estes€lifted€the€shirt€a€bit€further,€they€noted€additional€scarring.€€Her€hands,€arms,Š ˆŲ Šchin,€and€forehead€were€also€scarred.€€The€paramedics€reported€their€observations€to€the€medicalŠ tÄ Špersonnel€once€they€arrived€at€the€hospital€and€to€the€deputy€police€chief€when€they€returned€to€theŠ `° Šfire€station.€€Estes€testified€that,€during€his€seventeen€years€as€a€paramedic,€he€had€never€beforeŠ L œ Šobserved€that€many€scars€on€a€single€person.€€Š 8 ˆ ŠĢą  ąEsther€Combs€arrived€at€the€Medical€Center€at€approximately€11:30€a.m.€€Dr.€Gregory€AllenŠ  ` ŠGerlock,€the€emergency€room€physician€on€duty€at€that€time,€was€the€first€person€to€examine€her.€Š ü L  ŠAt€trial,€he€described€Estherššs€initial€condition€as€š šacutely€illšš€and€somewhat€delirious.€€Her€vitalŠ č 8  Šsigns€were€stable,€but€Dr.€Gerlock€was€concerned€about€her€š šmentationšš€and€the€š šnumerous€scarsŠ Ō$  Šall€across€her€body.šš€€€He€testified€that€there€were€š šscars€on€top€of€scars€all€overšš€but,€given€theŠ Ą  Šemergency€nature€of€the€encounter€and€the€number€of€scars,€it€was€not€practical€to€map€them€duringŠ ¬ü  Šthe€exam.€€Unable€to€extract€any€coherent€answers€or€information€from€Esther€regarding€herŠ ˜č  Šcondition,€Dr.€Gerlock€asked€Joseph€Combs€whether€he€knew€how€she€had€acquired€the€marks€onŠ „Ō  Šher€body.€€Joseph€responded,€š šWhat€marks?šš€€When€Dr.€Gerlock€replied,€š šAll€the€scars€over€herŠ pĄ Šbody,šš€Joseph€informed€him€that€Esther€š šfalls€a€lot.šš€€At€trial,€the€prosecutor€asked€Dr.€GerlockŠ \¬ Šwhether,€based€on€his€experience€and€training,€he€considered€the€explanation€received€from€JosephŠ H˜ ŠCombs€(i.e.,€that€the€injuries€were€caused€by€falls)€to€be€consistent€with€the€scars€and€condition€ofŠ 4„ ŠEstherššs€body.€€Dr.€Gerlock€responded€negatively.€€Joseph€had€also€informed€Dr.€Gerlock€that€EstherŠ  p Šwas€š šadopted.šš€€However,€Dr.€Gerlock€claimed€that€he€was€extremely€vague€concerning€anyŠ  \ Šadditional€information,€such€as€where€the€adoption€occurred€or€any€other€specific€details.Š ųH ŠĢą  ąTerri€Matney,€also€on€duty€in€the€Medical€Centerššs€emergency€room€on€February€18,€1997,€Š Š  Štestified€that€Esther€was€š šreal€hystericalšš€when€she€arrived.€€She€appeared€disoriented€and€confusedŠ ¼  Šand€kept€repeating,€š šIššm€sorry.€€Donššt€hurt€me.€€I€made€the€coffee.šš€€Matney€tried,€unsuccessfully,Š Øų Što€calm€her€down.€€The€medical€staff€then€pumped€her€stomach.€€Matney€observed€scars€š šfrom€headŠ ”ä Što€toešš€on€Estherššs€neck,€front€side,€arms,€back,€and€legs.€€She€had€never€before€seen€a€patient€withŠ €Š Šthat€many€scars.€€Emergency€room€nurse€Vickie€Lee€Blaylock€was€responsible€for€taking€bloodŠ l¼ Špressure€readings€on€Esther.€€At€trial,€Blaylock€testified€that€each€time€she€touched€Estherššs€arm,Š X Ø ŠEsther€would€say,€š šIššm€sorry.€€Donššt€hurt€me.€€Iššll€be€good,šš€over€and€over€again.€€BlaylockŠ D!” Šcorroborated€Matneyššs€observation,€i.e.,€that€Esther€was€thrashing,€screaming,€and€crying„„in€a€stateŠ 0"€  Šof€delirium„„when€she€initially€arrived€at€the€hospital.€€Blaylock€said€that€later,€when€Esther€calmedŠ #l! Šdown,€she€became€combative€only€when€someone€touched€her.Š $X" ŠĢą  ąDr.€Gerlock€treated€Esther€until€her€condition€stabilized,€at€which€point€he€recommended€thatŠ ą%0!$ Šshe€be€admitted€into€the€hospital.€€Esther€was€transferred€to€the€Cardiac€Intensive€Care€UnitŠ Ģ&"% Š(š šCICUšš)€of€the€Medical€Center.€€Elizabeth€Owens€Cribb,€the€assistant€nurse€manager€for€theŠ ø'#& ŠCritical€Care€Division,€was€instructed€to€take€photographs€of€the€scars€on€Estherššs€body.€€She€did€soŠ ¤(ō#' Šon€February€18,€1997,€the€day€Esther€arrived€at€the€hospital.€€Cribb€testified€at€trial€that€Estherššs€bodyŠ )ą$( Šā āpresented€layers€of€scar€tissue€along€the€inside€of€her€thighs€and€her€back,€neck,€forehead,€and€chin.€Š |*Ģ%) ŠEsther€was€drifting€in€and€out€of€consciousness€during€the€photograph€session.€€Later,€when€EstherŠ ° Šbecame€coherent,€Cribb€heard€her€ask€for€her€family.Š œģ Šā āĢą  ąDr.€Jennifer€Quesenberry€Stiefel€was€the€resident€physician€in€charge€of€Estherššs€care€at€theŠ tÄ ŠMedical€Center.€€Dr.€Stiefelššs€initial€evaluation€took€place€in€the€emergency€room,€shortly€afterŠ `° ŠEsther€arrived.€€She€described€Estherššs€condition€at€that€time€as€š šcritical.šš€€Her€eyes€were€closed€andŠ L œ Šshe€was€moaning.€€Verbal€communication€was€not€possible.€€Dr.€Stiefel€spoke€with€Joseph€Combs,Š 8 ˆ Šwho€related€the€following€information:€Esther€had€gone€to€bed€at€approximately€3:00€a.m.€thatŠ $ t Šmorning,€complaining€only€of€a€mild€headache€and€some€abdominal€pain.€€Later€that€morning,€atŠ  ` Šapproximately€11:00€a.m.,€they€discovered€her€crumpled€on€the€bathroom€floor.€€Dr.€Stiefel€askedŠ ü L  ŠJoseph€whether€Esther€had€a€history€of€medical€or€behavioral€problems.€€Joseph€reported€noŠ č 8  Šproblems,€other€than€some€fainting€and€dizzy€spells€over€the€last€two€or€three€years,€but€reported€thatŠ Ō$  ŠEsther€had€never€been€evaluated€by€a€physician.€€When€asked€whether€there€was€a€chance€that€EstherŠ Ą  Šhad€ingested€any€substance,€e.g.,€household€chemicals,€alcohol,€et€cetera,€capable€of€altering€herŠ ¬ü  Šmental€status,€he€replied€negatively.Š ˜č  ŠĢą  ąWhen€Esther€became€able€to€converse€intelligibly,€she€informed€Dr.€Stiefel€that€she€recalledŠ pĄ Šgoing€to€bed€at€approximately€3:00€a.m.€on€February€18,€1997,€and€waking€up€in€the€Medical€CenterŠ \¬ Šthree€days€later.€€Dr.€Stiefel€testified€that€Esther€denied€drinking€antifreeze€and,€when€she€askedŠ H˜ ŠEsther€how€she€had€managed€to€accumulate€so€many€scars,€her€answer€was€nearly€identical€to€thatŠ 4„ Šlater€received€from€both€parents:€š šIššm€a€clumsy€person.€€I€play€rough€and€I€fall€a€lot.šš€Š  p ŠĢą  ąDr.€Stiefel€ordered€a€variety€of€tests€performed€in€an€effort€to€accurately€determine€the€causeŠ ųH Šof€Estherššs€abnormal€mental€condition,€including€an€arterial€blood€gas€test.€€The€gas€test€revealedŠ ä4 Ša€condition€called€metabolic€acidosis,€which€indicated€that€the€patientššs€blood€was€highly€acidic.€Š Š  ŠWith€this€information,€Dr.€Stiefel€narrowed€the€problem€down€to€approximately€five€potentialŠ ¼  Šdisease€processes,€one€of€them€being€ethylene€glycol€poisoning,€and€started€Esther€on€an€ethanol€dripŠ Øų Šwith€bicarbonate,€the€treatment€of€choice€when€ethylene€glycol€ingestion€is€suspected.€€Over€time,Š ”ä ŠEstherššs€condition€began€to€improve.€Š €Š ŠĢą  ąDr.€Kenneth€Emile€Ferslew,€an€expert€in€the€area€of€pharmacology€and€toxicology,€testifiedŠ X Ø Šthat€ethylene€glycol,€the€chemical€compound€commonly€known€as€antifreeze,€is€toxic€if€ingested.€Š D!” ŠIf€the€toxin€is€not€removed€from€the€personššs€system,€two€things€typically€occur.€€First,€the€centralŠ 0"€  Šnervous€system€is€depressed,€the€effect€of€which€resembles€alcohol€intoxication.€€Second,€the€liverŠ #l! Šmetabolizes€the€compound€to€form€various€acids,€or€metabolites,€including€oxalic€acid.€€In€a€periodŠ $X" Šof€two€to€three€days,€the€oxalic€acid€will€bind€with€calcium€to€form€calcium€oxalate€crystals,€whichŠ ō$D # Šcauses€kidney€failure.€€If€left€untreated,€death€usually€occurs€within€several€days€of€ingestion.€€AfterŠ ą%0!$ Šreviewing€the€hospital€records€and€studying€the€symptoms€presented€by€Esther€on€February€18,€1997,Š Ģ&"% ŠDr.€Ferslew€concurred€with€Dr.€Steifelššs€opinion€that€she€was€suffering€from€ethylene€glycolŠ ø'#& Špoisoning€and€concluded€that€she€was€also€treated€appropriately.€€During€cross„examination,€Dr.Š ¤(ō#' ŠFerslew€was€asked€whether€a€specific€test€for€ethylene€glycol€poisoning€existed€and€whether€it€wasŠ )ą$( Šperformed€in€this€case.€€Dr.€Ferslew€replied€that€such€a€test€existed€but,€according€to€the€medicalŠ |*Ģ%) Šrecords,€it€was€not€performed.€€On€redirect,€he€explained€that€this€was€because€the€Medical€CenterŠ h+ø&* Šdid€not€have€the€ability€to€perform€the€test€on€site€and€it€would€have€taken€several€days€to€get€theŠ ° Šresults€back.€€In€a€case€where€the€symptoms€of€ethylene€glycol€toxicity€are€observed,€as€in€this€case,Š œģ Ša€confirmation€test€would€be€senseless€because€the€phase€of€renal€toxicity,€which€then€causes€death,Š ˆŲ Šwould€already€have€occurred.€€Š tÄ ŠĢą  ąWith€regard€to€Estherššs€physical€state,€Dr.€Steifelššs€š šhead€to€toešš€examination€revealed€theŠ L œ Šfollowing:€Esther€was€responsive€to€tactile€stimulation,€i.e.,€any€type€of€touch€would€startle€her.€€OldŠ 8 ˆ Šscars€ran€the€length€of€her€body,€front€and€back,€with€the€area€of€greatest€concentration€being€theŠ $ t Šback€and€buttocks.€€The€length€of€the€scars€varied€and€they€appeared€to€be€distributed€horizontally.€Š  ` ŠMany€overlapped€each€other.€€None€of€the€scars€were€recent,€and€the€causative€injuries€appeared€toŠ ü L  Šhave€occurred€at€different€times.€€In€response€to€questions€about€the€origins€of€Estherššs€scars,Š č 8  ŠEvangeline€Combs€informed€Dr.€Stiefel€that€š šEsther€was€a€very€clumsy€child.€€She€played€rough.€Š Ō$  ŠShe€fell€a€lot.€€And€she€was€a€very€active€child.šš€€Evangeline€claimed€that€Esther€had€been€born€withŠ Ą  Šclubbed€feet,€which€contributed€to€her€clumsiness.€€An€examination€of€Estherššs€feet€revealed€š šnoŠ ¬ü  Šclubbing,šš€however.€€Dr.€Stiefel€also€reported€that€Estherššs€teeth€were€in€š šhorriblešš€condition.€€SheŠ ˜č  Šhad€multiple€dental€caries€(also€known€as€š šcavitiesšš),€a€severe€overbite,€and€clearly€had€received€noŠ „Ō  Šdental€care€in€recent€years.€€Dr.€Stiefel€noted€that,€at€approximately€90€pounds,€Esther€was€emaciatedŠ pĄ Šand€underweight€for€her€height€and€build.€€She€was€also€unable€to€fully€extend€her€left€arm,€due€toŠ \¬ Šan€injury€of€some€kind.€€A€pelvic€examination€revealed€that€her€hymenal€ring€was€intact€with€smoothŠ H˜ Šborders„„a€finding€she€claimed€was€not€inconsistent€with€penile€penetration€of€her€vagina.Š 4„ ŠĢą  ąThe€prosecutor€asked€Dr.€Stiefel€if,€based€upon€her€experience€and€training€and€within€aŠ  \ Šreasonable€degree€of€medical€certainty,€she€could€state€whether€the€scars€observed€on€Estherššs€backŠ ųH Šwere€self„inflicted.€€Dr.€Stiefel€responded€that€those€scars€did€not€fit€the€pattern€or€typical€distributionŠ ä4 Šshape€of€self„inflicted€scars.€€When€asked€the€same€question€concerning€the€scars€on€Estherššs€headŠ Š  Šand€scalp,€Dr.€Stiefel€replied€it€was€š špossible,šš€but€š šhighly€unlikelyšš€that€the€causative€injuries€wereŠ ¼  Šself„inflicted.€€As€for€the€other€scars,€Dr.€Stiefel€testified€that€the€appearance€of€some€were€consistentŠ Øų Šwith€burn€injuries;€others€appeared€linear,€which€would€be€consistent€with€cuts€made€into€the€flesh.€Š ”ä ŠBurn€wounds€were€located€on€Estherššs€arms,€thighs,€and€backside.€€Dr.€Stiefel€was€informed€byŠ €Š ŠEvangeline€that€these€wounds€were€the€result€of€cooking€accidents,€as€Esther€frequently€preparedŠ l¼ Šfamily€meals.€€Dr.€Stiefel€testified€that,€all€things€considered,€the€scars€on€Estherššs€body€wereŠ X Ø Šinconsistent€with€the€personal/medical€history€provided€by€Evangeline€and€Joseph€Combs.€€Š D!” ŠĢą  ąDr.€Stiefel€learned€that€Esther€was€adopted€at€the€approximate€age€of€five€or€six€months€andŠ #l! Šthat€she€had€lived€with€the€Combs€family€since€that€time.€€Esther€had€never€attended€public€school.€Š $X" ŠRather,€she€had€been€home„schooled,€as€were€the€other€Combs€children.€€Evangeline€claimed€thatŠ ō$D # ŠEsther€had€the€equivalent€of€a€12th€grade€education€and€was€preparing€to€take€the€š šGEDšš€exam.€€Š ą%0!$ ŠAs€for€Estherššs€employment€status,€Dr.€Stiefel€was€informed€that€Estherššs€job€was€to€care€for€theŠ Ģ&"% Šchildren€in€the€church€nursery€and€work€for€her€father,€performing€cleaning€services€and€secretarialŠ ø'#& Šduties€at€the€church.€€Š ¤(ō#' ŠĢą  ąSusan€Francis€Early,€a€clinical€social€worker€employed€by€the€Medical€Center,€was€asked€toŠ |*Ģ%) Šinvestigate€the€suspicions€of€abuse€prompted€by€Estherššs€condition.€€Early€testified€that€her€first€visitŠ h+ø&* Šwith€Esther€occurred€on€February€19,€1997,€while€Esther€was€still€in€the€hospital.€€Early€noted€theŠ ° Šscars€on€her€face,€abdomen,€breast,€and€back.€€She€recalled€that€the€scars€on€her€back€were€thick€andŠ œģ Šraised€approximately€1/4€inch€above€her€skin,€running€in€€a€š šsidewaysšš€direction€from€the€base€ofŠ ˆŲ Šher€neck€to€her€buttocks.€€Sections€of€hair€were€missing€from€the€top€of€Estherššs€head.€€EarlyŠ tÄ Šquestioned€both€Evangeline€and€Joseph€Combs€as€to€the€origin€of€the€scars€on€Estherššs€body.€Š `° ŠInitially,€neither€defendant€would€respond€to€her€question.€€Later,€Evangeline€informed€Early€thatŠ L œ ŠEsther€š šfell€a€lot€and€was€clumsy.šš€€Esther€was€discharged€on€February€25,€1997.€€Prior€to€EstherššsŠ 8 ˆ Šdeparture,€Early€informed€her€that€the€Department€of€Human€Services€operated€an€adult€protectiveŠ $ t Šservices€program€and€that€the€program€was€responsible€for€investigating€suspected€cases€of€abuseŠ  ` Šand/or€neglect€concerning€adults€over€the€age€of€18.€€Esther€told€Early€that€she€wanted€to€return€toŠ ü L  Šher€family€and€subsequently€did€so.€Š č 8  ŠĢą  ąDebbie€Richmond„McCauley,€a€detective€with€the€Bristol,€Tennessee€Police€Department,€wasŠ Ą  Šalso€alerted€to€the€possibility€that€Esther€was€a€victim€of€abuse.€€Detective€McCauley€arrived€at€theŠ ¬ü  ŠMedical€Center€during€the€evening€on€February€18,€1997.€€Esther€was€unclothed€and€semi„conscious.€Š ˜č  ŠMcCauley€noted€the€scarring€on€Estherššs€face,€neck,€chest,€inner€thighs,€back,€buttocks,€arms,€hands,Š „Ō  Šand€legs.€€She€took€photographs.€€When€Esther€regained€consciousness,€McCauley€questioned€herŠ pĄ Šabout€the€scars€and€showed€her€the€photographs.€€Esther€would€not€look€at€them€or€make€eye€contactŠ \¬ Šwith€her.€€During€their€meetings,€Esther€experienced€periods€of€shaking€and€stuttering;€her€right€legŠ H˜ Šshook€very€rapidly.€€Š 4„ ŠĢą  ąOver€the€next€few€days,€McCauley€spoke€with€the€entire€Combs€family:€the€parents,€JosephŠ  \ Šand€Evangeline;€Estherššs€brothers€Jimmy,€David€and€Peter;€and€her€sisters€Cindy€and€Sarah.€€JosephŠ ųH Šcompletely€disavowed€any€knowledge€of€Estherššs€scars,€claiming€that€he€had€never€observed€any.€Š ä4 ŠAccording€to€Joseph,€Esther€played€š šrough,šš€was€š švery€clumsy,šš€and€š šfell€a€lot€on€the€pavement.šš€Š Š  ŠShe€was€outgoing,€but€did€not€have€a€boyfriend€or€any€outside€friends.€€Joseph€also€claimed€thatŠ ¼  Špunishment€of€the€Combs€children€took€the€form€of€restrictions€on€their€television€privileges€and/orŠ Øų Štheir€liberty€(š šgroundingšš)€and€that€he€had€not€spanked€any€of€the€children€since€they€were€small.€Š ”ä ŠJoseph€informed€McCauley€that€Esther€was€adopted,€but€he€did€not€recall€where€the€adoptionŠ €Š Šoccurred.€€Joseph€was€stuttering€and€shaking€while€McCauley€questioned€him.€€She€asked€him€toŠ l¼ Šsign€a€statement.€€He€refused.Š X Ø ŠĢą  ąThe€statements€Detective€McCauley€received€from€Evangeline€Combs€were€very€similar€toŠ 0"€  ŠJosephššs,€to€wit:€she€had€never€seen€the€scars;€she€was€unaware€that€Esther€had€any€scars;€Esther€wasŠ #l! Šclumsy€and€slow;€she€fell€a€lot€on€pavement;€she€was€outgoing€and€rough;€she€cooked€a€lot,€whichŠ $X" Šmay€have€caused€any€burns€that€she€suffered;€the€children€had€not€been€spanked€since€they€were€veryŠ ō$D # Šyoung;€and€Esther€was€adopted.€€Evangeline€did€not€recall€where€they€had€adopted€Esther.€€She€toldŠ ą%0!$ ŠMcCauley€that€she€would€find€out€and€give€this€information€to€her,€but,€according€to€McCauley,€thisŠ Ģ&"% Šnever€happened.Š ø'#& ŠĢą  ąOn€March€5,€1997,€shortly€after€her€release€from€the€hospital,€Esther€visited€Dr.€Stiefel€forŠ )ą$( Šfollow„up€care.€€Joseph€and€Evangeline€Combs€accompanied€her€to€Dr.€Stiefelššs€office,€andŠ |*Ģ%) ŠEvangeline€went€with€her€into€the€examination€room.€€Esther€did€not€give€Dr.€Stiefel€any€newŠ h+ø&* Šinformation€as€to€the€cause€of€her€hospitalization€and€she€reported€no€additional€problems,€other€thanŠ ° Ša€recent€burn€wound€on€her€right€third€finger.€€She€returned€three€weeks€later,€on€March€26th.€€TheŠ œģ Šburn€wound€on€her€finger€was€healing.€€Š ˆŲ ŠĢą  ąAt€approximately€8:00€a.m.€on€March€24,€1997,€McCauley€accompanied€a€number€of€policeŠ `° Šofficers€and€firemen€with€a€search€warrant€for€the€Emanuel€Baptist€Church,€the€location€of€theŠ L œ ŠCombs€family€residence.€€The€search€warrant€permitted€inspection€of€the€premises€for€safety€and€fireŠ 8 ˆ Šcode€violations.€€They€knocked€on€the€doors€and€could€hear€people€talking€and€moving€around€insideŠ $ t Šthe€building,€but€no€one€responded.€€The€officers€also€telephoned€the€residence,€but€no€one€answeredŠ  ` Štheir€calls.€€After€attempting€to€gain€entry€for€almost€three€hours,€the€officers€finally€forced€the€doorsŠ ü L  Šopen€with€a€crowbar€and€entered€at€approximately€11:00€a.m.€€The€entire€Combs€family€was€insideŠ č 8  Šthe€building€and€still€wearing€their€sleepwear.€€Joseph€and€Evangeline€Combs€claimed€that€they€didŠ Ō$  Šnot€hear€any€knocking€on€the€door€and€that€they€were€unaware€anyone€was€outside.€€The€policeŠ Ą  Šofficers€and€firemen€began€an€investigation€of€the€interior€and€took€photos€which€revealed,€amongŠ ¬ü  Šother€things,€the€following€conditions:€piles€upon€piles€of€trash€bags,€with€pathways€in€betweenŠ ˜č  Šthem;€mice€in€the€kitchen,€some€dead,€with€mouse€feces€scattered€about;€pools€of€black€liquid€in€andŠ „Ō  Šunder€the€kitchen€sink;€piles€of€dirty€dishes€and€spoiled€food;€a€large€room€with€numerous€beds€andŠ pĄ Štelevisions;€cats,€birds,€and€other€animals€living€inside.€€Š \¬ ŠĢą  ąOn€July€28,€1997,€Detective€McCauley€filed€a€lawsuit€on€behalf€of€Esther€Combs,€theŠ 4„ Špurpose€of€which€was€to€appoint€a€guardian€ad€litem€and€conservator€to€ensure€that€Esther€receivedŠ  p Šmedical€care,€education,€medical€insurance,€opportunities€for€employment,€a€driverššs€license,€andŠ  \ Šother€standard€personal€documentation,€such€as€a€birth€certificate,€Social€Security€card,€et€cetera.€Š ųH ŠIn€an€order€dated€September€11,€1997,€the€court€appointed€attorney€David€William€Tipton€to€act€asŠ ä4 ŠEstherššs€guardian€ad€litem.€€A€hearing€date€was€set€for€October€3,€1997.€€On€the€day€of€the€hearing,Š Š  ŠEsther€failed€to€appear.€€David€Tipton,€Detective€McCauley,€and€Joseph€Combs€were€present,Š ¼  Šhowever.€€According€to€McCauley,€Joseph€claimed€that€Esther€had€run€away€and€that€she€wasŠ Øų Šunaware€a€hearing€had€been€scheduled.€€Joseph€further€claimed€that,€although€he€had€spoken€withŠ ”ä Šher€on€the€phone€and€seen€her€during€church€services,€he€had€no€knowledge€of€her€whereabouts€atŠ €Š Šthat€time.€€At€trial,€David€Tipton€corroborated€McCauleyššs€testimony,€stating€that€Joseph€Combs€hadŠ l¼ Štestified€that€he€did€not€know€where€Esther€Combs€was€and€that€he€had€not€seen€her€in€at€least€aŠ X Ø Šcouple€of€weeks.€€Tipton€also€testified€that€Joseph€was€under€oath€when€he€made€the€aboveŠ D!” Šstatements.€€Richard€Edward€Ladd,€Chancellor€of€the€Second€Judicial€District,€presided€at€theŠ 0"€  Šhearing€and€similarly€testified€that€Joseph€Combs€had€denied€having€any€knowledge€of€EstherššsŠ #l! Šwhereabouts€and€that€he€was€under€oath€when€he€did€so.Š $X" ŠĢą  ąOn€October€3,€1997,€the€entire€Combs€family€drove€Esther€to€the€home€of€Sonja€CarolineŠ ą%0!$ ŠMeadows.€€Meadows€testified€that€they€were€waiting€for€her€when€she€arrived€home€after€work€atŠ Ģ&"% Šapproximately€5:00€p.m.€that€afternoon.€€At€Joseph€Combsšš€request,€Meadows€had€agreed€to€driveŠ ø'#& ŠEsther€to€a€Waffle€House€restaurant€on€the€interstate€near€Spartanburg,€South€Carolina.€€MeadowsŠ ¤(ō#' Štestified€that€the€trip€š šhad€something€to€do€with€[Esther]€appearing€in€court€that€day.šš€€Esther€broughtŠ )ą$( Šā āwith€her€some€clothes,€stuffed€in€plastic€grocery€bags,€and€a€cellular€telephone€given€to€her€by€JosephŠ |*Ģ%) ŠCombs.€€They€left€at€approximately€5:30€p.m.€€Esther€was€in€š šbad€shapešš€during€the€drive.€€She€criedŠ ° Šfrequently€and€spoke€to€Joseph€numerous€times€on€the€telephone.Š œģ Šā āĢą  ąAt€approximately€midnight,€Meadows€arrived€at€the€Waffle€House€restaurant€and€metŠ tÄ ŠDouglas€Carpenter,€a€personal€friend€of€the€Combs€family€and€a€pastor€at€the€Palmettoland€BaptistŠ `° ŠChurch€near€Charleston,€South€Carolina.€€Carpenter€testified€at€trial€that€he€had€offered€to€keepŠ L œ ŠEsther€with€him€and€his€family€for€a€while€š što€give€her€some€relief€from€the€pressure€cooker.šš€€ViaŠ 8 ˆ Šthe€media,€Carpenter€was€aware€that€Joseph€Combs€was€being€investigated€and€that€the€whole€familyŠ $ t Šwas€under€a€great€deal€of€stress.€€Initially,€Joseph€declined€Carpenterššs€offer.€€Later,€Joseph€accepted.€Š  ` ŠCarpenter€said€he€had€little€knowledge€of€the€court€proceedings€involving€the€Combs€family;€heŠ ü L  Šknew€that€Esther€was€involved€in€some€form€or€fashion,€but€he€was€uncertain€to€what€extent.€€Š č 8  ŠĢą  ąEsther€stayed€with€the€Carpenter€family€for€approximately€four€or€five€weeks.€€CarpenterŠ Ą  Štestified€that,€during€this€time,€there€is€no€question€that€Joseph€or€Evangeline€Combs€knew€ofŠ ¬ü  ŠEstherššs€whereabouts.€€Esther€spoke€with€one€or€both€of€them€at€least€once€a€day€by€telephone.€Š ˜č  ŠCarpenter€said€that€Esther€occasionally€cried,€usually€at€night,€and€they€did€their€best€to€console€her,Š „Ō  Šbut€most€of€the€time€she€š šdid€real€well.šš€€Esther€accompanied€the€Carpenter€family€on€shopping€tripsŠ pĄ Šand€attended€church€youth€functions€with€Donna,€Douglas€Carpenterššs€daughter€of€similar€age.€€TheŠ \¬ Štwo€girls€became€good€friends.€€On€cross„examination,€Carpenter€stated€that€his€family€did€notŠ H˜ Šrestrict€Esther€in€any€way€during€her€visit.€€She€appeared€to€feel€very€comfortable€living€with€themŠ 4„ Šand€behaved€like€a€š šnormal€teenager.šš€€Occasionally,€she€would€say€that€she€missed€her€parents€andŠ  p Šwanted€to€go€home.€€She€never€indicated€that€she€had€been€abused€at€home€or€that€she€was€fearfulŠ  \ Šof€returning€there.€€On€redirect,€Carpenter€admitted€that€he€had€observed€scars€on€Estherššs€body,€butŠ ųH Špaid€little€attention€to€them€because€they€had€š šalways€been€there.šš€€He€noticed€that€Esther€walkedŠ ä4 Šwith€a€limp,€but€testified€that€she€did€not€appear€clumsy€or€fall€a€lot.€€In€fact,€he€saw€her€fall€onlyŠ Š  Šonce.Š ¼  ŠĢą  ąThe€Carpenter€family€had€plans€to€visit€Israel€on€November€12,€1997.€€Esther€suggested€toŠ ”ä Šthem€that€she€stay€with€her€aunt€and€uncle,€Susan€and€Roger€Combs€(Joseph€Combsšš€brother€andŠ €Š Šsister„in„law)€when€they€left.€€Joseph€Combs€agreed.€€Two€or€three€days€before€the€CarpentersššŠ l¼ Šdeparture€for€Israel,€Douglas€drove€Esther€to€a€Hardeeššs€restaurant€in€Denmark,€South€Carolina.€Š X Ø ŠRoger€Combs€met€him€there€and€then€drove€Esther€to€stay€with€his€family€at€their€home€in€Georgia.€Š D!” ŠThereafter,€the€Carpenter€familyššs€contact€with€Esther€was€limited.Š 0"€  ŠĢą  ąSusan€Combs€testified€that€Esther€appeared€very€nervous€and€withdrawn,€small€and€š šfrail„Š $X" Šlooking,šš€when€she€arrived€at€their€home€in€Georgia.€€Esther€also€cried€a€lot,€jumped€when€touched,Š ō$D # Šand€avoided€most€attempts€to€make€eye€contact.€€She€possessed€only€a€few€š šshabby,šš€long„sleevedŠ ą%0!$ Šdresses€and€a€cell€phone.€€She€could€print,€albeit€poorly,€but€was€unable€to€write€cursive„style€or€spellŠ Ģ&"% Šwell.€€She€was€also€unable€to€make€change€with€money€or€drive€a€car,€and€she€did€not€have€a€SocialŠ ø'#& ŠSecurity€card€or€driverššs€license.€€She€had€never€heard€of€Elvis€Presley.€€At€first,€she€also€refused€toŠ ¤(ō#' Šgo€outside€the€house€alone.€€Every€three€or€four€days,€she€talked€with€one€of€her€parents€on€theŠ )ą$( Štelephone.€€After€these€conversations,€she€usually€appeared€upset.Š |*Ģ%) ŠŠ h+ø&* Šą  ąSusan€noticed€changes€in€Estherššs€physical€appearance€and€demeanor€after€she€stayed€withŠ ° Šthem€for€a€while.€€She€had€gained€weight€and€changed€her€attire,€e.g.,€she€started€wearing€jeans€andŠ œģ Šother€styles€of€pants.€€She€also€established€eye€contact€when€she€communicated€with€people,€seemedŠ ˆŲ Šgenerally€happier,€and€laughed€frequently.€€Although€she€was€reluctant€to€walk€past€the€edge€of€theŠ tÄ Šyard€by€herself€for€quite€a€while,€they€continuously€encouraged€her€to€try€and€she€eventually€did€so.€Š `° Š€Ģą  ąEsther€telephoned€Detective€McCauley€on€February€20,€1998€from€Watkinsville,€Georgia,Š 8 ˆ Šwhile€she€was€living€with€Roger€and€Susan€Combs.€€McCauley€drove€to€Georgia,€interviewed€Esther,Š $ t Šand€took€a€statement.€€From€there,€McCauley€went€to€the€Baptist€Childrenššs€Home€in€Indiana,€whereŠ  ` Šshe€subsequently€discovered€that€the€Defendants€had€never€legally€adopted€Esther.€€Estherššs€naturalŠ ü L  Šmother€was€Rachel€Garcia,€a€woman€who€lived€in€Michigan,€north€of€Detroit.€€McCauley€contactedŠ č 8  ŠMs.€Garcia,€who€then€agreed€to€a€blood€test€which€conclusively€proved€that€she€was€Estherššs€naturalŠ Ō$  Šmother.€Š Ą  ŠĢą  ąDawn€Rose€Loftis,€office€manager€of€the€Baptist€Childrenššs€Home€in€Valparaiso,€Indiana,€Š ˜č  Štestified€that€the€home€functioned€as€both€an€adoption€agency€and€a€group€home€facility€in€1977€(theŠ „Ō  Šyear€of€Estherššs€birth).€€At€trial,€Loftis€identified€the€adoption€agreement€for€š šbaby€Garciašš€(Esther),Š pĄ Šdated€March€1,€1978€and€signed€by€Joseph€and€Evangeline€Combs,€in€which€the€parties€agreed€toŠ \¬ Šadopt€the€baby€girl€within€six€months€and€also€pay€a€fee€to€defray€the€homeššs€expenses.€€LoftisŠ H˜ Štestified€that€the€infant€Garcia€was€given€to€the€Combs€before€the€adoption€was€finalized.€€OnŠ 4„ ŠSeptember€10,€1980,€the€home€sent€a€letter€to€the€Combs,€at€their€Indiana€address,€requesting€thatŠ  p Šthey€send€a€copy€of€the€final€decree€of€adoption.€€The€letter€was€not€returned,€and€no€reply€wasŠ  \ Šforthcoming.€€The€home€sent€a€second€letter€of€request€on€January€9,€1984.€€Again,€the€letter€was€notŠ ųH Šreturned€and€no€reply€was€received.€€More€than€ten€years€later,€on€March€11,€1994,€a€third€letter€wasŠ ä4 Šsent.€€The€letter€was€returned€and€stamped:€š šForwarding€Order€Expired.šš€€As€of€the€date€of€trial,€theŠ Š  Šfile€on€baby€Garcia€reflects€that€the€home€did€not€receive€a€final€decree€of€adoption€or€any€otherŠ ¼  Šcommunication€from€the€Combs€after€November€8,€1979.Š Øų ŠĢą  ąOn€March€6,€1998,€Detective€McCauley€brought€Esther€back€to€Dr.€Stiefel€for€reexamination.€Š €Š ŠApproximately€one€year€had€transpired€since€the€hospital€incident€and€Estherššs€last€examination.€Š l¼ ŠDr.€Stiefel€noted€that€Esther€had€gained€a€significant€amount€of€weight€(approximately€24€pounds)Š X Ø Šand€appeared€š šhealthy,€rosy.šš€€€She€made€eye€contact€during€conversation€and€the€condition€of€herŠ D!” Šteeth€had€greatly€improved.€€Esther€was€then„currently€experiencing€€nightmares€and€pain€in€variousŠ 0"€  Šparts€of€her€body,€however.€€During€the€appointment,€she€also€admitted€that€she€had€sufferedŠ #l! Šrepetitive€beatings€with€baseball€bats€and€electric€cords€and€that€she€had€ingested€antifreeze€the€yearŠ $X" Šbefore,€in€an€attempt€to€commit€suicide€because€she€saw€š šno€escape.šš€€Dr.€Stiefelššs€reexaminationŠ ō$D # Šrevealed€no€new€or€additional€scarring€on€Estherššs€body.€€Š ą%0!$ ŠĢą  ąDuring€cross„examination€at€trial,€Dr.€Stiefel€testified€that€Estherššs€March€1998€appointmentŠ ø'#& Šwas€set€up€by€Detective€Debbie€Richmond„McCauley,€who€informed€her€that€Esther€was€then€š šinŠ ¤(ō#' Šhidingšš€at€the€behest€of€protective€services.€€Dr.€Stiefel€acknowledged€that€the€February€1997Š )ą$( Šhospitalization€discharge€summary€stated€that€Esther€had€š šfirmly€denied€any€type€of€physical€abuseŠ |*Ģ%) Šin€either€the€past€or€the€presentšš€and€that€she€had€also€refused€to€take€advantage€of€any€form€ofŠ h+ø&* Šprotective€services.€€Dr.€Steifel€also€testified€that€Estherššs€family€was€not€present€on€every€occasionŠ ° Šthat€Esther€denied€suffering€abuse.€€However,€Dr.€Stiefel€remarked€that€Esther€appeared€š šextremelyŠ œģ Šnervousšš€during€their€discussions€concerning€protective€service€options.€Š ˆŲ ŠĢą  ąThe€victim€in€this€case,€Esther€Combs,€testified€at€trial€that€she€had€recently€changed€theŠ `° Šname€on€her€birth€certificate€to€Elsa€Rachel€Garcia.€€(Notwithstanding€the€name€change,€in€thisŠ L œ Šopinion€we€shall€refer€to€her€by€the€name€she€was€called€when€the€offenses€in€this€case€wereŠ 8 ˆ Šcommitted.)€€At€the€time€of€trial,€Esther€was€twenty„two€years€old€(date€of€birth:€November€16,Š $ t Š1977).€€She€had€five€š šsiblingsšš€while€a€member€of€the€Combs€family:€James€was€the€oldest;€EstherŠ  ` Šcame€next;€the€third€oldest€was€David;€then€came€Cindy,€Peter,€and€Sarah,€in€that€order€of€age.€Š ü L  ŠEsther€testified€that€both€Joseph€and€Evangeline€had€informed€her€that€she€was€adopted€by€theŠ č 8  ŠCombses€at€the€age€of€four„and„one„half€months.€€Joseph€told€her€that€her€mother€was€Hispanic€andŠ Ō$  Šher€father€was€Caucasian.€€Š Ą  ŠĢą  ąEstherššs€first€memories€as€a€child€took€place€when€the€Combs€family€lived€in€Merryville,Š ˜č  ŠIndiana.€€At€that€time,€Joseph€Combs€taught€at€a€Bible€college€for€novice€pastors.€€The€Combs€movedŠ „Ō  Šfrom€Indiana€to€Florida€sometime€in€1986,€when€Esther€was€six€or€seven€years€old.€€Joseph€workedŠ pĄ Šas€a€pastor€in€Florida€for€a€few€years.€€Thereafter,€they€traveled€to€various€states,€evangelizing€on€theŠ \¬ Šroad€and€living€in€a€trailer€for€approximately€one€and€one„half€years.€€In€April€1989,€the€familyŠ H˜ Šsettled€down€in€Bristol,€Tennessee,€where€Joseph€became€the€pastor€of€EBC.€€They€lived€in€the€trailerŠ 4„ Šfor€a€few€more€months,€then€transferred€their€residence€to€a€yellow€building€on€the€church€premises,Š  p Šwhich€also€housed€the€church€gymnasium€and€fellowship€hall.Š  \ ŠĢą  ąDuring€Estherššs€testimony,€the€State€informed€the€trial€court€that€it€was€preparing€to€ask€someŠ ä4 Šquestions€which€concerned€only€Defendant€Evangeline€Combs.€€A€hearing€ensued€outside€of€theŠ Š  Špresence€of€the€jury.€€Thereafter,€the€trial€court€instructed€the€jury,€prior€to€the€victimššs€testimony,Š ¼  Šthat€it€should€consider€the€upcoming€evidence€only€as€to€the€guilt€of€Defendant€Evangeline€untilŠ Øų Šdirected€to€do€otherwise.€€The€jury€was€also€told€to€consider€the€evidence€of€other€crimes€presentedŠ ”ä Šat€trial€for€the€limited€purpose€of€constructing€š šthe€complete€storyšš€of€the€crime€of€especiallyŠ €Š Šaggravated€kidnapping,€and€not€as€proof€of€either€Defendantššs€disposition€to€commit€a€similar€crime.€Š l¼ ŠAs€to€the€other€counts,€the€jury€was€to€consider€the€evidence€in€determining€only€whether€EvangelineŠ X Ø Špossessed€š šguilty€knowledge.ššŠ D!” ŠĢą  ąFollowing€the€trial€courtššs€limiting€instruction,€Esther€began€with€testimony€concerning€theŠ #l! Šwounds€and€abuse€inflicted€upon€her€by€Evangeline€while€the€family€lived€in€Indiana.€€EstherŠ $X" Šidentified€a€photograph€of€herself€with€large€bandages€covering€both€of€her€hands€and€arms€up€to€theŠ ō$D # Šelbows.€€According€to€Esther,€the€underlying€injuries€were€burns€caused€by€hot€oatmeal.€€EvangelineŠ ą%0!$ Šhad€taken€the€other€children€to€wash€their€hands€and€instructed€Esther€not€to€touch€the€stove€whileŠ Ģ&"% Šshe€was€gone.€€Esther€nevertheless€stirred€the€oatmeal€in€an€effort€to€help,€but€she€dropped€the€spoonŠ ø'#& Šinto€the€pot€in€the€process.€€When€Evangeline€discovered€the€spoon€had€fallen€into€the€oatmeal,€sheŠ ¤(ō#' Šforced€Estherššs€hands€into€the€hot€food€until€she€retrieved€it.€€Her€hands€and€arms€were€burnt€as€aŠ )ą$( Šresult,€and€the€wounds€were€very€painful.€€Evangeline€bandaged€them€herself.€€Esther€did€not€receiveŠ |*Ģ%) Šmedical€treatment.€€Another€time,€Evangeline€pushed€Esther€because€she€was€not€climbing€the€stairsŠ h+ø&* Šfast€enough.€€Esther€tripped€and€hit€her€chin,€which€left€a€scar.€€Esther€testified€that€the€scar€on€herŠ ° Šright€hand€was€caused€when€Evangeline€opened€a€pair€of€scissors€and€used€one€of€the€blades€to€cutŠ œģ Šher.€€An€additional€scar€on€her€hand€was€caused€when€Evangeline€held€Estherššs€hand€on€a€red„hotŠ ˆŲ Šstove€burner€for€an€extended€period€of€time.€€The€various€marks€on€her€chest€and€another€on€her€leftŠ tÄ Šarm€resulted€from€those€occasions€when€Evangeline€would€twist€and€pull€Estherššs€skin€with€a€pairŠ `° Šof€needle„nosed€pliers€until€a€chunk€of€flesh€came€off.€€Esther€further€testified€that€her€front€teethŠ L œ Šwere€in€poor€condition€because€they€were€previously€knocked€out€of€her€head.€€This€took€place€afterŠ 8 ˆ Šone€of€the€other€children€had€š šturned€her€inšš€for€jumping€on€the€bed.€€To€teach€Esther€not€to€do€thisŠ $ t Šagain,€Evangeline€picked€her€up€by€her€arm€and€leg,€swung€her€around,€and€threw€her€into€the€wall.€Š  ` ŠShe€hit€the€wall€with€her€face,€and€four€front€teeth€fell€out.€€She€was€not€taken€to€a€dentist.€€Instead,Š ü L  ŠEvangeline€pushed€the€teeth€back€into€Estherššs€head.€€After€a€while,€they€reattached.€€As€anŠ č 8  Šadditional€form€of€punishment,€Esther€was€occasionally€forced€to€sleep€naked€in€the€basement€ofŠ Ō$  Štheir€Indiana€home.€€It€was€uncomfortable€and€very€cold€in€the€winter.€€One€of€Estherššs€earliest€Š Ą  Šmemories€was€of€a€time€when€Evangeline€tied€her€to€a€high€chair€and€threw€her€down€the€stairs.€€SheŠ ¬ü  Šrecalled€tumbling€down€two€flights€of€stairs€and€landing€in€the€basement.€€Evangeline€left€her€there.€Š ˜č  ŠNo€scars€resulted€from€this€event,€but€Esther€recalled€being€š šbanged€up,€black€and€bluešš€for€a€while.€Š „Ō  ŠĢą  ąNext,€Esther€testified€as€to€the€treatment€she€received€from€Evangeline€Combs€while€theŠ \¬ ŠCombs€family€lived€in€Clearwater,€Florida.€€Esther€first€pointed€to€the€photograph€of€a€scar€on€herŠ H˜ Šmiddle€finger.€€According€to€Esther,€this€scar€was€produced€when€Evangeline€placed€her€hand€on€theŠ 4„ Šcounter€and€then€hammered€this€finger€until€it€š šbusted€open.šš€€Another€time,€Esther€was€whippedŠ  p Šwith€a€rope€because€the€baby€sitter€had€taught€her€how€to€write€her€name.€€On€yet€another€occasion,Š  \ ŠEvangeline€whipped€the€bottom€of€Estherššs€feet€with€an€electrical€cord€because€she€believed€EstherŠ ųH Šhad€been€kicking€the€curtains.€€Other€punishments€inflicted€upon€her€while€in€Florida€included€denialŠ ä4 Šof€food€and€additional€instances€of€skin€removal€with€the€needle„nosed€pliers.€€Š Š  ŠĢą  ąRegarding€the€abuse€Esther€suffered€while€the€Combs€family€traveled€from€state€to€state€inŠ Øų Šthe€trailer€home,€Esther€testified€first€that€Evangeline€burned€her€legs€because€the€baby,€SarahŠ ”ä ŠCombs,€had€a€diaper€rash.€€Because€it€was€Estherššs€job€to€change€Sarahššs€diapers,€Evangeline€viewedŠ €Š ŠSarahššs€rash€as€proof€of€Estherššs€negligence.€€Wanting€to€demonstrate€to€Esther€how€a€diaper€rashŠ l¼ Šfelt,€Evangeline€burnt€the€inside€of€both€of€her€thighs€with€a€curling€iron.€€The€wounds€were€veryŠ X Ø Špainful,€and€it€was€difficult€for€Esther€to€walk€afterward.€€Evangeline€also€beat€the€inside€of€EstherššsŠ D!” Šthighs€with€a€shower€brush€to€make€boils.€€First,€she€would€use€water€to€wet€the€brush€and€the€insideŠ 0"€  Šof€Estherššs€thighs.€€Next€she€beat€the€skin€until€it€made€boils,€and€then€beat€the€boils€until€they€brokeŠ #l! Šopen€and€started€bleeding.€€Š $X" ŠĢą  ąNext,€Esther€testified€about€the€wounds€and€abuse€Evangeline€inflicted€upon€Esther€whileŠ ą%0!$ Šthe€family€lived€in€Tennessee.€€She€claimed€that€one€of€her€arm€scars€resulted€from€an€incidentŠ Ģ&"% Šoccurring€on€Jimmy€Combsšš€birthday.€€Evangeline€was€angry€because€the€kitchen€was€not€clean,€soŠ ø'#& Šshe€threw€a€spice€bottle€through€the€window€and€it€broke.€€Evangeline€instructed€Esther€to€clean€itŠ ¤(ō#' Šup,€and€Esther€thought€she€complied,€but€she€had€missed€one€rather€large€piece€of€glass.€€To€showŠ )ą$( ŠEsther€what€might€have€happened€if€one€of€the€younger€children€had€happened€upon€it,€EvangelineŠ |*Ģ%) Štook€Estherššs€arm€and€cut€it€open€with€the€piece€of€glass.€€The€bleeding€was€heavy.€€To€stop€it,Š h+ø&* ŠEvangeline€ran€Estherššs€arm€under€water.€€When€this€did€not€stop€the€bleeding,€she€stuffed€paperŠ ° Štowels€into€the€wound€and€wrapped€bandages€around€it.€€One€day,€after€the€injured€area€began€toŠ œģ Šheal,€Evangeline€flew€into€a€rage€for€some€reason,€grabbed€Estherššs€arm,€and€š štorešš€the€wound€openŠ ˆŲ Šagain.€€The€bleeding€was€profuse.€€Esther€received€no€medical€treatment€for€either€injury.Š tÄ ŠĢą  ąAnother€Tennessee€incident€occurred€shortly€after€Jimmy€Combsšš€birthday.€€Esther€wasŠ L œ Šcaught€looking€at€a€watch€that€Jimmy€had€received€as€a€present.€€To€teach€her€that€she€must€neverŠ 8 ˆ Štouch€another€personššs€property,€Evangeline€burned€Estherššs€arm€in€two€places€with€a€curling€iron.€Š $ t ŠOn€a€different€occasion,€Evangeline€beat€Esther€š šall€day€longšš€with€a€water€hose€for€falling€asleepŠ  ` Šin€church,€and€then€shook€Esther€by€her€hair€until€it€began€to€fall€out.€€A€photograph€which€revealedŠ ü L  Šnumerous€scars€on€Estherššs€buttocks€was€presented€in€court.€€Esther€testified€that€one€of€the€scarsŠ č 8  Šwas€caused€when€Evangeline€burned€her€with€the€top€of€an€iron€because€she€allowed€the€spaghettiŠ Ō$  Što€burn.€€A€scar€on€her€shoulder€resulted€from€being€struck€by€Evangeline€with€a€claw€hammer,€andŠ Ą  Šadditional€scars€around€her€mouth€and€chin€were€the€result€of€being€whipped€in€that€area€or€havingŠ ¬ü  Šobjects€thrown€at€her€by€Evangeline.€€Esther€claimed€that€Evangeline€gave€her€numerous€black€eyesŠ ˜č  Šduring€their€stay€in€Tennessee€and€generally€whipped€her€at€least€once€per€day€with€a€coiled€metalŠ „Ō  Šcord.€€When€the€black€eyes€were€severe,€the€Combses€did€not€allow€her€to€attend€church.Š pĄ ŠĢą  ąWhen€the€Stateššs€evidence€regarding€Defendant€Evangeline€Combs€had€been€concluded,€theŠ H˜ Štrial€court€reemphasized€that€the€evidence€must€be€considered€as€to€her€guilt€alone.€€The€court€thenŠ 4„ Šgave€the€jury€limiting€instructions,€similar€to€the€instructions€previously€given€for€Evangeline,€whichŠ  p Šconcerned€the€upcoming€proof€of€š šother€crimesšš€allegedly€committed€by€Joseph€Combs.€€Š  \ ŠĢą  ąEsther€began€by€testifying€that,€while€the€family€lived€in€Florida,€Joseph€š šbeltedšš€her€afterŠ ä4 Šdiscovering€that€the€babysitter€had€taught€her€how€to€write€her€name.€€Joseph€informed€her€thatŠ Š  Šš šJesus€didnššt€learn€to€read€or€write€until€he€was€12,€and€that€[she]€wasnššt€going€to€either.šš€€OnŠ ¼  Šanother€day,€while€the€family€was€living€in€the€trailer,€Joseph€laid€her€on€her€back€and€whipped€herŠ Øų Šstomach€with€a€type€of€š šflip„flopšš€sandal€because€š šhe€heard€something€about€a€pink€belly.šš€€He€didŠ ”ä Šnot€stop€until€Esther€could€remain€perfectly€still€without€crying.€€In€Tennessee,€Joseph€beat€her€withŠ €Š Ša€water€hose€for€falling€asleep€during€church€services.€€He€made€her€take€off€her€clothes€first,€toŠ l¼ Šmake€sure€that€š šhe€did€not€miss€any€inch€of€[her]€skin.šš€€Esther€claimed€that,€later€that€afternoon,€heŠ X Ø Šalso€beat€her€with€a€belt€but€she€did€not€recall€the€reason€for€it.€€Esther€next€identified€a€photographŠ D!” Šof€a€hole€in€the€wall€of€Josephššs€office.€€She€claimed€that€the€hole€was€created€by€her€head,€whenŠ 0"€  ŠJoseph€repeatedly€banged€it€into€the€wall.€€Another€time,€Joseph€became€angry€because€the€groceryŠ #l! Šstore€was€closing€and€Esther€had€not€yet€completed€a€list€of€what€the€family€needed.€€He€kneed€herŠ $X" Šin€the€stomach€and€knocked€the€wind€out€of€her.€€As€she€bent€over,€he€went€to€knee€her€in€theŠ ō$D # Šstomach€a€second€time€but€missed.€€He€caught€her€in€the€eye€instead.€€She€fell€backward.€€Her€eyeŠ ą%0!$ Šbecame€black€and€blue€and€swelled€shut.€€She€wore€a€patch€for€a€long€time,€but€did€not€receiveŠ Ģ&"% Šmedical€treatment.€€At€the€conclusion€of€Estherššs€testimony€concerning€Joseph€Combs,€the€trial€courtŠ ø'#& Šrepeated€for€the€jury€the€limiting€instructions€previously€given€them.€€Š ¤(ō#' ŠĢą  ąEsther€also€testified€as€to€what€specific€facts€gave€rise€to€the€individual€counts€in€theŠ |*Ģ%) Špresentment€against€Joseph€and€Evangeline€Combs.€€Concerning€count€2,€charging€both€DefendantsŠ h+ø&* Šwith€committing€aggravated€assault€between€June€1,€1996€and€September€1,€1996,€Esther€stated€thatŠ ° Šthe€incident€occurred€because€Esther€had€not€finished€her€chores.€€Earlier€in€the€day,€the€CombsŠ œģ Šfamily€was€barbecuing€outside€because€it€was€summertime.€€Then€it€began€to€rain.€€They€brought€theŠ ˆŲ Šgrill€inside,€but€Esther€had€not€finished€cleaning€the€dishes€or€the€laundry.€€As€punishment,€JosephŠ tÄ Štook€her€into€the€gymnasium€and€beat€her€with€a€rope.€€Esther€was€screaming,€but€Joseph€told€herŠ `° Šhe€would€not€stop€beating€her€until€she€stopped€screaming.€€She€did€not€stop.€€Consequently,€heŠ L œ Šwrapped€the€rope€around€her€neck€and€draped€her€over€his€back.€€She€recalled€that€her€feet€lifted€offŠ 8 ˆ Šof€the€floor.€€Evangeline€watched€the€episode.€€Eventually,€Esther€passed€out.€€She€woke€up€later€onŠ $ t Šthe€floor.€Š  ` ŠĢą  ąCounts€7€through€10€charged€Evangeline€Combs€alone€with€committing€separate€offensesŠ č 8  Šof€aggravated€child€abuse.€€The€incident€giving€rise€to€count€7€occurred€in€February€1994.€€EstherŠ Ō$  Šrecalled€that€the€other€children€were€making€Valentine€cards.€€Evangeline€became€angry€for€someŠ Ą  Šreason€and€took€Esther€to€the€gymnasium€to€š šbeatšš€her.€€She€began€by€beating€Estherššs€backside€withŠ ¬ü  Ša€baseball€bat,€but€Esther€turned€her€body€and€the€bat€hit€her€elbow.€€Esther€claimed€that€it€was€veryŠ ˜č  Špainful€and€her€elbow€swelled€up,€but€she€received€no€medical€attention.€€Instead,€her€arm€was€placedŠ „Ō  Šin€a€sling€for€what€seemed€to€Esther€like€months.€€When€church€members€asked€questions€aboutŠ pĄ ŠEstherššs€arm,€Evangeline€told€them€that€she€sprained€her€elbow€when€she€swung€two€gallons€of€milk.€Š \¬ ŠEsther€testified€that€she€was€unable€to€straighten€her€arm€afterward.Š H˜ ŠĢą  ąCount€8€stemmed€from€an€offense€which€was€alleged€to€have€occurred€in€November€1994.€Š  p ŠEsther€recalled€that€it€took€place€near€Thanksgiving€Day.€€She€was€cleaning€out€the€refrigerator€toŠ  \ Šcreate€room€for€the€holiday€fare.€€To€prevent€Esther€from€disposing€of€any€edible€foodstuffs,Š ųH ŠEvangeline€wanted€to€check€the€spoiled€food€before€Esther€threw€it€away.€€Quite€a€bit€of€food€hadŠ ä4 Šgone€bad.€€After€a€while,€Evangeline€appeared€to€find€the€parade€of€rotten€food€tiresome.€€She€threwŠ Š  Ša€wooden€shoe€at€Esther,€hitting€her€above€the€eye.€€The€wound€bled€profusely.€€Evangeline€tried€toŠ ¼  Šstop€the€bleeding€because€the€wound€was€š šright€on€[her]€face€where€people€could€see€[her]€atŠ Øų Šchurch.šš€€She€knew€Joseph€would€be€upset€by€this.€€Unable€to€check€the€bleeding,€Evangeline€gotŠ ”ä Ša€sewing€needle€and€began€to€stitch€the€wound€closed.€€Esther€was€in€great€pain€and€would€not€stopŠ €Š Šwiggling€around,€so€Evangeline€sat€on€her€while€stitching€the€skin€together.€€Again,€Esther€receivedŠ l¼ Šno€medical€attention.€€Upon€discovering€the€injury,€Joseph€restricted€her€from€attending€church€untilŠ X Ø Šthe€wound€healed.€€Later,€Evangeline€removed€the€stitches€and€Esther€wore€a€hairstyle€with€bangsŠ D!” Što€cover€the€forehead€scar.Š 0"€  ŠĢą  ąThe€incident€underlying€count€9€was€alleged€to€have€occurred€in€September€1994.€€EstherŠ $X" Štestified€that€Evangeline€was€using€needle€nose€pliers€to€construct€a€Christmas€plaque€that€day.€€SheŠ ō$D # Šcalled€for€Esther.€€When€Esther€arrived,€Evangeline€grabbed€the€skin€on€Estherššs€€hip€with€a€pair€ofŠ ą%0!$ Šneedle€nose€pliers.€€She€then€pulled€and€twisted€Estherššs€skin€until€a€chunk€came€off.€€EvangelineŠ Ģ&"% Šcalled€such€wounds€š šmarks€of€the€beast.šš€€Esther€was€unable€to€recall€anything€she€had€done€toŠ ø'#& Šdeserve€punishment€on€that€occasion.Š ¤(ō#' ŠĢą  ąThe€offense€in€count€10€allegedly€occurred€on€a€day€between€September€1995€and€NovemberŠ |*Ģ%) Š1995.€€Esther€testified€that€she€had€a€considerable€amount€of€work€to€do€that€day€and€she€was€runningŠ h+ø&* Šbehind€schedule.€€Evangeline€asked€Esther€whether€she€had€completed€cleaning€the€kitchen.€€EstherŠ ° Štold€her€š šyes,šš€which€was€untrue.€€She€had€planned€to€finish€cleaning€the€kitchen€at€a€later€time,€butŠ œģ ŠEvangeline€checked€before€she€had€a€chance€to€do€so.€€As€punishment€for€lying,€Evangeline€madeŠ ˆŲ ŠEsther€drape€her€body€over€the€kitchen€window€ledge€and€beat€her€with€a€baseball€bat.€€Estherššs€bodyŠ tÄ Škept€slipping€from€the€window,€however.€€Evangeline€recruited€Jimmy€and€David€Combs€to€holdŠ `° ŠEsther€in€place.€€The€boys€held€her€by€the€feet€and€hands€while€Evangeline€beat€her€with€the€bat.€Š L œ ŠEsther€claimed€that€the€beating€broke€her€tailbone,€and€she€could€barely€walk.€€Joseph€Combs€gaveŠ 8 ˆ ŠEsther€four€Tylenol€and€four€ibuprofen€for€the€pain,€and€some€vitamin€E€to€speed€healing.€€SheŠ $ t Šreceived€no€medical€attention.Š  ` ŠĢą  ąCount€11€alleged€that€Joseph€Combs€committed€aggravated€perjury€on€or€about€October€€3,Š č 8  Š1997.€€Esther€testified€that€she€was€aware€Detective€Debbie€Richmond„McCauley€had€filed€a€lawsuit,Š Ō$  Šbecause€she€was€present€when€the€police€officer€delivered€Joseph€the€subpoena.€€Evangeline€CombsŠ Ą  Šthought€the€officerššs€knock€on€the€door€was€a€UPS€delivery.€€Esther€did€not€open€the€door,€but€sheŠ ¬ü  Šcould€see€that€the€caller€was€a€police€officer,€so€Joseph€answered€the€door€instead.€€Esther€heardŠ ˜č  ŠJoseph€say,€š šSheššs€not€here€right€now,€but€Iššll€give€it€to€her.šš€€When€the€officer€left,€Joseph€toldŠ „Ō  ŠEsther€that€the€subpoena€required€Esther€to€show€up€in€court€because€Detective€McCauley€wantedŠ pĄ Šher€to€have€a€š šlegal€babysitteršš€to€manage€her€money€and€other€needs.€€He€said,€š šI€donššt€think€youŠ \¬ Šneed€that,€do€you?šš€€Esther€replied,€š šNo,šš€because€she€did€not€understand€what€was€going€on.€Š H˜ ŠJoseph€told€her€not€to€worry€about€it,€because€she€would€be€in€another€county€when€the€court€dateŠ 4„ Šarrived€and€he€would€report€to€the€court€that€she€had€run€away.€€On€the€court€date,€Esther€was€atŠ  p ŠSonja€Meadowsšš€house.€€Later,€Joseph€š šwas€laughing€at€how€he€had€made€a€fool€out€of€Ms.Š  \ Š[McCauley]€and€the€judge€by€saying€that€[Esther]€had€run€away.šš€€From€Sonja€Meadowsšš€house,Š ųH ŠEsther€went€to€South€Carolina€because€Joseph€thought€š šthings€were€getting€a€little€too€hot.šš€€Later,Š ä4 Šshe€stayed€with€Roger€and€Susan€Combs€in€Georgia.Š Š  ŠĢą  ąCount€12€charged€Joseph€Combs€with€committing€aggravated€rape€in€April€1989€(Esther€wasŠ Øų Šunder€thirteen€years€of€age€at€this€time).€€Esther€testified€that€Joseph€made€her€perform€oral€sex€onŠ ”ä Šhim€on€a€day€near€Peter€Combššs€birthday,€April€25th.€€The€Combs€family€had€since€settled€in€Bristol,Š €Š ŠTennessee,€but€was€still€living€in€the€trailer€at€that€time.€€Esther€claimed€that€Joseph€called€her€intoŠ l¼ Šthe€bedroom€of€the€trailer,€closed€the€door,€sat€down€on€the€bed€and€exposed€his€penis.€€He€thenŠ X Ø Šplaced€Estherššs€hand€upon€it€and€told€her€that€š šhe€knew€[she]€wanted€it.šš€€He€made€her€put€her€headŠ D!” Šdown€and€placed€his€penis€into€her€mouth.€€She€testified€that€when€Joseph€was€angry€with€her,€heŠ 0"€  Šmade€her€swallow€his€ejaculate.€€He€called€it€š šsugar€water.ššŠ #l! ŠĢą  ąCounts€13€through€19€charged€Joseph€Combs€with€the€rape€of€Esther€Combs.€€Count€13Š ō$D # Šconcerns€an€incident€that€occurred€on€November€16,€1990,€Estherššs€thirteenth€birthday.€€AccordingŠ ą%0!$ Što€Esther,€Joseph€informed€her€that€he€wanted€some€coffee€that€day.€€She€made€the€coffee€andŠ Ģ&"% Šbrought€him€a€cup.€€He€was€sitting€in€a€chair€in€the€foyer€at€the€time.€€He€told€her€that€he€wanted€toŠ ø'#& Šgive€her€a€birthday€present€and€closed€the€doors€to€the€foyer.€€Esther€was€then€directed€to€get€downŠ ¤(ō#' Šon€her€knees€and€perform€oral€sex€on€him.€€Joseph€instructed€her€š šhow€hard€and€how€fast€to€pumpŠ )ą$( Šitšš€until€he€š šdid€it€in€her€mouth.šš€€She€was€not€allowed€to€wash€her€mouth€out€afterward.Š |*Ģ%) ŠŠ h+ø&* Šą  ąCount€14€charged€Joseph€Combs€with€the€rape€of€Esther€during€the€summer€of€1995.€€EstherŠ ° Štestified€that€the€kids€were€playing€outside€on€the€day€he€committed€this€particular€offense.€Š œģ ŠEvangeline€Combs€was€also€outside€and€Joseph€was€inside,€standing€by€the€door€watching€everyone.€Š ˆŲ ŠJoseph€called€Esther€inside€to€perform€oral€sex€on€him.€€Esther€responded€that€she€could€not€becauseŠ tÄ Šthe€Bible€said€that€it€was€wrong.€€Joseph€told€her€that€š šit€was€okay€with€God€because€[she]€was€hisŠ `° Šadopted€daughter,€[not]€his€biological€daughter.€€And€that€King€David€had€concubines.šš€€He€thenŠ L œ Šplaced€his€penis€into€her€mouth€and€made€her€š šdo€it€until€he€went.šš€€This€time,€she€was€allowed€toŠ 8 ˆ Šwash€her€mouth€out€afterward.Š $ t ŠĢą  ąCount€15€alleged€that€Joseph€Combs€committed€the€crime€of€rape€against€Esther€on€June€16,Š ü L  Š1991.€€The€date€was€Evangeline€Combsšš€birthday.€€Evangeline€had€gone€to€the€park€with€the€otherŠ č 8  Šchildren.€€Esther€remained€behind€because€she€had€not€yet€finished€cleaning€the€kitchen€when€theyŠ Ō$  Šdeparted.€€Joseph€had€been€at€a€meeting,€but€he€came€home€before€the€rest€of€the€family€returnedŠ Ą  Šfrom€the€park.€€He€stood€before€the€kitchen€window,€where€he€would€be€able€to€observe€EvangelineššsŠ ¬ü  Šreturn.€€He€had€Esther€get€underneath€the€counter€to€perform€oral€sex€on€him.€€Joseph€placed€hisŠ ˜č  Špenis€into€her€mouth€until€he€š šwentšš€and€told€her€she€was€š šspecial.šš€€She€was€not€allowed€to€rinseŠ „Ō  Šher€mouth€out.Š pĄ ŠĢą  ąCount€16€charged€Joseph€Combs€with€raping€Esther€on€November€25,€1993.€€It€wasŠ H˜ ŠThanksgiving€Day€and€dinner€was€nearly€ready.€€Evangeline€Combs€was€in€the€kitchen,€yelling,Š 4„ Šbecause€the€dishes€were€not€yet€cleaned.€€She€kept€sending€Esther€to€the€front€of€the€building,€whereŠ  p ŠJoseph€was€sitting€in€the€dark€waiting€for€her,€because€every€five€minutes€she€had€to€be€beaten€forŠ  \ Šone€reason€or€another.€€After€a€while,€he€appeared€to€grow€tired€of€whipping€her.€€€Since€the€familyŠ ųH Šwas€busy€in€the€kitchen€and€he€was€just€sitting€in€the€dark,€he€made€Esther€perform€oral€sex€on€him.€Š ä4 ŠAgain,€he€placed€his€penis€in€her€mouth€and€ejaculated.€€This€time€he€allowed€her€to€wipe€her€mouthŠ Š  Šwith€his€boxer€shorts.Š ¼  ŠĢą  ąCount€17€alleged€that€Joseph€Combs€raped€Esther€on€November€16,€1993.€€It€was€EstherššsŠ ”ä Šsixteenth€birthday.€€Esther€did€not€recall€where€the€rest€of€the€family€had€gone.€€Joseph€was€in€theŠ €Š Šfoyer€and€called€her€to€come€in€because€he€had€something€he€wanted€to€give€her€for€her€birthday.€Š l¼ ŠWhen€she€arrived,€he€closed€the€door€and€opened€his€boxer€shorts.€€(According€to€Esther,€JosephššsŠ X Ø Šš šnormalšš€attire€was€boxer€shorts.)€€She€performed€oral€sex€on€him,€and€he€ejaculated€into€her€mouth,Š D!” Šwhich€she€was€not€allowed€to€wash€out.€€Š 0"€  ŠĢą  ąThe€incident€giving€rise€to€the€rape€charge€in€count€18€occurred€on€February€14,€1991.€€TheŠ $X" Šother€Combs€children€were€in€the€kitchen€making€Valentineššs€Day€cards,€and€Evangeline€Combs€wasŠ ō$D # Šbusy€doing€something€in€the€gymnasium.€€Esther€was€clearing€a€table€when€Joseph€told€her€that€heŠ ą%0!$ Šwanted€some€coffee.€€When€she€brought€it€to€him,€he€closed€the€doors€and€made€her€perform€oralŠ Ģ&"% Šsex,€in€a€fashion€similar€to€the€other€instances.€€Š ø'#& ŠĢą  ąCount€19€alleged€that€Joseph€Combs€committed€another€rape€of€Esther.€€The€incidentŠ )ą$( Šoccurred€on€February€4,€1992.€€Joseph€was€in€his€office€and€had€spilled€a€š šCokešš€under€his€desk.€Š |*Ģ%) ŠHe€instructed€Esther€to€bring€him€another€drink€and€also€clean€up€what€he€had€spilled.€€SheŠ h+ø&* Šclambered€onto€the€floor€underneath€his€desk.€€He€grabbed€her€head€and€made€her€perform€oral€sexŠ ° Šon€him€as€he€sat€in€his€chair.€€Esther€was€still€underneath€the€desk€when€Evangeline€Combs€cameŠ œģ Šinto€the€room.€€Evangeline€demanded€to€know€what€Esther€was€doing€down€there.€€JosephŠ ˆŲ Šš šcomposedšš€himself€and€Esther€resumed€cleaning€the€floor.€€Joseph€was€in€his€boxers,€as€usual,€andŠ tÄ Šshe€was€not€allowed€to€clean€her€mouth€afterward.€€Š `° ŠĢą  ąWith€regard€to€her€life€in€general,€Esther€testified€that€she€had€never€been€allowed€to€visitŠ 8 ˆ Šother€children€or€go€anywhere€or€do€anything€without€Evangeline,€Joseph,€or€one€or€more€of€herŠ $ t Šsiblings€present.€€Moreover,€no€visitors€were€permitted€inside€the€Combs€residence€at€EBC.€€JosephŠ  ` Štold€her€that€this€was€because€their€home€was€š ša€mess.šš€€Esther€recalled€that€various€church€membersŠ ü L  Šhad€come€by€at€different€times€to€deliver€food,€but€they€were€either€met€at€the€door€and€not€allowedŠ č 8  Šin,€or€the€Combs€family€would€not€answer€the€door€at€all€and€the€visitor€would€eventually€leave€theŠ Ō$  Šfood€on€the€doorstep.€€On€the€occasions€that€Esther€was€not€allowed€to€attend€church€services,€sheŠ Ą  Šwas€ordered€to€stay€in€a€small€room€near€the€menššs€bathroom.€€No€one€stood€guard€over€her,€butŠ ¬ü  ŠEvangeline€placed€powder€in€front€of€the€door.€€Footprints€in€the€powder€would€reveal€anyŠ ˜č  Šdisobedience.€€This€area€by€the€bathroom€was€also€where€Esther€slept€the€majority€of€the€time.€€SheŠ „Ō  Šwas€not€permitted€to€sleep€with€the€other€children€because€she€reportedly€š šsnored€really€loudšš€andŠ pĄ Šš šsmelled€bad.šš€€Š \¬ ŠĢą  ąEsther€did€not€have€a€driverššs€license,€a€Social€Security€number,€or€any€other€standard€formŠ 4„ Šof€identification.€€In€addition,€she€was€not€able€to€read€or€write€well.€€The€other€children€participatedŠ  p Šin€home„schooling€sessions,€but€Esther€was€not€allowed€to€join€the€lessons€until€her€chores€wereŠ  \ Šcompleted,€and€this€did€not€happen€often.€€At€home,€Esther€was€responsible€for€the€laundry€and€theŠ ųH Široning,€making€the€beds,€cleaning€the€dishes€and€the€house,€cooking€the€meals,€making€the€groceryŠ ä4 Šlist,€and€whatever€else€needed€to€be€done.€€(Because€she€could€not€read€or€write,€she€prepared€theŠ Š  Šgrocery€list€by€copying€the€letters€from€near„empty€packages€of€food.)€€Esther€claimed€that€herŠ ¼  Šsiblings€had€no€responsibilities€in€the€way€of€chores,€and€Esther€did€not€go€to€bed€until€her€choresŠ Øų Šwere€completed,€normally€between€3:30€and€5:00€a.m.€€The€other€members€of€the€family€usually€Š ”ä Šretired€between€midnight€and€1:00€a.m.,€and€they€arose€anywhere€between€9:00€and€11:00€a.m.€€AtŠ €Š Šwhatever€time€each€member€of€the€Combs€family€got€out€of€bed,€Esther€was€responsible€forŠ l¼ Špreparing€that€personššs€breakfast.€€If€all€seven€of€them€got€up€at€different€times,€she€cooked€sevenŠ X Ø Šseparate€breakfasts.€€Š D!” ŠĢą  ąEsther€testified€that€she€had€been€informed€several€times€by€both€Defendants€over€the€yearsŠ #l! Šthat€her€š špurpose€in€lifešš€was€to€act€as€a€š šservantšš€to€the€Combs€family.€€On€those€occasions€she€didŠ $X" Šnot€perform€this€function€properly,€she€was€punished.€€The€š šnormal€positionšš€she€assumed€whenŠ ō$D # Šeither€Defendant€beat€or€whipped€her€required€her€to€take€off€all€of€her€clothes,€place€her€hands€onŠ ą%0!$ Šthe€back€of€a€chair,€and€bend€over.€Š Ģ&"% ŠĢą  ąEsther€testified€that€on€February€17,€1997,€the€day€prior€to€her€hospitalization€at€the€MedicalŠ ¤(ō#' ŠCenter,€she€did€not€make€the€coffee€š šright.šš€€When€this€occurred,€the€coffee€was€thrown€in€her€faceŠ )ą$( Šand€she€was€beaten.€€This€particular€day€was€no€different.€€Esther€decided€she€š šcouldnššt€take€itŠ |*Ģ%) Šanymorešš€and€š šwanted€to€die.šš€€In€the€early€hours€of€February€18,€1997,€she€filled€a€24„ounceŠ h+ø&* Šstyrofoam€cup€with€antifreeze,€drank€it,€brushed€her€teeth,€and€then€went€to€bed.€€When€she€awoke,Š ° Šshe€was€in€a€bed€at€the€Medical€Center.€€When€the€prosecutor€asked€Esther€why€she€failed€to€reportŠ œģ Šthe€many€incidents€of€abuse€to€any€medical€personnel€or€the€police€officers€she€had€encounteredŠ ˆŲ Šduring€her€stay€at€the€hospital,€Esther€replied€that€she€was€š šscared.šš€€She€had€previously€run€awayŠ tÄ Štwice,€but€she€was€returned€to€the€Combs€both€times€and€severely€punished€afterward.€€(Esther€wasŠ `° Šunable€to€recall€the€dates€that€she€ran€away.)€€Consequently,€Esther€believed€the€same€thing€wouldŠ L œ Šhappen€again.€€Esther€testified€that€there€was€no€one€outside€of€the€Combsšš€household€to€whom€sheŠ 8 ˆ Šcould€turn€for€help.€€She€recalled€someone€mentioning€š šprotective€custodyšš€while€she€was€in€theŠ $ t Šhospital,€but€she€did€not€comprehend€what€that€meant.€€Approximately€one€year€later,€while€livingŠ  ` Šin€Georgia€with€her€aunt€and€uncle,€Susan€and€Roger€Combs,€Esther€decided€to€telephone€DetectiveŠ ü L  ŠMcCauley€and€report€what€the€Defendants€had€done€to€her.Š č 8  ŠĢą  ąEstherššs€first€runaway€experience€involved€Officer€Vic€Jordan,€with€the€Bristol,€VirginiaŠ Ą  ŠPolice€Department.€€Officer€Jordan€testified€that€on€November€5,€1992,€he€was€summoned€to€anŠ ¬ü  Šš šAbcošš€store€because€a€female€had€reportedly€locked€herself€in€the€bathroom€and€refused€to€comeŠ ˜č  Šout.€€Officer€Jordan€arrived€at€the€scene€and€beat€on€the€door.€€Someone€inside€the€bathroomŠ „Ō  Šunlocked€it.€€When€Jordan€entered,€he€observed€a€young€female€standing€in€the€corner,€š škind€ofŠ pĄ Šš šcowed€downšš€and€š šreal€timid.šš€€The€female€was€later€identified€as€Esther€Combs.€€JordanŠ \¬ Štransported€her€to€the€police€department,€where€she€was€subsequently€picked€up€by€Joseph€Combs.€Š H˜ ŠDuring€cross„examination,€Officer€Jordan€read€his€official€report€of€the€incident€which€stated:€š š„„VicŠ 4„ ŠJordan,€talked€with€Esther€who€said€that€she€had€a€misunderstanding€with€her€parents,€and€thatššs€whyŠ  p Šshe€left€home.šš€€Officer€Jordan€confirmed€that€the€report€was€an€accurate€statement€of€what€EstherŠ  \ Šhad€said€to€him.Š ųH ŠĢą  ąEstherššs€second€runaway€incident€was€reported€to€the€police€department€by€Joseph€CombsŠ Š  Šon€September€29,€1996.€€It€was€a€Sunday.€€When€Detective€Jerry€Smeltzer€arrived€at€the€EmanuelŠ ¼  ŠBaptist€Church€to€investigate,€Joseph€told€him€that€Esther€had€disappeared€from€the€church€nurseryŠ Øų Šduring€the€evening€church€service.€€In€the€nursery,€Smeltzer€observed€a€large€rocking€chair€layingŠ ”ä Šon€its€side,€items€from€a€ladyššs€handbag€strewn€about,€and€two€large€š šgobsšš€of€human€hair,€one€onŠ €Š Ša€table€and€the€other€on€the€floor€near€the€door.€€Smeltzer€testified€that€Esther€was€located€in€CarterŠ l¼ ŠCounty€at€4:30€a.m.€the€next€morning€and€returned€home.€€Smeltzer€telephoned€the€church€the€nextŠ X Ø Šday.€€A€male€voice€answered.€€Smeltzer€asked€to€speak€with€Esther€but€the€man€said€that€this€wasŠ D!” Šnot€possible.€€He€made€two€more€attempts€with€similar€fruitless€results.Š 0"€  ŠĢą  ąThe€State€presented€numerous€witnesses€to€testify€regarding€their€contact€with€the€CombsŠ $X" Šfamily€and€what€they€had€observed€concerning€the€familyššs€treatment€of€Esther.€€In€this€vein,Š ō$D # ŠGayland€M.€Oaks,€II,€testified€that€he€had€known€the€Combs€family€for€twelve€years.€€He€met€JosephŠ ą%0!$ ŠCombs€in€1981€at€Hyles„Anderson€College,€where€Joseph€was€š ša€Bible€teacher.šš€€Gayland€was€oneŠ Ģ&"% Šof€his€students€at€the€time.€€Gayland€graduated€in€1985€and€moved€to€Ohio.€€Some€time€later,Š ø'#& ŠGayland€called€Joseph€(who€was€living€in€Florida)€to€invite€him€to€teach€a€seminar€on€family€life€inŠ ¤(ō#' ŠOhio.€€Instead,€Joseph€asked€Gayland€to€serve€as€his€associate€pastor€in€Florida.€€Gayland€accepted.€Š )ą$( ŠIn€Florida,€Gayland€was€responsible€for€building€a€music€ministry€and€increasing€church€attendance,Š |*Ģ%) Šamong€other€things.€€His€wife,€Malinda,€babysat€the€Combs€children€one€day€per€week€from€JulyŠ h+ø&* Šthrough€October€1987,€when€Malinda€became€pregnant€and€Gayland€assumed€her€babysittingŠ ° Šresponsibilities.€€Joseph€informed€Gayland€that€only€a€very€few€people€were€permitted€to€interactŠ œģ Šwith€the€Combs€children.€€Thus,€he€should€consider€it€a€š šgreat€honoršš€to€be€selected.Š ˆŲ ŠĢą  ąGayland€watched€over€the€Combs€children€each€Thursday€beginning€in€November€1987,€untilŠ `° ŠMay€1988.€€He€arrived€at€approximately€8:00€a.m.€and€stayed€until€somewhere€between€8:00€andŠ L œ Š10:00€p.m.€€Joseph€told€Gayland€that€he€was€only€responsible€for€supervising€the€children,€nothingŠ 8 ˆ Šmore,€because€š šEsther€would€take€care€of€the€food,€the€babies,€the€diapers,€everything.šš€€GaylandŠ $ t Štestified€that€Esther€was€nine€years€old€at€the€time€and€took€care€of€the€babies€š šexceptionally€well.šš€Š  ` ŠShe€brought€them€their€bottles,€changed€their€diapers,€and€prepared€food€for€all€of€the€other€children;Š ü L  Šshe€made€š šwhatever€they€asked€for,€whenever€they€asked€for€it.šš€€Rarely€did€the€children€eat€togetherŠ č 8  Šor€at€one€time,€and€they€seldom€went€outdoors€during€the€day.€€Joseph€said€that€he€did€not€want€theŠ Ō$  Šauthorities€to€learn€that€the€children€were€not€enrolled€in€school.Š Ą  ŠĢą  ąGayland€also€testified€that€Evangeline€and€Joseph€Combs€treated€Esther€differently€from€theŠ ˜č  Šother€children.€€Joseph€had€informed€Gayland€that€Esther€Combsšš€š špurpose€in€life€was€to€be€a€servantŠ „Ō  Š.€.€.€that€was€what€God€had€created€her€to€be.šš€€Consequently,€the€Combs€were€training€her€to€do€that.€Š pĄ ŠWhen€Joseph€and€Evangeline€returned€home€on€the€nights€that€Gayland€babysat,€they€asked€him€forŠ \¬ Ša€report€of€the€childrensšš€behavior.€€On€those€occasions€that€Gayland€reported€a€child€other€thanŠ H˜ ŠEsther€had€committed€some€indiscretion,€the€Combs€would€instead€punish€Esther€or€send€her€to€theŠ 4„ Šoffice.€€According€to€Joseph,€the€office€was€where€the€spankings€took€place.€€Joseph€informedŠ  p ŠGayland€that€š šit€was€necessary€to€spank€a€child€through€their€rebellion€.€.€.€[which]€meant€to€spankŠ  \ Šthem€until€they€stopped€resisting€you,€stopped€struggling€against€you,€stopped€crying.ššŠ ųH ŠĢą  ąRegarding€Estherššs€appearance,€Gayland€testified€that€she€was€š švery€frail,€weak,€[and]Š Š  Šappeared€sickly.šš€€He€noticed€a€scar€on€her€upper€lip€and€another€on€her€hand.€€She€always€wore€longŠ ¼  Šdresses€which€covered€most€of€her€body,€her€arms,€and€all€of€her€legs.€€The€dresses€were€often€tooŠ Øų Šbig€for€her.€€She€wore€her€hair€long,€with€bangs€which€covered€most€of€her€forehead.€€Her€teeth€wereŠ ”ä Šš švery€bad,€the€worst€[he]€had€ever€seen,€protruding€out€of€her€mouth€and€in€deplorable€condition.šš€Š €Š ŠJoseph€did€not€specifically€explain€to€Gayland€how€Esther€had€received€any€of€her€injuries.€€He€saidŠ l¼ Šonly€that€Esther€was€š šclumsyšš€and€š šfell€a€lot.šš€€Gayland€testified€that€he€never€personally€saw€herŠ X Ø Šact€clumsily€or€fall€down,€however.€€In€addition,€Esther€was€š šthe€most€cooperative€and€amiable€andŠ D!” Špleasant€of€the€children€.€.€.€.€[I]t€was€not€necessary€to€ask€her€to€do€anything.€€She€did€it€withoutŠ 0"€  Šasking.šš€€She€was€not€disobedient€to€Gayland€and,€at€church,€she€appeared€to€obey€her€parents€also.€Š #l! ŠGayland€never€saw€Esther€playing€rough€with€the€other€children€or€injure€herself,€and€he€never€sawŠ $X" Šher€apart€from€the€other€members€of€her€family.€€In€May€1988,€Gayland€and€his€wife€returned€toŠ ō$D # ŠOhio,€after€which€they€had€no€further€contact€with€the€Combs€family.Š ą%0!$ ŠĢą  ąMalinda€Oaks,€wife€of€Gayland€Oaks,€also€testified€that€she€had€performed€babysitting€dutiesŠ ø'#& Šfor€the€Combs€family.€€During€one€such€occasion,€Malinda€discovered€that€Esther€was€unable€toŠ ¤(ō#' Šwrite€her€name.€€She€was€nine€years€old€at€the€time.€€Malinda€taught€Esther€to€write€her€name€andŠ )ą$( Šalso€gave€her€instruction€on€the€alphabet.€€When€Evangeline€and€Joseph€returned€home€that€evening,Š |*Ģ%) ŠEsther€showed€them€what€she€had€written.€€She€was€š šexcitedšš€about€her€accomplishment,€but€theŠ h+ø&* ŠCombs€appeared€displeased€and€sent€her€to€š šthe€office.šš€€When€asked€to€describe€EstherššsŠ ° Šappearance,€Malinda€replied€that€Esther€had€scars€around€her€mouth€and€a€broken€tooth.€€MalindaŠ œģ Šalso€reported€that€she€had€never€noticed€Esther€to€be€clumsy,€fall€frequently,€or€injure€herself.Š ˆŲ ŠĢą  ąKelly€Rose€Wood€testified€that€she€also€babysat€for€the€Combs€family€while€they€lived€inŠ `° ŠFlorida.€€It€was€during€the€fall€of€1986,€and€Sarah€Combs€had€just€been€born.€€One€evening,€sheŠ L œ Šobserved€that€Esther€had€kicked€the€covers€off€while€sleeping.€€Wood€then€noticed€that€the€back€ofŠ 8 ˆ ŠEstherššs€legs€were€š švery,€very€scarred.šš€€They€had€š šstripes€all€over€the€back€of€them;€some€old,€someŠ $ t Šnew,€some€very€fresh,€just€scar€upon€scar€upon€scar€.€.€.€.šš€€Wood€observed€that€the€back€of€CindyŠ  ` ŠCombsšš€legs€were€also€visible,€and€they€did€not€have€a€single€mark€on€them.€€Another€time,€WoodŠ ü L  Šnoted€a€gouge€wound€on€Estherššs€chest.€€It€was€a€š šfresh€wound.šš€€Wood€also€testified€that€Esther€didŠ č 8  Šnot€appear€to€be€clumsy€and€she€did€not€behave€in€a€rebellious€manner.€€Instead,€Esther€was€š šveryŠ Ō$  Šquietšš€and€š šmeek.šš€€She€was€a€small,€thin€child,€and€the€clothing€she€wore€was€very€loose,€baggy,Š Ą  Šand€long,€so€that€you€did€not€see€much€of€her.€€Wood€claimed€that€Mr.€and€Mrs.€Combs€treatedŠ ¬ü  ŠEsther€very€differently€from€the€other€children,€but€she€did€not€elaborate€further.Š ˜č  ŠĢą  ąAndy€Steven€Arnold€testified€that€he€knew€the€Combs€family.€€He€regularly€attended€SundayŠ pĄ Šand€Wednesday€services€at€EBC€from€the€early€months€of€1992€until€the€fall€of€1993.€€ArnoldŠ \¬ Štestified€that€Esther€always€wore€long€dresses€with€long€sleeves€and€that€she€did€not€interact€withŠ H˜ Šother€adults€or€the€other€children€at€the€church.€€Instead,€Esther€was€š švery€withdrawnšš€and€š škept€toŠ 4„ Šherself.šš€€When€Arnold€attempted€to€talk€to€her,€she€would€not€make€eye€contact€with€him,€and€sheŠ  p Šonly€spoke€when€asked€a€direct€question.€€Evangeline€was€always€nearby.€€Arnold€claimed€thatŠ  \ Šš š[Esther]€was€just€never€really€out€of€Mrs.€Combsšš€sight.šš€€On€two€separate€occasions,€ArnoldŠ ųH Šobserved€that€Esther€was€injured.€€The€first€time,€her€arm€was€wrapped€in€gauze€and€supported€byŠ ä4 Ša€sling.€€The€second€occasion€Esther€showed€up€for€church€with€black€eyes€and€bruises€on€her€face.€Š Š  ŠJoseph€Combs€said€that€Esther€š šwas€clumsy,€fell€down,€things€of€that€nature.šš€€Evangeline€CombsŠ ¼  Šgave€similar€explanations.€€Esther€missed€more€church€services€than€the€other€children.€€The€CombsŠ Øų Šfamily€usually€said€that€she€was€š šsick.šš€€Arnold€also€testified€that€he€delivered€food€to€the€CombsŠ ”ä Šfamily€several€times,€but€he€was€never€allowed€into€their€home.€€Instead,€he€was€instructed€to€set€theŠ €Š Šfood€on€a€concrete€slab€at€the€door€of€the€fellowship€hall,€knock,€and€then€leave€the€premises.Š l¼ ŠĢą  ąBetty€Atkinson€testified€that€she€played€piano€during€the€church€services€at€EBC,€beginningŠ D!” Šin€July€1994.€€Atkinson€also€testified€that€Esther€wore€long„sleeved€clothing€and€rarely€interactedŠ 0"€  Šwith€anyone€outside€of€the€Combs€family.€€Atkinson€confirmed€that€Evangeline€Combs€was€usuallyŠ #l! Šby€Estherššs€side€and€that€Esther€appeared€subdued,€obedient,€and€avoided€eye€contact€when€spokenŠ $X" Što.€€As€far€as€Atkinson€could€tell,€Esther€was€not€clumsy€and€she€did€not€fall€a€lot.€€EvangelineŠ ō$D # Šinformed€Atkinson€that€Esther€loved€to€serve€and€this€was€her€lifeššs€purpose,€but€Esther€wasŠ ą%0!$ Šš šrebellious.šš€€Atkinson€never€saw€any€indication€of€this,€however.€€To€her,€Esther€appeared€š šveryŠ Ģ&"% Šsweet€.€.€.€[and]€obedient€to€her€parents.ššŠ ø'#& ŠĢą  ąDavid€Lamar€Wright€attended€EBC€from€1982€until€January€1994.€€Wright€testified€that€heŠ )ą$( Šbecame€acquainted€with€the€Combs€family,€including€Esther,€during€this€time.€€He€said€that€JosephŠ |*Ģ%) ŠCombs€had€characterized€Esther€as€a€š šrebellious€child.šš€€Š h+ø&* Š‡ą  ąEsther€Owens,€a€member€of€EBC€from€1990€to€1993,€testified€that€Esther€did€not€interactŠ ° Šwith€other€members€of€the€church€and€that€she€did€not€recall€ever€seeing€Esther€without€EvangelineŠ œģ Šclose€by.€€According€to€Owens,€Esther€regularly€missed€church€services.€€On€some€of€thoseŠ ˆŲ Šoccasions,€Joseph€Combs€gave€the€congregation€reasons€for€her€absence,€e.g.,€she€had€an€accidentŠ tÄ Šwith€her€bicycle,€lifted€a€jug€of€milk,€et€cetera.€€Esther€looked€š š[r]eally,€really€skinny€and€real€badššŠ `° Šwhen€Owens€knew€her,€and€she€always€wore€long€dresses€with€long€sleeves.€€Joseph€asked€OwensŠ L œ Što€bring€food€to€the€family€on€a€few€occasions,€and€he€always€instructed€her€to€leave€it€on€the€porch.€Š 8 ˆ ŠHe€said€that€someone€would€come€out€and€pick€it€up€later.Š $ t ŠĢą  ąSimilar€testimony€was€given€by€numerous€other€members€of€EBS.€€Leona€Dickens,€MaryŠ ü L  ŠJohnson,€and€Donna€Sue€Hensley€attended€EBS€for€forty„four€years,€forty„five€years,€and€two€years,Š č 8  Šrespectively.€€Dickens,€Johnson€and€Hensley€testified€that€they€observed€the€Combs€family€duringŠ Ō$  Šchurch€services,€and€all€three€noted€obvious€injuries€to€various€parts€of€Estherššs€body,€including€herŠ Ą  Šarm,€eyes,€and€forehead.€€The€three€witnesses€were€also€given€various€explanations€by€Joseph€and/orŠ ¬ü  ŠEvangeline€as€to€how€the€injuries€were€sustained,€e.g.,€Esther€was€clumsy€and€fell€often.€€None€ofŠ ˜č  Šthese€witnesses€had€ever€observed€Esther€fall€or€behave€clumsily,€however.€€The€witnesses€Š „Ō  Šcorroborated€the€testimony€of€previous€witnesses€concerning€Estherššs€style€of€dress€(long€length/longŠ pĄ Šsleeves)€and€demeanor.€€Specifically,€they€claimed€that€Esther€was€different€from€the€other€CombsŠ \¬ Šchildren€in€that€she€appeared€frightened,€quiet,€and€generally€did€not€interact€with€others€or€make€eyeŠ H˜ Šcontact€during€conversation.€€Johnson€testified€that€instead€of€playing€with€other€children,€EstherŠ 4„ Šworked.€€The€other€Combs€children€always€played.€€Johnson€never€saw€them€do€any€work.€€HensleyŠ  p Šsimilarly€testified€that€the€Combs€children,€save€Esther,€were€allowed€to€do€š špretty€much€whateverŠ  \ Šthey€wanted.šš€€Esther€was€responsible€for€taking€care€of€young€Sarah€Combs€and,€whenever€theŠ ųH ŠCombs€family€attended€a€social€gathering,€Esther€served€the€other€members€of€the€family€their€meals.€Š ä4 ŠOn€the€matter€of€delivering€food€to€the€Combs€residence,€Hensley€testified€that€she€performed€thisŠ Š  Šservice€on€more€than€one€occasion,€but€was€never€once€allowed€into€the€Combs€home.€€Ordinarily,Š ¼  Šshe€would€knock€on€the€door€and€no€one€answered.€€After€a€few€minutes,€she€put€the€food€down€andŠ Øų Šleft.€€The€last€time€she€delivered€food,€she€knocked,€left€the€food,€and€then€drove€around€the€building.€Š ”ä ŠBy€the€time€she€returned€to€the€door,€the€food€had€disappeared.Š €Š ŠĢą  ąDr.€Mona€Gretel€Harlan,€a€forensic€pathologist,€testified€that€she€examined€Esther€on€AprilŠ X Ø Š4,€1999,€at€the€prosecutorššs€request.€€Her€examination€revealed€the€following:€The€scars€on€the€insideŠ D!” Šof€Estherššs€thighs€were€consistent€with€burn€wounds.€€The€scars€on€Estherššs€forehead€were€notŠ 0"€  Šsignificant€in€number,€but€they€were€layered,€some€as€many€as€three€layers€thick,€indicating€that€someŠ #l! Šof€the€newer€injuries€were€inflicted€upon€existing€scars.€€The€broad€scar€on€Estherššs€forearm€wasŠ $X" Šconsistent€with€a€deep€wound€which,€for€some€reason,€did€not€heal€properly€due€to€reinjury€orŠ ō$D # Šinfection.€€When€asked€whether€the€cause€of€the€scars€could€have€been€accidental€trauma,€Dr.€HarlanŠ ą%0!$ Štestified€affirmatively€with€regard€to€Estherššs€forehead€scars,€especially€if€the€injuries€occurred€whenŠ Ģ&"% Šshe€was€a€young€child.€€She€said€that€children€have€large,€heavy€heads.€€Thus,€they€are€prone€to€tipŠ ø'#& Šover€when€moving€in€a€forward€direction.€€By€contrast,€the€wounds€on€Estherššs€back,€thighs,€andŠ ¤(ō#' Šbuttocks€were€not€consistent€with€either€self„inflicted€or€accidentally„caused€injuries.€€In€herŠ )ą$( Šsummation,€Dr.€Harlan€reported€that€the€majority€of€Estherššs€scars€were€the€result€of€non„accidentalŠ |*Ģ%) Šand€non„self„inflicted€trauma.€Š h+ø&* Š‡ą  ąDr.€Harlan€also€testified€that€she€was€unable€to€date€the€causative€injuries.€€However,€noneŠ ° Šof€the€observed€scars€were€red€at€the€time€of€the€exam.€€In€other€words,€the€scars€had€all€healed€asŠ œģ Šmuch€as€was€possible€and€none€of€them€appeared€to€be€the€result€of€an€injury€sustained€within€theŠ ˆŲ Špast€year.€€A€careful€and€thorough€count€of€the€scars€on€Estherššs€body€revealed€410€discrete€scars.€Š tÄ ŠDr.€Harlan€stated€that€during€her€25€years€of€practice,€she€had€never€before€seen€so€many€individualŠ `° Šscars€on€one€personššs€body.€Š L œ ŠĢą  ąDr.€Henry€Nichols€testified€that€he€evaluated€Estherššs€dental€condition€on€May€11,€1998,€and,Š $ t Šat€that€time,€her€front€teeth€were€š šgrossly€displacedšš€or€š šbucktooth€exaggerated.šš€€In€Dr.€NicholsššŠ  ` Šopinion,€the€only€reasonable€cause€of€the€displacement€would€be€some€sort€of€š štraumatic€episode,ššŠ ü L  Ši.e.,€a€blow,€fall,€concussion,€or€other€sort€of€abrupt€physical€force€contact€with€the€tissue.€€TheŠ č 8  Šprosecutor€asked€Dr.€Nichols€if€he€could€state,€within€a€reasonable€degree€of€medical€certainty,Š Ō$  Šwhether€the€condition€of€Estherššs€front€teeth€was€consistent€with€complete€displacement,€followedŠ Ą  Šby€reinsertion€of€the€teeth€into€the€gums.€€Dr.€Nichols€responded€affirmatively,€stating€that€toothŠ ¬ü  Šdisplacement€to€the€degree€present€in€Estherššs€mouth€š šjust€doesnššt€occur€in€nature.šš€€Dr.€NicholsŠ ˜č  Šstated€that€in€his€twenty€years€of€practice,€he€had€never€observed€an€arrangement€of€teeth€similar€toŠ „Ō  ŠEstherššs.€€Moreover,€the€shape€of€Estherššs€dental€arch€was€not€the€typical€š šUšš€shape,€but€š šterriblyŠ pĄ Šdistorted.šš€€The€blunted€appearance€of€the€roots€of€Estherššs€upper€front€teeth€and€the€condition€ofŠ \¬ Šher€lower€jaw€revealed€further€evidence€of€trauma:€the€top€half€of€one€of€her€lower€incisors€wasŠ H˜ Šmissing€and€a€cyst€had€formed€on€the€root,€without€any€sign€of€decay€(the€typical€cause).€€With€theŠ 4„ Špermission€and€assistance€of€Estherššs€natural€parents,€Bill€and€Rachel€Whetstone€(formerly€RachelŠ  p ŠGarcia),€Dr.€Nichols€treated€Estherššs€conditions€and€replaced€her€two€upper€front€teeth€with€aŠ  \ Špermanent€bridge.Š ųH ŠĢą  ąDr.€Glenda€Jo€Fox€Ramsey,€a€radiologist,€testified€that€she€evaluated€x„rays€of€Estherššs€leftŠ Š  Šelbow€and,€in€her€opinion,€the€elbow€appeared€š šabnormal.šš€€Specifically,€the€distal€humerus,€aŠ ¼  Športion€of€the€long€bone€at€the€elbow,€had€not€grown€properly.€€The€x„ray€showed€a€healed€fracture,Š Øų Šcaused€by€some€sort€of€š štraumašš€(defined€by€Dr.€Ramsey€as€š šan€injury,€a€blow€to€the€bone€thatššs€notŠ ”ä Ša€normal€degree€of€stressšš).€€She€further€testified€that€the€appearance€of€the€bone€indicated€an€injuryŠ €Š Šš šconsistent€with€being€struck€by€an€object€such€as€a€[baseball]€batšš€or€the€result€of€a€fall.€€The€injuryŠ l¼ Šwas€not€consistent€with€the€action€of€swinging€a€gallon€milk€jug.€€Dr.€Ramsey€also€testified€that€x„Š X Ø Šrays€of€Estherššs€sacrum€(š štailbonešš)€revealed€an€abnormal€š šacutešš€curvature€of€the€bone,€as€if€it€wereŠ D!” Šš šcollapsed€inward.šš€€Finally,€she€testified€that€Estherššs€š šbone€agešš€was€š šdelayedšš€by€at€least€threeŠ 0"€  Šyears,€i.e.,€the€development€of€her€bones€was€significantly€slower€than€her€chronological€age,Š #l! Šreporting€that€such€š š[a]€delay€in€bone€age€is€a€common€manifestation€of€malnutrition.šš€€Š $X" ŠĢą  ąAt€the€conclusion€of€the€above€testimony,€the€State€rested€its€case.€€Thereafter,€SamuelŠ ą%0!$ ŠJohnson,€an€acquaintance€of€Defendant€Joseph€Combs,€testified€that€he€met€Joseph€at€the€Hyles„Š Ģ&"% ŠAnderson€Bible€College€in€1983.€€Johnson€saw€him€again€in€Florida€in€1986.€€At€that€time,€JosephŠ ø'#& Šwas€starting€the€Tampa€Bay€Baptist€Church.€€Johnson€became€a€member€and€saw€the€Combs€childrenŠ ¤(ō#' Šregularly€(three€to€five€times€per€week)€for€the€following€two„and„one„half€years.€€In€addition,Š )ą$( ŠJohnson€had€stayed€as€a€guest€in€the€Combsšš€home€for€two€weeks€while€he€was€seeking€employment.€Š |*Ģ%) ŠJohnson€testified€that€their€home€was€š švery€normal,šš€clean,€and€organized.€€Š h+ø&* Š‡ą  ąAaron€P.€Welch,€pastor€of€the€Charles€Towne€Baptist€Temple€in€South€Carolina,€testified€thatŠ ° Šhe€met€Joseph€Combs€in€1979.€€Welch€was€a€student€of€Josephššs€at€Hyles„Anderson€Bible€CollegeŠ œģ Šand€graduated€in€1982.€€In€1986,€he€saw€Defendant€again.€€Joseph€was€preparing€to€move€to€FloridaŠ ˆŲ Šat€the€time.€€In€1987,€Welch€arranged€to€have€Joseph€come€to€his€church€in€South€Carolina€andŠ tÄ Špreach€for€him.€€Thereafter,€Welch€scheduled€Joseph€to€preach€on€a€regular€basis,€sometimes€asŠ `° Šmuch€as€twice€a€year.€€When€this€happened,€Joseph€stayed€for€five€to€six€days€and€brought€his€familyŠ L œ Šwith€him.€€Welch€found€the€Combs€children,€including€Esther,€to€be€š šquiet,€well„mannered€kidsššŠ 8 ˆ Šwho€š šalways€dressed€very€neat.šš€€He€described€Esther€as€š šreal€sweetšš€and€š šquiet.ššŠ $ t ŠĢą  ąJoseph€Henry€Esposito,€a€pastor€at€Pacific€Baptist€Church€in€Long€Beach,€California,€testifiedŠ ü L  Šthat€Joseph€Combs€was€one€of€his€professors€at€Hyles„Anderson€Bible€College.€€In€1986,€EspositoŠ č 8  Šleft€the€college€and€moved€with€his€wife€to€Clearwater,€Florida,€where€he€worked€for€one€year€as€anŠ Ō$  Šassistant€pastor€to€Joseph€at€the€Tampa€Bay€Baptist€Church.€€When€he€and€his€wife€first€arrived,€theyŠ Ą  Šwere€invited€to€live€in€the€Combsšš€home€for€two€weeks€until€they€found€a€place€of€their€own.€Š ¬ü  ŠEsposito€saw€the€Combs€children€often€and€his€wife€babysat€occasionally.€€Esposito€claimed€that€theŠ ˜č  ŠCombsšš€home€was€š šbeautifulšš€and€the€kids€were€all€š šnormal,€happy€children.šš€€During€cross„Š „Ō  Šexamination,€Esposito€testified€that€he€had€observed€no€scars€or€marks€on€Estherššs€body€while€inŠ pĄ ŠFlorida.€€He€did€recall€a€possible€chip€in€one€of€her€front€teeth,€however.€€When€asked€whether€EstherŠ \¬ Šwas€ever€rebellious,€clumsy,€or€troublesome,€Esposito€replied€negatively.€€Espositoššs€wife,€MaryŠ H˜ ŠJane,€also€gave€testimony€which€essentially€echoed€her€husbandššs€statements.Š 4„ ŠĢą  ąThomas€Edward€Boyle€testified€that€he€attended€Hyles„Anderson€Bible€College€from€1981Š  \ Što€1984.€€Joseph€Combs€was€one€of€his€professors.€€In€the€fall€of€1986,€Boyle€and€his€family€movedŠ ųH Što€Clearwater,€Florida,€and€joined€the€church€that€Defendant€was€pastoring.€€During€the€next€twoŠ ä4 Šyears,€Boyle€encountered€Joseph€and€his€family€during€church€services€on€Sundays€and€Wednesdays.€Š Š  ŠBoyle€and€his€family€also€visited€the€Combs€several€times€at€their€home,€which€he€described€asŠ ¼  Šš šclean.šš€€During€cross„examination,€Boyle€said€that€he€noticed€Estherššs€front€teeth€were€crooked,Š Øų Šand€he€did€not€observe€any€evidence€of€injuries€or€clumsy€behavior.Š ”ä ŠĢą  ąTrent€Pollack€testified€that€he€met€Joseph€Combs€while€attending€Hyles„Anderson€BibleŠ l¼ ŠCollege.€€In€1986€or€1987,€Pollack€and€a€few€other€people€moved€to€Florida€to€start€a€church.€Š X Ø ŠPollack€was€to€be€the€music€director,€and€he€lived€with€the€Combs€family€for€approximately€oneŠ D!” Šmonth€upon€his€arrival.€€The€Combsšš€home€served€as€a€place€for€meetings€and€the€headquarters€forŠ 0"€  Šthe€new€church.€€Pollack€testified€that€everyone€pitched€in€to€keep€the€house€clean.€€While€in€theŠ #l! ŠCombs€home,€Pollack€did€not€observe€any€of€the€children€being€singled€out€for€preferentialŠ $X" Štreatment.€€He€testified€that€Esther€participated€in€the€home€schooling€process,€along€with€the€restŠ ō$D # Šof€the€Combs€children.€€During€cross„examination,€Pollack€said€that€he€observed€scars€on€EstherššsŠ ą%0!$ Šhands€and€that€he€had€asked€Joseph€Combs€about€them.€€Joseph€informed€him€that€Esther€had€placedŠ Ģ&"% Šher€hands€into€scalding€water€and€that€she€appeared€to€have€a€high€tolerance€for€pain.Š ø'#& ŠĢą  ąJeffrey€Arnold€Coester,€a€pastor€and€part„time€clothing€salesman€in€Illinois,€testified€that€heŠ )ą$( Šmet€the€Combs€family€when€he€visited€Bristol,€Tennessee,€in€1995.€€Coester€testified€that€theŠ |*Ģ%) Šchildren,€including€Esther,€were€playing€sports€(basketball€and€baseball)€at€the€time.€€According€toŠ h+ø&* ŠCoester,€Esther€was€dressed€š šcool€and€comfortable,šš€the€same€as€the€other€children.€€He€also€reportedŠ ° Šthat€the€other€children€did€not€behave€differently€toward€her,€and€Esther€was€not€asked€to€run€errandsŠ œģ Šfor€them.€€Coester€came€to€Bristol€because€he€was€considering€joining€Joseph€Combsšš€ministry.€Š ˆŲ ŠConsequently,€he€wanted€to€learn€something€about€the€Combs€family€and€spoke€with€each€childŠ tÄ Šindividually€for€approximately€ten€minutes.€€According€to€Coester,€Esther€was€š švery€comfortableššŠ `° Šwith€him,€š ša€little€bit€shy,€but€never€withdrawn.šš€€During€cross„examination,€Coester€testified€thatŠ L œ Šhe€had€observed€scars€only€on€Estherššs€face€and€that€he€was€concerned€about€the€condition€ofŠ 8 ˆ ŠEstherššs€teeth.€€Coester€said€that€he€did€not€move€to€Bristol€or€take€the€job€at€EBC,€but€he€gave€noŠ $ t Šreason€for€this€decision.Š  ` ŠĢą  ąRuby€Rhotenberry,€a€regularly„attending€member€of€EBC€from€1967€to€1998,€testified€thatŠ č 8  Šshe€saw€the€Combs€children€at€church€services€approximately€three€times€a€week.€€Rhotenberry€saidŠ Ō$  Šthat€the€family,€including€Esther,€appeared€š švery€friendly,€happy,€always€laughing,€talking,€friendly.šš€Š Ą  ŠRhotenberry€claimed€that€she€had€š švery€fewšš€private€conversations€with€Esther,€but,€when€she€did,Š ¬ü  ŠEsther€never€reported€having€been€mistreated€or€sexually€abused€by€either€Defendant.€€During€theŠ ˜č  Štrial,€Rhotenberry€identified€eighteen€photographs€that€she€personally€took€of€the€Combs€family€onŠ „Ō  Švarious€occasions.€€Most€of€the€pictures€showed€family€gatherings,€with€the€majority€of€the€familyŠ pĄ Špresent.€€Our€review€of€this€evidence€reveals€the€following:€Esther€was€smiling€in€all€of€theŠ \¬ Šphotographs,€and€at€least€ten€of€the€pictures€show€Esther€wearing€clothes€with€short€sleeves.€€Her€leftŠ H˜ Šelbow€and€arm€appears€abnormal€and€thin.€€Scarring€is€apparent€on€at€least€one€arm€in€twoŠ 4„ Šphotographs,€and€her€front€teeth€are€grossly€malaligned.€€During€cross„examination,€RhotenberryŠ  p Štestified€that€Esther€was€a€thin,€frail,€well„behaved€girl,€who€was€never€rebellious€or€clumsy€in€herŠ  \ Špresence.€€Š ųH ŠĢą  ąPauline€Melvin€testified€that€she€was€a€member€of€EBC€from€1981€until€it€closed€in€1998.€Š Š  ŠMelvin€met€the€Combs€family€when€they€came€to€the€church€in€1989,€and€she€usually€sat€with€theŠ ¼  ŠCombs€children€during€church€services.€€Melvin€reported€that€all€of€the€children€were€š šnicešš€andŠ Øų Šš šhappyšš€and€gave€her€hugs€when€they€met.€€During€cross„examination,€Melvin€testified€that€Esther€Š ”ä Šwas€thin,€well„behaved,€and€obedient.€€In€addition,€Esther€did€not€fall€down€frequently€or€appearŠ €Š Šclumsy.€€Melvin€also€admitted€that€she€was€š šnot€really€closešš€to€Esther€and€that€she€never€saw€muchŠ l¼ Šof€Estherššs€skin€exposed,€since€she€usually€wore€long€dresses.Š X Ø ŠĢą  ąElizabeth€Huff€and€her€husband,€Dickie€Lee€Huff,€started€attending€EBC€in€1996.€€At€trial,Š 0"€  ŠElizabeth€testified€that€she€observed€the€Combs€children,€including€Esther,€during€church€servicesŠ #l! Šand€that€they€were€š šall€friendlyšš€and€š šgave€us€a€hug€on€Sunday.šš€€In€1997,€the€Huffs€attended€aŠ $X" Šdinner€function€with€the€Combs€family.€€Esther€appeared€to€be€š šjust€fine,šš€an€obedient€child,€and€notŠ ō$D # Šrebellious.€€Elizabeth€acknowledged€that€she€saw€Esther€only€on€Sundays.€€Dickie€Lee€Huff€testifiedŠ ą%0!$ Šthat€the€Combs€children,€including€Esther,€appeared€to€be€š švery€happy.šš€€During€cross„examination,Š Ģ&"% ŠDickie€Lee€admitted€that€he€also€had€very€little€contact€with€the€Combs€family,€except€on€Sunday.€Š ø'#& ŠDickie€Lee€also€testified€that€Esther€was€thin€and€wore€baggy€clothing,€but€he€claimed€that€sheŠ ¤(ō#' Šlooked€no€different€from€the€other€Combs€children.€€He€never€observed€Esther€falling€down€or€beingŠ )ą$( Šclumsy,€and€he€had€not€observed€any€scars€on€her€face€or€body.€€Dickie€Lee€admitted€that€he€paid€theŠ |*Ģ%) Šbond€for€Joseph€Combs€in€this€case.Š h+ø&* Š‡ą  ąHilda€Jane€Combs,€Joseph€Combsšš€mother,€testified€that€prior€to€1989,€she€only€saw€her€sonŠ ° Šand€his€family€once€or€twice€a€year.€€After€Joseph€became€the€pastor€at€EBC,€she€saw€the€CombsŠ œģ Šfamily€more€frequently,€at€least€three€times€a€week€(at€church€services)€and€during€visits.€€Mrs.Š ˆŲ ŠCombs€testified€that€all€the€children€seemed€š šhappy,šš€and€Esther€š šwas€always€smiling.šš€€Mrs.€CombsŠ tÄ Šsaid€that€the€children€š šgot€along€finešš€and€played€together,€but€Esther€was€a€š šrough€little€girlšš€andŠ `° Šliked€to€wrestle€with€the€boys.€€Mrs.€Combs€further€claimed€that€Esther€had€a€temper€and,€š šif€she€feltŠ L œ Šsomething€wasnššt€right,€sheššd€tell€you.šš€€Consequently,€Mrs.€Combs€professed€confusion€as€to€whyŠ 8 ˆ ŠEsther€would€not€tell€her€if€something€was€wrong.€€Mrs.€Combs€was€unaware€that€anything€wasŠ $ t Šamiss€until€Esther€left€town.€€Later,€Esther€told€her€that€she€left€because€she€was€afraid€of€DebbieŠ  ` ŠRichmond€[McCauley]€and€that€she€would€be€placed€in€an€š šinsane€asylum.ššŠ ü L  ŠĢą  ąMrs.€Combs€testified€that€Fatherššs€Day€1991€(the€day€Joseph€allegedly€committed€the€rapeŠ Ō$  Šin€count€15)€was€special€because€it€fell€on€Evangelineššs€birthday.€€Mrs.€Combs€said€that€the€familyŠ Ą  Šgathered€at€Mrs.€Combsšš€house€for€fried€chicken€after€church€that€day€and€stayed€until€the€time€cameŠ ¬ü  Što€leave€for€the€evening€church€service€at€6:00€p.m.€€Mrs.€Combs€also€testified€that€on€ThanksgivingŠ ˜č  ŠDay€1993€(the€day€the€rape€in€count€16€was€allegedly€committed),€the€Combs€family€spent€the€dayŠ „Ō  Šat€her€house€and€stayed€until€11:00€p.m.€€During€cross„examination,€Mrs.€Combs€claimed€to€haveŠ pĄ Šno€knowledge€of€any€scars€on€Estherššs€body.€€When€asked€whether€Esther€š šhelped€her€family€out,ššŠ \¬ ŠMrs.€Combs€replied€that€she€š šplayed€too€muchšš€to€be€helpful.€€Mrs.€Combs€described€Esther€as€aŠ H˜ Šsmiling,€cheerful,€obedient€child€who€was€always€running€from€place€to€place,€talking€to€people€andŠ 4„ Škeeping€busy.Š  p ŠĢą  ąThe€other€five€Combs€children,€James,€David,€Cindy,€Peter,€and€Sarah€Combs,€also€testified.€Š ųH ŠJames€Jack€Combs,€the€oldest,€was€the€only€child€legally€adopted€by€the€Combs.€€(David,€Cindy,Š ä4 ŠPeter€and€Sarah€were€the€Combsšš€natural€children).€€At€the€time€of€trial,€James€was€twenty„two€yearsŠ Š  Šold.€€James€testified€that€during€the€time€the€Combs€family€lived€in€the€fellowship€hall€of€EBC,€anŠ ¼  Šaverage€day€for€the€household€began€at€approximately€6:00€a.m.€on€weekdays.€€On€the€weekends,Š Øų Šthey€started€their€day€a€little€later.€€James€claimed€that€he€did€not€eat€breakfast€every€morning€butŠ ”ä Šwhen€he€did,€he€fixed€it€himself€or€Peter€helped€him.€€Esther€never€prepared€his€breakfast.€€Further,Š €Š Šas€each€Combs€child€finished€the€morning€meal,€that€child€then€carried€his€or€her€own€dishes€to€theŠ l¼ Škitchen,€where€Peter,€Cindy,€Sarah€and€Esther€would€rinse€them€and€place€them€in€the€dishwasher.€Š X Ø ŠAfter€the€children€had€finished€breakfast€and€dressed,€their€studies€began.€€Evangeline€and€JosephŠ D!” ŠCombs€typically€instructed€the€children€for€four€to€five€hours.€€All€the€children,€including€Esther,Š 0"€  Šparticipated€in€the€instruction.€€According€to€James,€Esther€was€able€to€read€and€write.€€He€hadŠ #l! Špreviously€observed€her€reading€to€Peter,€writing€in€the€kitchen,€and€performing€mathematicalŠ $X" Šcalculations.Š ō$D # ŠĢą  ąAt€lunchtime,€each€of€the€Combs€children€usually€made€his€or€her€own€lunch.€Each€child€wasŠ Ģ&"% Šalso€responsible€for€performing€certain€chores€around€the€home.€€James€cared€for€the€dogs€and€cats.€Š ø'#& ŠEsther€was€responsible€for€making€her€own€bed€and€picking€up€her€clothes.€€She€also€helped€prepareŠ ¤(ō#' Šdinner€and€clear€the€table€afterward.€€The€job€of€making€a€grocery€list€was€assigned€to€no€one€inŠ )ą$( Šparticular.€€When€someone€in€the€family€believed€something€was€needed,€the€person€wrote€the€nameŠ |*Ģ%) Šof€the€item€on€a€piece€of€paper€attached€to€the€refrigerator.€€James€claimed€that€Esther€did€not€haveŠ h+ø&* Šmore€chores€than€the€rest€of€the€family,€and€she€did€not€stay€up€until€3:00€a.m.€to€complete€the€choresŠ ° Šshe€did€have.€€As€far€as€James€knew,€no€member€of€the€family€ever€treated€Esther€as€a€servant€orŠ œģ Šbelieved€that€she€had€been€born€to€such€a€station.€Š ˆŲ ŠĢą  ąJames€testified€that€after€the€schoolwork€and€chores€were€completed,€the€children€wereŠ `° Šnormally€allowed€to€watch€television€and€movies€or€play€video€games.€€The€children€were€also€givenŠ L œ Šaccess€to€computers€for€using€the€Internet,€playing€games,€and€doing€homework.€€Esther€participatedŠ 8 ˆ Šin€all€of€these€activities.€€The€family€had€a€telephone,€and€Esther€used€that€too.€€The€Combs€childrenŠ $ t Šrecreated€together€outdoors.€€They€often€rode€bikes€or€played€basketball,€baseball,€or€Frisbee€in€theŠ  ` Šchurch€parking€lot€or€DeFriece€Park,€which€was€located€approximately€one€block€away.€€Esther€hadŠ ü L  Šher€own€bike.€€The€children€also€went€shopping€at€the€mall,€out€to€eat,€and€to€the€movies€together.€Š č 8  ŠSometimes€their€parents€or€another€adult€would€accompany€them€on€these€outings,€and€sometimesŠ Ō$  Šthey€went€without€adult€supervision.Š Ą  ŠĢą  ąJames€testified€that€the€Combs€family€ate€their€evening€meal€together€and€that€variousŠ ˜č  Šmembers€of€the€family€took€turns€preparing€this€meal.€€Esther€was€not€required€to€complete€herŠ „Ō  Šchores€or€serve€everyone€at€the€table€before€she€ate,€and€she€was€given€the€same€food€as€the€rest€ofŠ pĄ Šthe€family.€€At€the€conclusion€of€the€evening€meal,€each€member€of€the€family€brought€his€or€herŠ \¬ Šown€dishes€to€the€kitchen€where€Peter,€Sarah,€Cindy,€and€Esther€rinsed€them€and€placed€them€in€theŠ H˜ Šdishwasher.€€Evangeline€Combs€did€the€familyššs€laundry€and€James€assisted€her.€€Estherššs€choresŠ 4„ Šdid€not€involve€the€laundry.€€When€bedtime€arrived,€the€children€all€slept€together€in€the€fellowshipŠ  p Šhall,€Esther€included.€€James€never€saw€Esther€sleeping€naked€or€in€a€room€near€the€showers.€€ThatŠ  \ Šroom€was€used€to€store€musical€equipment:€speakers,€amplifiers,€keyboard,€et€cetera.€€Š ųH ŠĢą  ąAccording€to€James,€punishment€of€the€Combs€children€usually€took€the€form€of€some€typeŠ Š  Šof€restriction,€either€of€their€liberty€(š šgroundingšš)€or€one€of€their€privileges€(watching€television,€etŠ ¼  Šcetera).€€Estherššs€situation€was€no€different.€€She€was€not€beaten,€whipped,€or€starved.€€James€did€seeŠ Øų ŠEsther€suffer€injuries,€however.€€On€one€occasion,€he€saw€Esther€get€hit€in€the€face€with€a€plastic€batŠ ”ä Šbecause€she€stood€on€the€wrong€side€of€the€plate€during€a€baseball€game.€€This€resulted€in€a€blackŠ €Š Šeye€and€her€face€was€red€for€a€while.€€Another€time,€he€saw€her€slip€on€a€base€and€scrape€her€kneesŠ l¼ Šon€the€asphalt€parking€lot.€€Yet€another€injury€occurred€while€the€children€were€assisting€their€parentsŠ X Ø Šwith€bringing€in€the€groceries.€€Esther€had€been€warned€not€to€carry€more€than€one€gallon€of€milkŠ D!” Šat€a€time,€but€she€did€not€listen.€€She€was€carrying€two€gallons€of€milk,€and€the€door€started€to€closeŠ 0"€  Šon€her.€€In€an€effort€to€catch€it,€she€swung€the€gallons€and€twisted€her€arm.€€Evangeline€Combs€putŠ #l! Šice€on€the€arm€and€placed€it€in€a€sling.€€James€testified€that€the€rope€burn€on€Estherššs€neck€wasŠ $X" Šcaused€by€Esther€herself.€€Esther€had€placed€a€rope€around€her€neck€to€pull€a€wagon€with€her€friendŠ ō$D # Šin€it€up€and€down€a€steep€hill.€€Her€neck€became€red€and€Evangeline€told€her€to€stop.€€She€did€not.€Š ą%0!$ ŠEventually,€she€cut€her€neck.€€James€also€claimed€that€he€never€saw€Esther€naked,€and€he€never€heardŠ Ģ&"% ŠEsther€or€anyone€else€claim€that€she€had€been€injured,€beaten,€or€molested€by€either€parent.€€JosephŠ ø'#& ŠCombsšš€attorney€asked€James€whether€he€had€witnessed€the€specific€incidents€which€gave€rise€to€theŠ ¤(ō#' Šcharges€against€the€Defendants.€€In€each€case,€James€replied€negatively.Š )ą$( Šā āŠ |*Ģ%) Šą  ąWith€regard€to€Estherššs€attire,€James€claimed€that€no€one€instructed€her€how€to€dress.€Š ° Šā āBecause€Esther€had€a€smaller€frame€than€Cindy€Combs,€she€wore€Cindyššs€hand„me„down€dresses.€Š œģ ŠDuring€church€services,€Esther€would€either€sit€with€the€family€or€work€in€the€nursery€with€otherŠ ˆŲ Šfemale€church€members.€€The€nursery€had€a€door€to€the€outside,€whereby€one€could€leave€withoutŠ tÄ Špassing€through€the€sanctuary.€€James€claimed€that€he€was€home€but€not€awake€when€the€familyŠ `° Šdiscovered€Esther€ill€in€the€bathroom€in€February€1997.€€He€recalled€that€she€had€seemed€š šnormalššŠ L œ Šthe€prior€day.€€James€and€the€rest€of€the€family€visited€Esther€in€the€hospital€at€every€opportunity.€Š 8 ˆ ŠShe€was€š šreally,€really€happyšš€to€see€Evangeline€and€Joseph,€and€she€also€appeared€š šhappyšš€to€goŠ $ t Šhome€afterward.€€Š  ` ŠĢą  ąDuring€cross„examination,€James€testified€that€he€received€his€driverššs€license€on€the€26thŠ č 8  Šor€27th€of€September€1997.€€He€also€claimed€that,€prior€to€receiving€his€driverššs€license,€he€did€notŠ Ō$  Šdrive€any€vehicle€on€any€public€road€with€one€exception:€the€day€he€drove€a€car€which€he€wasŠ Ą  Šconsidering€purchasing.€€Once€licensed,€James€drove€the€other€Combs€children,€including€Esther,Š ¬ü  Što€the€mall€and€other€places.€€He€testified€that€this€happened€š šon€many€occasionsšš€before€Esther€leftŠ ˜č  Štown€on€October€3,€1997.€€Š „Ō  ŠĢą  ąJoseph€David€Combs,€Jr.,€commonly€known€as€š šDavidšš€Combs,€was€twenty„one€years€oldŠ \¬ Šat€the€time€of€trial€and€the€third€oldest€child€in€the€Combs€family€(Esther€being€the€second€oldest).€Š H˜ ŠDavidššs€testimony€at€trial€essentially€paralleled€that€of€James€in€all€material€aspects:€David€claimedŠ 4„ Šthat€Esther€slept€in€the€fellowship€hall,€along€with€the€rest€of€the€children,€and€that€she€did€not€sleepŠ  p Šnaked.€€David€also€testified€that€after€the€Combs€children€arose€at€approximately€6:00€a.m.,€theyŠ  \ Šfixed€their€own€breakfasts€and€š šthe€girlsšš€(Esther,€Cindy,€and€Sarah)€cleaned€up.€€The€children€wereŠ ųH Šhome„schooled,€every€day,€from€approximately€7:30€a.m.€until€after€noon€and€Esther€regularlyŠ ä4 Šparticipated.€€At€lunchtime,€their€mother,€Evangeline,€fixed€sandwiches.€€Esther€and€Cindy€usuallyŠ Š  Šassisted€her.€€David€stated€that€the€evening€meal€was€a€š šspecialšš€time,€which€Joseph€liked€the€familyŠ ¼  Što€spend€together.€€This€meal€was€usually€prepared€by€Evangeline€alone,€and€the€girls€cleaned€up.Š Øų ŠĢą  ąWith€regard€to€chores,€David€testified€that€each€child€was€assigned€individual€tasks€toŠ €Š Šperform.€€David€was€responsible€for€taking€out€the€trash€and€vacuuming.€€Esther€made€her€own€bedŠ l¼ Šand€helped€with€the€cooking.€€She€did€not€have€more€chores€to€do€than€the€other€children,€and€DavidŠ X Ø Šnever€heard€anyone€say€that€Estherššs€š špurposešš€in€life€was€to€be€a€servant.€€During€the€childrenššsŠ D!” Šleisure€time,€Esther€enjoyed€playing€video€games€and€watching€television.€€Most€frequently,€theŠ 0"€  Šchildren€played€basketball,€baseball,€and€rode€bikes.€€Esther€joined€them€frequently,€but€she€playedŠ #l! Šš šrough.šš€€On€Friday€and€Saturday€nights,€the€children€frequently€went€to€the€mall.€€Esther€went€withŠ $X" Šthem€š ševery€time.šš€€David€said€that€they€were€unaccompanied€by€their€parents€on€these€trips,€andŠ ō$D # ŠJames€drove.€Š ą%0!$ ŠĢą  ąAccording€to€David,€punishment€usually€involved€š šgrounding.šš€€Occasionally,€David€wasŠ ø'#& Šspanked€instead€or€required€to€write€š šstuffšš€on€the€chalkboard.€€David€claimed€that€Esther€was€notŠ ¤(ō#' Špunished€more€severely€than€the€other€children,€and€she€was€not€whipped.€€David€recalled€fourŠ )ą$( Šinjuries€suffered€by€Esther€while€they€lived€at€EBC.€€The€first€was€a€burn€that€occurred€in€1994.€€TheŠ |*Ģ%) Šchildren€had€been€discussing€a€story€they€heard€on€the€news€about€a€child€who€had€seriously€burnedŠ h+ø&* Šhis€hand€on€a€stove.€€Esther€told€them€that€a€stove€would€not€burn€if€the€hand€was€removed€quicklyŠ ° Šenough.€€As€a€demonstration,€she€placed€her€hand€on€the€stove€and€burned€it.€€The€second€injuryŠ œģ Šresulted€from€a€mishap€with€her€bicycle€in€1996.€€She€stepped€on€the€brakes€too€hard,€slid€off€of€theŠ ˆŲ Šseat,€and€landed€on€the€center€bar.€€(She€was€riding€a€boyššs€bicycle.)€€The€third€injury€also€occurredŠ tÄ Šin€1996.€€The€children€needed€keys€which€were€locked€inside€of€Josephššs€office.€€They€tried€to€breakŠ `° Šin€through€the€ceiling,€and€Esther€fell€through€it.€€She€hit€her€head€on€the€bookcase€and€again€on€theŠ L œ Šfloor€when€she€landed.€€The€fourth€injury€came€about€when€David€accidentally€gave€Esther€a€blackŠ 8 ˆ Šand€blue€eye€with€his€elbow€while€playing.€€Š $ t ŠĢą  ąDavid€testified€that€he€had€never€seen€Esther€without€clothes€on€and€she€never€complainedŠ ü L  Šof€being€molested€by€anyone.€€Similarly€to€James,€David€was€asked€whether€he€had€witnessed€manyŠ č 8  Šof€the€individual€incidents€which€gave€rise€to€the€charges€against€the€Defendants.€€In€each€case,Š Ō$  ŠDavid€also€replied€negatively.€€Regarding€Estherššs€style€of€dress,€David€implied€that€long€dresses€andŠ Ą  Šsleeves€must€have€been€Estherššs€choice,€since€the€children€were€not€told€what€to€wear.€€David€alsoŠ ¬ü  Šsaid€that€the€Combs€had€three€different€telephones€in€their€home,€and€he€saw€Esther€use€them.€€SheŠ ˜č  Šalso€used€the€computers€and€had€friends€with€whom€she€communicated€via€the€Internet.€€DavidŠ „Ō  Šclaimed€to€have€a€š šgood€relationshipšš€with€Esther.€Š pĄ ŠĢą  ąDavid€testified€that€Esther€appeared€to€be€š šfinešš€on€the€day€before€she€was€hospitalized.€€TheŠ H˜ Šnext€morning,€however,€one€of€the€other€siblings€woke€him€up€to€come€to€the€bathroom.€€There€heŠ 4„ Šdiscovered€Esther€š šsitting€on€the€commode€and€beating€her€head€against€the€wall.šš€€He€picked€herŠ  p Šup,€laid€her€on€her€bed,€and€sent€one€of€the€other€children€to€inform€the€Defendants.€€Later,€DavidŠ  \ Šmoved€her€out€to€the€van€because€the€rescue€people€had€not€arrived.€€He€estimated€that€they€had€beenŠ ųH Šwaiting€approximately€thirty€minutes,€and€Esther€had€already€stopped€breathing€three€times.€Š ä4 ŠTherefore,€the€Combs€were€preparing€to€drive€her€to€the€hospital€themselves.€€He€also€claimed€thatŠ Š  ŠEsther€seemed€š šhappyšš€to€return€home€from€the€hospital.€€Š ¼  ŠĢą  ąDuring€cross„examination,€David€claimed€that€James€drove€the€Combs€children,€includingŠ ”ä ŠEsther,€to€the€mall€on€twenty„five€or€thirty€occasions.€€When€asked€how€many€times€the€CombsŠ €Š Šchildren€were€allowed€to€have€friends€over€to€spend€the€night€in€the€EBC€fellowship€hall€with€them,Š l¼ ŠDavid€replied€that€this€never€happened.€€David€also€testified€that€on€March€24,€1997,€the€day€theŠ X Ø Špolice€and€fire€department€were€banging€on€the€fellowship€hall€doors,€he€did€not€hear€anything.€Š D!” ŠWhen€the€police€and€firemen€finally€entered,€the€time€was€11:00€a.m.€and€it€was€a€Monday.€€TheŠ 0"€  Šchildren€were€all€still€in€their€bedclothes€and€lying€around,€however,€because€everyone€was€ill€thatŠ #l! Šday.€€Š $X" ŠĢą  ąCindy€Combs€was€twenty€years€old€at€the€time€of€trial€and€the€fourth€oldest€child€in€theŠ ą%0!$ ŠCombs€family.€€With€regard€to€the€childrenššs€sleeping€arrangements,€preparation€of€meals,€choreŠ Ģ&"% Šassignments,€punishment,€and€Estherššs€frequent€participation€in€home„schooling€and€playtime,€herŠ ø'#& Štestimony€essentially€mirrored€that€of€her€older€brothers,€James€and€David.€€She€also€testified€thatŠ ¤(ō#' Šshe€had€never€seen€Esther€without€clothes€and€that€she€had€no€knowledge€regarding€any€abuse€orŠ )ą$( Šmolestation€of€Esther.€€With€regard€to€Estherššs€injuries,€Cindy€corroborated€Davidššs€testimony€thatŠ |*Ģ%) Šhe€accidentally€elbowed€Esther€in€the€eye€while€playing.€€Another€time,€Cindy€saw€Esther€get€hit€onŠ h+ø&* Šthe€forehead€with€a€bat€during€a€baseball€game.€€Cindy€was€also€specifically€asked€whether€she€hadŠ ° Šwitnessed€the€specific€incidents€which€gave€rise€to€the€individual€counts€against€the€Defendants.€€SheŠ œģ Šreplied€negatively€to€all€questions.€Š ˆŲ ŠĢą  ąCindy€testified€that€on€the€evening€of€February€17,€1997€(the€day€before€Esther€was€taken€toŠ `° Šthe€hospital),€she€and€David,€Esther,€Peter,€and€Sarah€all€began€to€feel€sick€and€went€to€bed.€Š L œ ŠSometime€later,€Cindy€woke€up€and€saw€Esther€running€in€the€direction€of€the€bathroom.€€Cindy€ranŠ 8 ˆ Šafter€her.€€She€found€Esther€in€the€bathroom€with€the€door€shut.€€A€few€minutes€later,€she€heard€aŠ $ t Šbanging€sound.€€Cindy€woke€up€Peter€first.€€Later,€they€woke€up€David,€who€removed€Esther€fromŠ  ` Šthe€bathroom.€€Cindy€dialed€911.€€While€they€were€waiting€for€emergency€medical€personnel€toŠ ü L  Šarrive,€Esther€stopped€breathing€a€few€times€and€began€to€thrash€around.€€The€family€became€nervousŠ č 8  Šwhen€the€ambulance€did€not€come€quickly.€€They€moved€her€to€the€van€for€transport€to€the€hospital.€Š Ō$  ŠShortly€thereafter,€the€ambulance€arrived.Š Ą  ŠĢą  ąPeter€and€Sarah€Combs,€the€second€youngest€and€the€youngest€of€the€Combs€children,Š ˜č  Šrespectively,€gave€testimony€essentially€similar€to€that€related€by€the€three€other€siblings.€€Peter,Š „Ō  Šfifteen€years€old€at€the€time€of€trial,€testified€that€Esther€was€home„schooled,€along€with€the€rest€ofŠ pĄ Šthe€children,€and€that€Esther€was€able€to€read€and€write.€€Peter€claimed€that€he€and€Esther€read€booksŠ \¬ Štogether€and€that€Esther€wrote€short€stories.€€According€to€Peter,€Esther€slept€in€the€same€room€asŠ H˜ Šthe€other€children,€she€did€not€serve€food€to€the€rest€of€the€family,€she€was€not€responsible€forŠ 4„ Šcleaning€up€after€meals,€she€was€not€assigned€more€chores€than€any€other€member€of€the€family,€andŠ  p Šshe€was€not€considered€the€family€servant.€€Peter€further€claimed€that€punishment€for€all€of€theŠ  \ Šchildren€consisted€of€š šgrounding.šš€€He€never€saw€Esther€being€whipped,€beaten,€or€starved.€€EstherŠ ųH Šwas€allowed€to€do€the€same€things€the€rest€of€the€children€did,€to€wit:€she€watched€television€andŠ ä4 Šmovies,€played€Nintendo,€talked€on€the€telephone,€went€to€the€mall€and€the€park,€rode€her€bike,€andŠ Š  Šused€the€computer€toš šsurf€the€Web.šš€€Peter€claimed€that€he€never€heard€the€Defendants€tell€her€howŠ ¼  Što€dress,€he€never€saw€her€unclothed,€and€she€was€not€told€where€to€sit€during€church€services.€€InŠ Øų Šfact,€she€sat€with€a€number€of€different€people.€€As€for€injuries,€Peter€said€that€he€witnessed€a€few.€Š ”ä ŠHe€saw€her€injure€her€hand€in€January€1997,€when€hot€gravy€or€grease€somehow€splashed€onto€itŠ €Š Šwhile€she€was€removing€a€roast€from€the€oven.€€She€immediately€ran€to€the€sink€and€washed€it€off.€Š l¼ ŠLater€that€evening,€her€hand€was€red€but€she€claimed€to€be€š šokay.šš€€Another€injury€occurred€in€1994Š X Ø Šor€1995,€during€one€of€the€many€baseball€games€the€children€played€together.€€Someone€threw€a€bat,Š D!” Šwhich€hit€Esther€in€the€face.€€Esther€also€occasionally€scraped€her€knees€when€she€played€on€theŠ 0"€  Šasphalt€parking€lot.€€Another€time,€he€watched€her€zealously€scratch€mosquito€bites€until€they€bled.€Š #l! ŠĢą  ąPeter€recalled€that€Esther€was€š švery€happyšš€on€the€day€before€she€went€to€the€hospital€inŠ ō$D # ŠFebruary€1997.€€She€also€appeared€š šrelieved€and€happyšš€to€see€the€Defendants€when€they€visited€her.€Š ą%0!$ ŠBefore€she€left€town€to€stay€at€Sonja€Meadowsšš€house,€Esther€told€Peter€she€was€š šsick€of€DebbieŠ Ģ&"% ŠRichmond€[McCauley]€coming€after€us,€[and]€coming€after€her.€€Sheššd€seen€what€Debbie€had€doneŠ ø'#& Što€our€family€and€she€was€just€sick€of€it.€€She€didnššt€want€it.šš€€Peter€was€asked€whether€he€hadŠ ¤(ō#' Šwitnessed€the€individual€incidents€which€gave€rise€to€the€charges€against€the€Defendants.€€PeterŠ )ą$( Šresponded€negatively€to€all€questions.Š |*Ģ%) ŠŠ h+ø&* Šą  ąThe€youngest€child,€Sarah€Jane€Combs,€gave€testimony€similar€to€Peterššs€and€the€otherŠ ° Šchildren€regarding€the€sleeping€arrangements,€mealtime€procedures,€home„schooling€participation,Š œģ Šshared€chore€assignments,€standard€punishments,€the€lack€of€seating€restrictions€during€churchŠ ˆŲ Šservices,€and€Estherššs€involvement€in€family€playtime.€€Sarah€also€claimed€that€she€never€saw€EstherŠ tÄ Šunclothed€or€punished€severely.€€She€recalled€only€two€incidents€where€Esther€suffered€any€injuries.€Š `° ŠThe€first€occurred€in€the€kitchen,€when€Esther€broke€a€plate€which€cut€her€arm.€€The€second€occurredŠ L œ Šduring€a€baseball€game,€when€one€of€their€friends€hit€the€top€of€Estherššs€eye€with€a€baseball€bat.€€ItŠ 8 ˆ Šwas€an€accident.€€Sarah€also€claimed€that€Esther€was€able€to€read€and€write.€€She€explained€thatŠ $ t ŠEsther€would€often€read€to€her,€and€Sarah€observed€her€compose€long€stories€and€poetry.€€Š  ` ŠĢą  ąAccording€to€Sarah,€the€day€prior€to€Estherššs€hospitalization€in€February€1997€was€notŠ č 8  Šunusual.€€Esther€seemed€š šhappy.šš€€While€in€the€hospital,€she€also€seemed€š šhappyšš€to€see€the€familyŠ Ō$  Šwhen€they€visited.€€Esther€never€complained€to€Sarah€that€either€Defendant€had€ever€injured€her.€Š Ą  ŠWhen€Sarah€was€asked€whether€she€had€witnessed€the€individual€incidents€which€gave€rise€to€theŠ ¬ü  Šcharges€against€the€Defendants,€she€replied€negatively€regarding€all€counts.€€Š ˜č  ŠĢą  ąMary€Ellen€Caldwell€testified€that€she€was€working€7:00€p.m.€to€7:00€a.m.€as€a€nurse€in€theŠ pĄ Šcardiac€intensive€care€unit€at€the€Medical€Center€during€Estherššs€treatment€in€February€1997.€Š \¬ ŠCaldwell€questioned€Esther€about€the€numerous€scars€on€her€body.€€Esther€responded€that€she€š šfellŠ H˜ Ša€lot€when€[she]€was€little.šš€€Caldwell€recalled€the€visits€by€Estherššs€family€and€described€them€asŠ 4„ Šš švery€civil,€normal.šš€€Caldwell€also€recalled€speaking€to€Joseph€Combs€on€the€telephone€when€heŠ  p Šcalled€to€inquire€about€Estherššs€condition.€€He€asked€Caldwell€to€tell€Esther€that€š šhe€loved€her.šš€Š  \ ŠDuring€cross„examination,€Caldwell€testified€that€she€observed€Esther€clutching€her€stuffed€animalsŠ ųH Šand€exhibiting€š šrestless€movementsšš€while€at€the€Medical€Center.€€She€also€moaned€loudly€andŠ ä4 Šclaimed€to€have€nightmares€involving€her€father.Š Š  ŠĢą  ąDonna€Sue€Tiller€also€worked€as€a€nurse€in€the€Medical€Centerššs€cardiac€intensive€care€unitŠ Øų Šwhile€Esther€was€a€patient.€€She€was€scheduled€to€work€only€one€day€during€Estherššs€stay,€from€7:00Š ”ä Šp.m.€to€7:00€a.m.,€and€she€saw€Estherššs€family€during€visitation.€€Tiller€said€that€the€other€CombsŠ €Š Šchildren€were€outgoing€and€friendly.€€By€contrast,€Esther€would€only€speak€when€spoken€to,€and€sheŠ l¼ Šdid€not€initiate€conversation.€€At€approximately€4:00€a.m.,€Esther€woke€up€š šwhining.šš€€She€said€sheŠ X Ø Šwas€š šhomesick,šš€missed€her€š šmama,šš€and€wanted€to€go€home.€€During€her€bath,€Esther€told€TillerŠ D!” Šthat€she€did€most€of€the€cooking€at€home€because€she€š šlovedšš€it.€€She€also€said€that€her€siblings€hadŠ 0"€  Štheir€own€chores€to€do.€€During€cross„examination,€Tiller€testified€that€she€asked€Esther€about€theŠ #l! Šmany€scars€on€her€body,€but€Esther€refused€to€discuss€them.€€According€to€Tiller,€the€scars€onŠ $X" ŠEstherššs€back€and€buttocks€were€too€numerous€to€document.Š ō$D # ŠĢą  ąDefendant€Joseph€Combs€testified€that€he€and€his€wife€adopted€their€son,€James,€when€he€wasŠ Ģ&"% Šonly€a€few€days€old.€€Shortly€thereafter,€Joseph€and€Evangeline€were€told€they€could€not€haveŠ ø'#& Šchildren,€but€they€wanted€additional€children€for€Jamesšš€sake.€€Consequently,€they€decided€to€adoptŠ ¤(ō#' Šanother€child.€€Joseph€conceded€that€he€was€familiar€with€the€adoption€process,€based€on€hisŠ )ą$( Šexperience€with€James,€and€that€he€had€signed€an€adoption€agreement€with€the€Baptist€ChildrenššsŠ |*Ģ%) ŠHome€(the€š šHomešš)€concerning€Esther€(then€š šbaby€Garciašš).€€Joseph€acknowledged€that€a€provisionŠ h+ø&* Šin€the€fourth€paragraph€of€the€agreement€stated€as€follows:€š šWe€agree€to€pay€the€fee€of€gift€to€theŠ ° ŠBaptist€Childrenššs€Home€to€pay€the€costs€of€the€Social€Services€and€to€help€defray€the€expenses€ofŠ œģ Šthe€birth€and€care€of€the€child.šš€€The€terms€of€the€fee€were€yet€to€be€discussed,€but€it€was€due€beforeŠ ˆŲ Šthe€adoption€was€finalized.€€The€Home€allowed€Joseph€and€Evangeline€to€take€Esther€home€for€a€fewŠ tÄ Šmonths€prior€to€signing€the€adoption€papers.€€She€was€five€months€old€at€the€time.€€Joseph€signedŠ `° Šthe€agreement€but€a€few€months€later,€he€became€š šconcernedšš€about€the€terms.€€He€sought€adviceŠ L œ Šfrom€an€attorney€named€Charles€Lee€Zandstra,€who€informed€him€that€he€would€be€required€to€payŠ 8 ˆ Šthe€Home€ten€percent€of€his€income€for€an€indefinite€period€of€time€once€the€adoption€was€finalized.€Š $ t ŠJoseph€called€the€Home.€€Whoever€answered€the€telephone€(Joseph€claimed€to€not€recall€the€name)Š  ` Štold€him€to€consider€the€matter€further€and€to€š štake€his€time,šš€because€š šthere€was€no€rush.šš€€Š ü L  ŠĢą  ąDuring€his€testimony,€Joseph€Combs€was€shown€copies€of€two€letters€previously€sent€to€himŠ Ō$  Šby€the€Home.€€The€first€was€dated€March€31,€1978;€the€second,€January€9,€1994.€€Both€requested€thatŠ Ą  Šhe€send€the€Home€a€copy€of€the€adoption€decree€concerning€Esther.€€Joseph€admitted€doing€nothingŠ ¬ü  Šin€response€to€the€first€letter€and€claimed€that€he€did€not€recall€receiving€the€second.€€When€hisŠ ˜č  Šattorney€asked€him€why€he€never€legally€adopted€Esther,€Joseph€replied€that,€initially,€š šit€was€fearŠ „Ō  Šof€financial€pressure.šš€€Since€he€and€his€wife€already€had€full€custody,€they€were€in€š šno€rush.šš€€AsŠ pĄ Šthe€years€rolled€by,€he€feared€that€š šif€[they]€tried€to€go€forward€at€that€point€that€[they]€would€loseŠ \¬ Šher.šš€€Joseph€admitted€that€Esther€did€not€have€a€Social€Security€card,€a€birth€certificate,€or€a€driversŠ H˜ Šlicense€while€she€lived€with€them.€€Š 4„ ŠĢą  ąJoseph€testified€that€the€Combs€family€lived€in€Indiana€for€thirteen€years.€€In€1986,€theyŠ  \ Šmoved€to€Clearwater,€Florida,€because€Joseph€wanted€to€start€a€church€there.€€All€of€the€CombsŠ ųH Šchildren€had€already€been€born€when€they€left€Indiana€except€for€Sarah,€the€youngest,€who€was€bornŠ ä4 Šin€Florida.€€Their€home€in€Florida€was€š švery€nicešš:€2200€square€feet,€with€four€bedrooms,€2€1/2Š Š  Šbathrooms,€and€a€pool.€€Joseph€claimed€that€all€of€the€Combs€children€were€outgoing;€they€frequentlyŠ ¼  Šstopped€people€on€the€street€to€talk€with€them.€€Joseph€denied€that€he€made€any€attempts€to€hide€theŠ Øų Šchildren.€€He€also€denied€that€Esther€was€required€to€prepare€the€familyššs€meals.€€His€wife,Š ”ä ŠEvangeline,€performed€that€duty.€€According€to€Joseph,€the€relationship€between€the€members€of€theŠ €Š ŠCombs€family€was€real€close,€and€the€family€š šdid€a€lot€together.šš€€Joseph€tried€š što€expose€[theŠ l¼ Šchildren]€to€as€many€different€places€and€things€as€possible,šš€and€Esther€was€not€treated€anyŠ X Ø Šdifferently€than€any€other€person€in€the€family.€€€€Joseph€denied€using€š šthe€officešš€in€the€FloridaŠ D!” Šhome€as€a€place€to€spank€Esther.€€Rather,€he€claimed€that€the€house€did€not€have€an€office.€€TheŠ 0"€  Šfamily€lived€in€Florida€for€eighteen€months.€Š #l! ŠĢą  ąJoseph€refuted€the€testimony€of€Malinda€Oakes€and€Esther€concerning€Estherššs€inability€toŠ ō$D # Šread€and€write.€€He€claimed€that€she€knew€how€to€do€both€before€leaving€Indiana€and€her€talentsŠ ą%0!$ Šincluded€creative€writing.€€Esther€participated€in€the€same€home„schooling€program€as€the€rest€of€theŠ Ģ&"% Šchildren.€€Instruction€took€place€from€8:00€a.m.€until€approximately€noon,€Monday€through€Friday.€Š ø'#& ŠJoseph€admitted€that€Malinda€Oaks€had€volunteered€to€help€teach€the€children.€€Joseph€informed€herŠ ¤(ō#' Šthat€this€was€not€necessary,€but€she€could€possibly€tutor€them€in€some€subjects€if€she€liked.€€In€sum,Š )ą$( Šā āhe€did€not€encourage€her€or€strictly€prohibit€her€from€participating.€€Joseph€also€claimed€that€theŠ |*Ģ%) Štestimony€of€Rose€Kelly€Wood,€who€noticed€that€the€back€of€Estherššs€legs€were€š švery,€very€scarred,ššŠ ° Šwas€untrue.Š œģ Šā āĢą  ąIn€1988,€the€Combs€family€left€Florida€and€traveled€from€state€to€state€€in€a€š šforty„five€footŠ tÄ Šfifth€wheel€trailer.šš€€Joseph€had€received€numerous€invitations€for€extended€meetings€at€churchesŠ `° Šacross€the€country,€and€he€decided€to€accept€them.€€Joseph€denied€giving€Esther€a€š špink€bellyšš€duringŠ L œ Štheir€travels€in€the€trailer,€or€at€any€other€time.€€Š 8 ˆ ŠĢą  ąIn€April€1989,€the€family€settled€down€in€Bristol,€Tennessee.€€Joseph€assumed€the€pastorshipŠ  ` Šof€EBC,€and€the€Combs€took€up€residence€in€the€fellowship€hall€of€the€church.€€According€to€Joseph,Š ü L  Šall€of€the€children,€including€Esther,€slept€in€the€fellowship€hall.€€He€claimed€that€Esther€interactedŠ č 8  Šwell€with€the€other€Combs€children.€€She€was€š špositive,šš€š šcheerful,šš€and€played€with€all€of€them.€Š Ō$  ŠShe€also€played€with€some€of€the€children€who€attended€EBC€and€rode€her€bike.€€Esther€was€notŠ Ą  Šrestricted€as€to€where€she€did€these€things.€€With€regard€to€chore€assignments,€Joseph€testified€thatŠ ¬ü  Šno€child€was€given€more€to€do€than€any€other€child€and€none€of€them€complained.€€Moreover,€heŠ ˜č  Šclaimed€that€Esther€was€never€told€that€her€purpose€in€life€was€to€be€a€servant€and€she€was€neverŠ „Ō  Štreated€as€such.€€She€did€not€retire€at€3:00€a.m.€and€she€was€not€forced€out€of€bed€at€5:00€a.m.€€EstherŠ pĄ Šwatched€television€with€the€other€children€and€she€was€never€deprived€of€food.€€Joseph€testified€thatŠ \¬ ŠEsther€was€not€sick€more€than€the€rest€of€the€Combs€children;€it€only€appeared€that€she€missed€moreŠ H˜ Šchurch€services€because€she€worked€in€the€nursery€so€frequently.€€Š 4„ ŠĢą  ąRegarding€Estherššs€two€attempts€to€run€away,€Joseph€gave€the€following€explanations:€TheŠ  \ Šfirst€incident€followed€an€argument€that€occurred€between€Joseph€and€his€wife.€€Esther€overheardŠ ųH Šthe€argument,€misunderstood€it,€and€then€decided€to€take€a€walk.€€During€her€walk,€she€becameŠ ä4 Šconfused€as€to€her€whereabouts.€€She€noticed€a€little€store€on€the€roadway€and€headed€for€it,€but€sheŠ Š  Šbecame€nervous€when€she€saw€a€police€car€pull€over.€€Hence,€she€ducked€into€the€bathroom€andŠ ¼  Šlocked€the€door.€€Meanwhile,€the€Combs€family€was€searching€everywhere€for€her.€€Within€a€fewŠ Øų Šminutes€of€her€departure,€they€realized€she€was€gone.€€Joseph€said€that€he€was€š šnot€comfortableššŠ ”ä Šwith€the€idea€of€Esther€being€outside€because€it€was€raining€and€rather€windy€that€evening.€€WhenŠ €Š Šthe€police€reported€that€they€had€found€her,€Joseph€picked€her€up.€€The€second€runaway€incidentŠ l¼ Šbegan€with€Esther€hearing€noises€during€her€shift€in€the€church€nursery.€€Esther€became€frightenedŠ X Ø Šand€went€outside€to€investigate.€€Once€outside,€she€thought€someone€was€chasing€her,€so€she€startedŠ D!” Šrunning.€€The€next€thing€she€knew,€she€woke€up€on€Highway€421.€€She€began€walking€along€theŠ 0"€  Šroad.€€A€pastor€and€his€wife€from€Mountain€City€picked€her€up€and€tried€to€help€her.€€She€would€notŠ #l! Štell€them€who€she€was,€so€they€turned€her€over€to€the€local€authorities.€€The€Combs€family€learnedŠ $X" Šshe€had€been€found€at€approximately€3:00€or€4:00€a.m.€the€next€morning€and€then€brought€her€home.Š ō$D # ŠĢą  ąJoseph€testified€that€on€February€17,€1997,€the€day€before€Esther€was€taken€to€the€hospital,Š Ģ&"% Šthe€Combs€children€had€played€vigorously€all€day.€€Esther€was€fine,€but€tired.€€When€evening€came,Š ø'#& Šsome€of€the€children€did€not€feel€well.€€Everyone€went€to€bed.€€The€next€morning,€David€alerted€heŠ ¤(ō#' Šand€Evangeline€that€Esther€was€having€š šsome€kind€of€seizure€or€something.šš€€She€was€in€theŠ )ą$( Šbathroom,€š škinda€jerking€around.šš€€Cindy€dialed€911.€€When€it€appeared€as€though€she€stoppedŠ |*Ģ%) Šbreathing€a€few€times,€and€the€emergency€personnel€had€not€arrived,€Joseph€was€afraid€she€wouldŠ h+ø&* Šdie€any€second.€€The€ambulance€finally€arrived,€however,€and€transported€her€to€the€hospital.€€TheŠ ° Šrest€of€the€family€followed€in€a€car.Š œģ ŠĢą  ąThe€following€morning,€Detective€Debbie€Richmond„McCauley€questioned€Joseph€in€anŠ tÄ Šattempt€to€determine€how€Esther€had€become€sick.€€Joseph€testified€that€McCauleyššs€questionsŠ `° Šconcerned€only€Estherššs€then„present€condition.€€She€did€not€ask€him€about€the€scars€on€EstherššsŠ L œ Šbody€and€Joseph€never€told€her€that€Esther€was€š šclumsyšš€and€š šfell€a€lot.šš€€He€also€denied€that€he€wasŠ 8 ˆ Šever€asked€to€give€or€sign€a€statement.€€Joseph€claimed€that€he€visited€Esther€in€the€hospital€at€everyŠ $ t Šopportunity€and€that€he€and€Esther€had€a€š šclosešš€relationship.€€They€discussed€many€personal€mattersŠ  ` Šand€he€loved€her.€€He€thought€that€she€also€loved€him.€€Consequently,€he€was€š šbewilderedšš€by€theŠ ü L  Šaccusations€against€him.€€Š č 8  ŠĢą  ąJoseph€recalled€when€the€Bristol€Fire€Department€came€to€the€EBC€fellowship€hall€in€MarchŠ Ą  Š1997.€€A€day€or€two€later,€Cindy,€Peter€and€Sarah€Combs€(the€minor€children)€were€removed€fromŠ ¬ü  Šthe€custody€of€the€Combs€for€approximately€one€year.€€In€June€1997,€the€family€moved€to€a€place€justŠ ˜č  Šoutside€of€Bristol.€€In€October€1997,€Esther€left€town.€€She€stayed€with€Sonja€Meadows€for€a€shortŠ „Ō  Štime,€and€then€moved€to€South€Carolina.€€There,€she€stayed€with€Reverend€Carpenterššs€family.€Š pĄ ŠJoseph€testified€that€he€was€present€when€Esther€left€town.€€He€claimed€that€Esther€was€š šscaredšš€andŠ \¬ Šš šfrustratedšš€by€the€police€driving€by€the€Combs€residence€and€the€unfamiliar€people€dropping€byŠ H˜ Štheir€home.€€Esther€knew€that€Joseph€had€been€summoned€to€go€to€court.€€She€wanted€to€leave€theŠ 4„ Šarea€and€asked€him€to€assist€her.€€Joseph€agreed€to€do€so.€€Š  p ŠĢą  ąFollowing€the€hearing€on€October€3,€1997,€the€Chancery€Court€for€Sullivan€County€at€Bristol,Š ųH ŠTennessee,€issued€the€following€court€order€which€was€read€into€evidence€during€Josephššs€testimony:Š ä4 ŠĢą8  ąUpon€Petitionerššs€motion€for€physical€and€psychiatric€examinations€and€appointmentŠ ¼  Šof€guardian€ad€litem,€brought€on€notice€for€hearing€on€October€3rd,€1997,€before€theŠ Øų ŠHonorable€Richard€E.€Ladd,€Respondent€did€not€appear.€€Respondentššs€caretaker,Š ”ä ŠJoseph€Combs,€appeared€and€testified€that€after€living€with€him€for€over€nineteen€(19)Š €Š Šyears,€Respondent€suddenly€left€without€her€[sic]€of€her€plans€or€whereabouts€someŠ l¼ Štime€prior€to€the€service€of€the€instant€petition€on€August€the€4th,€1997.€€AlthoughŠ X Ø ŠMr.€Combs€testified€that€Respondent,€Esther€Combs,€has€called€him€on€the€telephoneŠ D!” Šsince€and€has€appeared€in€his€Church€audience,€he€has€never€informed€her€of€this€caseŠ 0"€  Šand€has€no€idea€whatsoever€as€to€her€present€whereabouts.Š#l!Š Š  ŠĢą  ąJoseph€admitted€that€he€had€knowledge€of€Estherššs€whereabouts€at€the€time€of€the€hearingŠ ō$D # Šand€that€his€statement€to€the€contrary€was€untrue.€€However,€Estherššs€attorney€had€informed€her€thatŠ ą%0!$ Šshe€was€under€no€duty€to€appear.€€Thus,€what€she€did€was€her€choice,€and€she€chose€to€leave€town.€Š Ģ&"% ŠShe€was€no€longer€a€minor,€and€Joseph€was€not€her€caretaker.€€To€avoid€doing€anything€illegal,Š ø'#& ŠJoseph€had€asked€for€advice€from€three€different€attorneys€on€this€matter.€€(He€did€not€testifyŠ ¤(ō#' Šregarding€the€substance€of€such€advice.)€€Joseph€said€that€he€and€Esther€kept€in€touch€via€cellularŠ )ą$( Štelephone,€but€he€did€not€see€her€again€until€she€testified€at€trial.€€Š |*Ģ%) ŠŠ h+ø&* Šą  ąConcerning€the€charge€of€especially€aggravated€kidnapping€(count€1),€Joseph€testified€thatŠ ° Šhe€never€confined€Esther€by€a€display€of€deadly€weapons€and€that€he€never€observed€Evangeline€doŠ œģ Šso.€€The€Combs€household€had€three€working€telephones,€and€the€doors€to€their€residence€all€lockedŠ ˆŲ Šfrom€the€inside,€not€the€outside.€€In€other€words,€it€was€not€possible€to€prohibit€anyone€from€exitingŠ tÄ Šthe€Combs€residence€by€locking€the€doors.€€Further,€Joseph€testified€that€in€the€period€of€time€fromŠ `° ŠApril€30,€1990€to€October€3,€1997,€he€and€Evangeline€took€frequent€trips,€during€which€the€childrenŠ L œ Šwere€left€at€home€without€adult€supervision.€€Even€when€the€Defendants€were€home,€the€childrenŠ 8 ˆ Šwere€all€allowed€to€come€and€go€as€they€pleased,€within€the€normal€parameters€typically€allowedŠ $ t Šchildren.€€Esther€never€declared€a€desire€to€leave€home,€and,€when€her€hospitalization€and€the€twoŠ  ` Šrunaway€incidents€were€over,€she€had€returned€home€voluntarily.€€Š ü L  ŠĢą  ąWith€regard€to€count€2,€which€alleged€that€Joseph€choked€Esther€with€a€rope€sometimeŠ Ō$  Šbetween€June€1,€1996€and€September€1,€1996,€Joseph€testified€that€the€charge€was€untrue.€Š Ą  ŠSpecifically,€Joseph€claimed€that€on€March€26,€1996,€he€underwent€surgery€to€replace€the€aorticŠ ¬ü  Švalve€in€his€heart.€€As€a€result,€he€was€incapacitated€for€a€period€of€time€thereafter,€e.g.,€he€could€notŠ ˜č  Špreach€or€drive€for€months,€and€he€often€felt€dizzy€and€sick.€€Full€recovery€took€approximately€oneŠ „Ō  Šand€one„half€years.€€In€sum,€he€asserted€that€the€operation€left€him€so€physically€weak€that€he€couldŠ pĄ Šnot€have€committed€this€crime.€€Š \¬ ŠĢą  ąWith€regard€to€count€15,€alleging€that€Joseph€raped€Esther€on€June€16,€1991,€Joseph€testifiedŠ 4„ Šthat€€the€family€spent€the€entire€day€eating€fried€chicken€at€his€motherššs€house.€€They€returned€homeŠ  p Šin€time€for€the€evening€service€at€church.€€On€November€25,€1993,€the€day€Joseph€allegedlyŠ  \ Šcommitted€the€crime€of€rape€in€count€16,€the€Combs€family€had€again€spent€the€entire€day€at€hisŠ ųH Šmotherššs€house.€€It€was€Thanksgiving€Day,€and€the€family€did€not€return€home€until€approximatelyŠ ä4 Šmidnight.€Š Š  Š€Ģą  ąJoseph€also€denied€committing€the€crimes€in€the€other€counts€against€him.€€Josephššs€attorneyŠ Øų Šshowed€him€a€photograph€of€four€items€(Exhibit€178):€an€umbrella€with€some€of€the€spokes€exposed,Š ”ä Ša€piece€of€wood,€a€coiled€metal€wire,€and€a€piece€of€metal€(resembling€a€bent€curtain€rod).€€The€itemsŠ €Š Šwere€discovered€by€the€police€investigators€at€the€EBC€fellowship€hall€after€the€Combsšš€departure.€Š l¼ ŠJoseph€denied€using€the€items€to€beat€or€whip€Esther.€€Joseph€also€denied€using€Estherššs€head€toŠ X Ø Šmake€the€hole€in€his€office€wall,€as€shown€in€the€photograph€numbered€Exhibit€174.€€Joseph€thenŠ D!” Šrepudiated€Estherššs€other€allegations,€to€wit:€he€claimed€he€did€not€beat€her€black€and€blue€with€aŠ 0"€  Šwater€hose€as€punishment€for€running€away;€he€did€not€ever€give€her€a€black€eye;€he€was€unfamiliarŠ #l! Šwith€the€š šnormal€positionšš€she€had€claimed€to€assume€during€beatings;€he€did€not€require€that€EstherŠ $X" Šwear€certain€types€of€apparel;€he€did€not€force€her€to€wear€her€hair€in€any€particular€style;€powderŠ ō$D # Šwas€never€placed€in€front€of€the€door€to€Estherššs€room;€the€condition€of€Estherššs€front€teeth€was€theŠ ą%0!$ Šresult€of€a€fall,€rather€than€the€colliding€of€her€face€with€a€wall;€and€he€did€not€treat€her€anyŠ Ģ&"% Šdifferently€than€the€other€Combs€children.€€In€addition,€Joseph€said€he€never€observed€his€wife,Š ø'#& ŠEvangeline,€behave€as€described€by€Esther€during€her€testimony.Š ¤(ō#' ŠĢą  ąDuring€cross„examination,€Joseph€denied€that€he€responded,€š šWhat€marks?šš€when€Dr.Š |*Ģ%) ŠGerlock€asked€him€about€the€scars€on€Estherššs€body.€€He€also€denied€saying,€š šShe€falls€a€lot,šš€whenŠ h+ø&* Šquestioned€further.€€Joseph€said€that€he€did€not€recall€meeting€Dr.€Gerlock.€€He€also€did€not€recallŠ ° Štalking€with€Susan€Early,€who€previously€testified€that€Joseph€had€refused€to€respond€to€questionsŠ œģ Šabout€the€origin€of€Estherššs€scars.€€Joseph€explained€that€he€quit€answering€all€questions€after€talkingŠ ˆŲ Šwith€Detective€McCauley.€€Joseph€denied€telling€Dr.€Stiefel€that€Esther€had€never€been€to€a€€hospitalŠ tÄ Šor€to€see€a€doctor,€because€this€was€not€a€true€statement.€€He€also€refuted€the€testimony€of€GaylandŠ `° ŠOaks,€which€stated€that€Joseph€had€said€š šit€was€necessary€to€spank€[a€child]€through€their€rebellionŠ L œ Šuntil€they€stop€resisting€and€crying.šš€€In€addition,€Joseph€disclaimed€making€the€followingŠ 8 ˆ Šstatements:€(1)€God€had€created€Esther€to€be€a€servant€and€he€was€training€her€to€do€so;€(2)€EstherŠ $ t Šwas€clumsy€and€fell€a€lot;€(3)€it€was€Estherššs€responsibility€to€care€for€the€younger€children;€and€(4)Š  ` Šhe€had€never€seen€scars€on€Esther€before.€€Joseph€also€claimed€that€the€testimony€of€Arnold,€Owens,Š ü L  Šand€Hensley,€concerning€food€deliveries€to€the€Combs€family,€was€untrue.€€Š č 8  ŠĢą  ąJoseph€admitted€that€the€Defendantsšš€failure€to€legally€adopt€Esther€prohibited€her€fromŠ Ą  Šobtaining€both€a€Social€Security€number€and€any€type€of€job€which€required€one.€€Joseph€alsoŠ ¬ü  Štestified€that€he€did€not€have€Esther€š štakenšš€anywhere,€when€she€left€town€in€October€1997.€€Instead,Š ˜č  Ša€man€named€Ricky€Martin€š štook€her€somewhere€and€she€ended€up€at€Sonja€Meadowsšš€[home].šš€Š „Ō  ŠJoseph€claimed€that€the€record€of€what€was€said€during€the€hearing,€as€reflected€by€Judge€LaddššsŠ pĄ Šorder,€was€inaccurate.€€According€to€Joseph,€his€testimony€on€October€3,€1997,€stated€that€š šhe€wasnšštŠ \¬ Šsure€where€she€was€and€[he]€had€reason€to€know€or€to€believe€that€[he]€knew€where€she€was.šš€€Next,Š H˜ ŠJoseph€stated€that€he€was€asked€only€whether€he€had€informed€Esther€about€the€subpoena,€and€thenŠ 4„ Šhe€admitted€that€he€was€š šfairly€confident€that€she€was€[with€Sonja€Meadows]šš€at€that€time.€€He€alsoŠ  p Šadmitted€arranging€Estherššs€transportation€to€South€Carolina.€€He€said€he€did€this€because€he€lovedŠ  \ Šher€and€she€needed€his€help.Š ųH ŠĢą  ąAlso€during€cross„examination,€Joseph€was€shown€sixteen€photos€of€the€numerous€scarsŠ Š  Šcovering€Estherššs€body.€€For€each€photograph,€the€prosecutor€asked€whether€he€could€give€anyŠ ¼  Šexplanation€as€to€the€cause€of€the€scar.€€Joseph€claimed€to€have€knowledge€regarding€only€threeŠ Øų Šscars:€a€scar€on€Estherššs€left€arm€was€caused€when€she€broke€a€plate;€a€scar€on€her€right€eyebrow€wasŠ ”ä Šcaused€when€she€was€hit€with€a€baseball€bat€while€playing€a€game;€and€another€on€her€forehead€wasŠ €Š Šprobably€caused€when€she€ran€into€the€television€or€fell€in€gravel,€he€was€not€certain.€€As€for€theŠ l¼ Šscars€on€her€shoulder,€lower€back,€arms,€hands,€buttocks,€and€thighs,€Joseph€claimed€to€have€noŠ X Ø Šknowledge€of€their€presence€or€their€origin.€€Regarding€the€photographs€of€places€normally€coveredŠ D!” Šby€Estherššs€clothing,€Joseph€testified€that€he€could€have€no€knowledge€concerning€these€injuriesŠ 0"€  Šsince€he€had€never€seen€her€unclothed.Š #l! ŠĢą  ąEvangeline€Combs€did€not€testify.€€Following€the€testimony€of€Joseph€Combs,€bothŠ ō$D # ŠDefendants€rested€their€cases.€€As€rebuttal€proof,€the€State€called€Ricky€Dale€Martin,€who€testifiedŠ ą%0!$ Šthat€he€never€transported€Esther€from€Bristol€to€the€residence€of€Sonja€Meadows.€€During€cross„Š Ģ&"% Šexamination,€he€stated€that€Esther€had€never€even€been€in€his€vehicle.€€Sonja€Meadows€thenŠ ø'#& Šcorroborated€Martinššs€statement€that€he€did€not€drive€Esther€to€her€house.Š ¤(ō#' ŠĢą  ąJenny€Smeltzer,€the€director€of€the€911€Dispatch€Unit€in€Bristol,€Tennessee,€testified€that€theŠ |*Ģ%) Š911€system€is€capable€of€accurately€recording€the€exact€time€a€call€is€received€and€the€precise€timeŠ h+ø&* Šthe€911€emergency€personnel€first€arrive€at€the€scene.€€In€this€case,€the€911€dispatch€records€reflectedŠ ° Šthe€following:€a€911€call€was€received€from€EBC€at€11:00:18€a.m.;€a€second€call€was€received€fromŠ œģ Šthe€same€location€at€11:04:28€a.m.;€the€first€officer€or€medical€technician€arrived€at€the€scene€atŠ ˆŲ Š11:04:24€a.m.;€and€the€ambulance€arrived€at€11:09:31.€€The€ambulance€arrived€nine€minutes€andŠ tÄ Šthirteen€seconds€after€the€first€911€call€was€received€by€the€911€Dispatch€Unit.Š `° ŠĢą  ąTo€rebut€the€testimony€of€defense€witness€Samuel€Johnson€(who€claimed€the€Combs€familyŠ 8 ˆ Šhome€was€š šnormalšš),€the€State€presented€the€testimony€of€Franklin€C.€McCauley,€Jr.,€a€SpecialŠ $ t ŠAgent,€Criminal€Investigator€with€the€Tennessee€Bureau€of€Investigation.€€Agent€McCauley€said€thatŠ  ` Šhe€had€a€telephone€conversation€with€Samuel€Johnson€in€connection€with€Estherššs€case,€duringŠ ü L  Šwhich€Johnson€informed€him€that€the€Combs€children€were€very€quiet€and€did€not€intermingle€withŠ č 8  Šthe€other€kids.€€Moreover,€Esther€did€not€even€intermingle€with€the€other€children€in€the€family.€Š Ō$  ŠJohnson€informed€Agent€McCauley€that€he€never€really€spoke€to€the€children€or€had€the€opportunityŠ Ą  Što€get€close€to€them.Š ¬ü  ŠĢą  ąPrior€to€charging€the€jury,€the€trial€court€heard€arguments€by€both€parties€concerning€variousŠ „Ō  Šmotions,€including€a€motion€to€dismiss€counts€3€through€6€on€the€ground€that€the€charges€wereŠ pĄ Šbarred€by€the€statute€of€limitations.€€(Count€3€charged€both€Defendants€with€aggravated€assault;Š \¬ Šcount€4€charged€Evangeline€with€aggravated€assault;€and€counts€5€and€6€charged€Evangeline€withŠ H˜ Šassault.)€€Following€the€hearing,€the€trial€court€dismissed€counts€3€through€6€as€barred€by€the€statuteŠ 4„ Šof€limitations€and€instructed€the€jury€concerning€the€remaining€charges.€€After€some€deliberation,€theŠ  p Šjury€convicted€Defendant€Evangeline€Combs€of€one€count€of€especially€aggravated€kidnapping€andŠ  \ Šfour€counts€of€aggravated€child€abuse.€€The€jury€found€her€not€guilty€of€one€count€of€aggravatedŠ ųH Šassault.€€Defendant€Joseph€Combs€was€convicted€of€one€count€each€of€especially€aggravatedŠ ä4 Škidnapping,€aggravated€assault,€aggravated€perjury,€and€aggravated€rape,€in€addition€to€seven€countsŠ Š  Šof€rape.€€Following€a€sentencing€hearing,€Evangeline€Combs€received€a€sentence€of€65€years,€andŠ ¼  ŠJoseph€Combs€received€an€effective€sentence€of€114€years.€€Š Øų ŠĢņ ņą@ņņ&ģąANALYSISó óˆŠ €Š ŠĢņ ņą@ĒĒģąI.€€Voir€Dire€Proceedingsó óˆŠ X Ø ŠĢą  ąBoth€Defendants€contend€that€the€trial€court€committed€errors€during€the€voir€direŠ 0"€  Šexamination€of€two€prospective€jurors.€€Specifically,€the€Defendants€argue€that€the€examination€ofŠ #l! ŠHunter€Jones€revealed€that€he€would€be€unable€to€render€an€impartial€verdict.€€Accordingly,€theŠ $X" ŠDefendants€assert€that€Jones€should€have€been€excused€š šfor€cause,šš€and€the€trial€court€abused€itsŠ ō$D # Šdiscretion€by€refusing€to€do€so.€€The€Defendants€also€contend€that€the€trial€court€limited€the€scopeŠ ą%0!$ Šof€the€Defendantsšš€questions€with€regard€to€whether€a€prospective€juror,€Misty€Bishop,€harboredŠ Ģ&"% Šš šsuspicions€of€guilt.šš€€The€Defendants€maintain€that€this€limitation€was€improper€because€it€criticallyŠ ø'#& Šimpaired€their€attorneysšš€ability€to€uncover€juror€bias.€€To€summarize,€the€Defendants€argue€thatŠ ¤(ō#' Šthese€errors€require€reversal€of€the€judgments€in€this€case€because€they€effectively€denied€theŠ )ą$( ŠDefendants€their€constitutional€right€to€a€fair€and€impartial€jury.€€We€disagree.Š |*Ģ%) ŠŠ h+ø&* Šą  ąThe€ultimate€goal€of€voir€dire€is€to€see€that€jurors€are€competent,€unbiased,€and€impartial,€andŠ ° Šthe€decision€of€€how€to€conduct€voir€dire€of€prospective€jurors€rests€within€the€sound€discretion€ofŠ œģ Šthe€trial€court.€€ņņState€v.€Harrisóó,€839€S.W.2d€54,€65€(Tenn.€1992);€€ņņState€v.€Simonóó,€635€S.W.2d€498,Š ˆŲ Š508€(Tenn.€1982).€€The€trial€judgeššs€actions€in€the€conduct€of€voir€dire€will€not€be€disturbed€unlessŠ tÄ Šthere€is€an€abuse€of€that€discretion.€€ņņState€v.€Irickóó,€762€S.W.2d€121,€125€(Tenn.€1988).€€The€Sixth€andŠ `° ŠFourteenth€Amendments€unquestionably€guarantee€a€defendant€the€right€to€an€impartial€jury.€€ņņSeeóóŠ L œ ŠņņWainwright€v.€Wittóó,€469€U.S.€412,€105€S.€Ct.€844,€83€L.€Ed.€2d€841€(1985).€€The€process€of€voir€direŠ 8 ˆ Šand€the€defendantššs€use€of€peremptory€challenges€is€one€means€to€achieve€that€end.€€ņņRoss€v.Š $ t ŠOklahomaóó,€487€U.S.€81,€88,€108€S.€Ct.€2273,€2278,€101€L.€Ed.€2d€80€(1988).Š  ` ŠĢą  ąThe€trial€court€has€wide€discretion€in€ruling€upon€the€qualifications€of€a€juror.€€ņņState€v.Š č 8  ŠKilburnóó,€782€S.W.2d€199,€203€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1989).€€€When€the€trial€court€erroneously€refusesŠ Ō$  Što€excuse€a€juror€for€cause,€the€error€is€harmless€unless€the€jury€that€heard€the€case€was€not€fair€andŠ Ą  Šimpartial.€€ņņState€v.€Thompsonóó,€768€S.W.2d€239,€246€(Tenn.€1989).€€It€is€well„settled€that€a€defendantŠ ¬ü  Šwho€disagrees€with€a€trial€courtššs€ruling€on€juror€challenges€š šfor€causešš€must,€in€order€to€preserveŠ ˜č  Šthe€claim€that€the€ruling€deprived€him€of€a€fair€trial,€first€utilize€such€peremptory€challenges€as€heŠ „Ō  Šhas€available€to€remove€the€jurors.€€ņņState€v.€Howellóó,€868€S.W.2d€238,€248€(Tenn.€1993).€€The€trialŠ pĄ Šcourtššs€failure€to€properly€exclude€a€juror€for€cause€is€grounds€for€reversal€only€if€the€defendant€hasŠ \¬ Šexhausted€all€of€his€peremptory€challenges€and€an€incompetent€juror€is€then€forced€upon€him.€€ņņRossóó,Š H˜ Š487€U.S.€at€89,€108€S.€Ct.€at€2279;€ņņState€v.€Jonesóó,€789€S.W.2d€545,€549€(Tenn.€1990).€€In€their€briefs,Š 4„ Šboth€Defendants€claim€that€they€had€utilized€all€peremptory€challenges€prior€to€the€voir€direŠ  p Šexaminations€of€the€jurors€in€issue.€€The€record€does€not€indicate€otherwise,€and€the€State€does€notŠ  \ Šdispute€their€claim€in€its€brief.Š ųH ŠĢą  ąņ ņA.€€Failure€to€Excuse€Hunter€Jones€for€Causeó óŠ Š  ŠĢą  ą€The€Defendants€contend€that€Hunter€Jones€should€have€been€excused€š šfor€causešš€becauseŠ Øų Šthe€voir€dire€examination€revealed€that€(1)€Jones€was€š šintricately€relatedšš€to€numerous€prosecutionŠ ”ä Šwitnesses€through€professional€and€personal€relationships,€and€(2)€his€employment€in€anŠ €Š Šadministrative€position€with€Wellmont€Health€Systems€gave€him€pre„trial€exposure€to€informationŠ l¼ Šabout€the€trial.€€The€Defendants€maintain€that€both€circumstances€clearly€affected€his€judgment,Š X Ø Šthereby€rendering€him€unable€to€deliver€a€fair€and€impartial€verdict.€€Š D!” ŠĢą  ąThe€record€reflects€that€Hunter€Jones,€a€registered€nurse,€was€also€employed€as€the€DirectorŠ #l! Šof€Education€and€Development€Services€at€Wellmont€Health€System.€€His€duties€included€settingŠ $X" Šup€continuing€education€programs€for€nurses€and€other€health€care€professionals.€€Jones€stated€that,Š ō$D # Šin€this€capacity,€he€had€met€or€instructed€various€witnesses€whose€names€were€on€the€StateššsŠ ą%0!$ Špotential€witness€list.€€(Two€of€the€witnesses€known€to€Jones€did,€in€fact,€testify:€Susan€Early€andŠ Ģ&"% ŠElizabeth€Owen€Cribb.)€€During€voir€dire,€the€attorney€for€Joseph€Combs€asked€Jones€whether€heŠ ø'#& Šmight€consider€the€testimony€of€those€witnesses€whom€he€knew€to€be€more€credible€than€that€of€theŠ ¤(ō#' Šother€witnesses.€€Jones€responded,€š šNo,€not€necessarily.šš€€Jones€claimed€that€he€knew€three€of€theŠ )ą$( Špossible€witnesses€(Teresa€Bott,€Susan€Early,€and€Elizabeth€Cribb)€š šfairly€well.šš€€He€had€worked€asŠ |*Ģ%) Ša€direct€supervisor€over€Bott€for€two€and€one„half€years,€but€they€did€not€socialize;€Early€was€theŠ h+ø&* Šsocial€worker€assigned€to€his€wifeššs€case,€and€they€had€worked€on€various€committees€together;€andŠ ° ŠCribb€had€served€on€a€committee€with€him.€€Jones€stated€that€he€had€not€discussed€the€case€with€anyŠ œģ Šof€these€women€and€none€of€them€knew€he€had€been€called€as€a€potential€juror.€€Jones€said€that€heŠ ˆŲ Šhad€a€š špretty€close€personal€relationshipšš€with€Early,€but€he€claimed€that€this€would€not€cause€himŠ tÄ Što€give€her€testimony€additional€weight.€€With€regard€to€any€pre„trial€knowledge€of€the€case,€JonesŠ `° Štestified€that€the€upcoming€Combs€trial€was€discussed€during€a€management€meeting:€managementŠ L œ Šhad€instructed€the€department€heads€to€remind€their€staff€that€the€trial€was€pending,€that€some€of€theŠ 8 ˆ Šstaff€would€be€witnesses,€and€that€they€were€not€to€discuss€the€case€with€anyone.Š $ t ŠĢą  ąAt€the€conclusion€of€Jonesšš€voir€dire€examination,€the€attorneys€for€both€Defendants€movedŠ ü L  Što€dismiss€Jones€š šfor€cause.šš€€As€justification€for€dismissal,€the€attorneys€argued€that€Jones€workedŠ č 8  Šfor€the€same€employer€as€some€of€the€Stateššs€witnesses€and€that€he€was€tied€too€closely€to€them,Š Ō$  Šespecially€Early.€€The€trial€judge€denied€the€motion,€stating€that€Jones€was€š švery€specific€that€heŠ Ą  Šcould€not€overstep€any€bounds.ššŠ ¬ü  ŠĢą  ąIn€their€briefs,€the€Defendants€cite€Rule€24(b)(2)€of€Tennesseeššs€Rules€of€Criminal€Procedure,Š „Ō  Šwhich€provides€that€any€party€may€challenge€a€prospective€juror€for€cause€ifŠ pĄ ŠĢą8  ąą ` ąThe€prospective€jurorššs€exposure€to€potentially€prejudicial€information€makesŠ H˜ Šthe€person€unacceptable€as€a€juror.€€ņņBoth€the€degree€of€exposure€and€the€prospectiveŠ 4„ Šjurorššs€testimony€as€to€his€or€her€state€of€mind€shall€be€considered€in€determiningŠ  p Šacceptability.óó€€A€prospective€juror€who€states€that€he€or€she€will€be€unable€toŠ  \ Šovercome€preconceptions€shall€be€subject€to€challenge€for€cause€no€matter€how€slightŠ ųH Šthe€exposure.€€If€the€prospective€juror€has€seen€or€heard€and€remembers€informationŠ ä4 Šthat€will€be€developed€in€the€course€of€trial,€or€that€may€be€inadmissible€but€is€not€soŠ Š  Šprejudicial€as€to€create€a€substantial€risk€that€his€or€her€judgment€will€be€affected,€ņņtheŠ ¼  Šprospective€jurorššs€acceptability€shall€depend€on€whether€the€testimony€as€toŠ Øų Šimpartiality€is€believed.€€óóIf€the€prospective€juror€admits€to€having€formed€an€opinion,Š ”ä Šhe€or€she€shall€be€subject€to€challenge€for€cause€unless€the€examination€showsŠ €Š Šunequivocally€that€the€prospective€juror€can€be€impartial.Šl¼Š Š  ŠĢ(Emphasis€added.)Š D!” ŠĢą  ąWith€regard€to€Jonesšš€pre„trial€knowledge€of€information€relating€to€the€Combs€case,€we€findŠ #l! Šthe€degree€of€exposure€minimal.€€The€defense€attorneysšš€questions€on€this€matter€were€cursory€andŠ $X" Šthe€details€regarding€his€knowledge€remained€essentially€undeveloped.€€The€record€only€shows€thatŠ ō$D # Ša€management€meeting€was€held,€which€resulted€in€an€admonition€to€the€staff€to€refrain€fromŠ ą%0!$ Šdiscussing€the€case.€€Jones€was€not€asked€precisely€what€he€heard€or€from€whom€he€heard€it.€€Š Ģ&"% ŠĢą  ąAccording€to€Rule€24(b)(2),€š šthe€prospective€jurorššs€testimony€as€to€his€or€her€state€of€mindŠ ¤(ō#' Šshall€be€considered€in€determining€acceptability.šš€€The€trial€judge€found€that€Jones€was€š švery€specificŠ )ą$( Šthat€he€could€not€overstep€any€bounds.šš€€We€have€discovered€nothing€in€the€record€which€casts€doubtŠ |*Ģ%) Šon€the€trial€courtššs€conclusion.€€The€record€is€also€devoid€of€any€indication€that€Jonesšš€personalŠ h+ø&* Šand/or€professional€affiliations€with€the€Stateššs€witnesses€would€affect€his€judgment€so€that€he€wouldŠ ° Šbe€unable€to€render€a€fair€and€impartial€verdict€in€this€case.€€The€Defendants€argue€that€the€medicalŠ œģ Špersonnel€of€Wellmont€Health€Systems€comprised€a€significant€portion€of€the€Stateššs€witnesses.€Š ˆŲ ŠThat€may€be€so.€€However,€Jones€knew€only€Early€and€Cribb,€and€the€testimony€of€neither€witnessŠ tÄ Šwas€conclusive€on€any€issue€at€trial.€€Both€testified€as€to€the€appearance€of€scars€on€Estherššs€body,Š `° Ševidence€which€was€substantiated€by€photographs€and€the€testimony€of€numerous€other€witnesses.€Š L œ ŠIn€addition,€Early€testified€that€the€Defendants€were€not€forthcoming€with€information€regarding€theŠ 8 ˆ Šorigin€of€Estherššs€scars,€but€that€Evangeline€subsequently€informed€Early€that€Esther€š šfell€a€lot€andŠ $ t Šwas€clumsy.šš€€Again,€this€testimony€was€similar€in€content€to€that€of€other€witnesses.€Š  ` ŠĢą  ąņ ņB.€€Limitations€on€the€Scope€of€Voir€Direó óŠ č 8  ŠĢą  ąThe€Defendants€also€contend€that€the€trial€court€placed€limitations€on€the€scope€of€theirŠ Ą  Šquestions€during€voir€dire,€which€prevented€them€from€achieving€the€well„established€goals€of€thisŠ ¬ü  Šprocess€and€also€rendered€their€trial€fundamentally€unfair.€€We€reject€both€arguments.Š ˜č  ŠĢą  ąAccording€to€the€record,€Misty€Bishop€revealed€during€voir€dire€that€she€had€been€exposedŠ pĄ Što€some€pre„trial€publicity€via€prior€conversations€with€people€at€work.€€She€claimed€that€she€did€notŠ \¬ Šrecall€hearing€anything€about€the€case€on€the€news€and€that€she€had€not€read€the€newspaper,€but€Š H˜ Šacknowledged€that€various€co„workers€had€expressed€their€opinions€to€her€regarding€the€DefendantsššŠ 4„ Šguilt.€€The€trial€judge€asked€Bishop€whether€she€had€formed€an€opinion€herself.€€She€replied,€š šI€donšštŠ  p Šknow€that€I€have€enough€information.€€They€just€told€me€what€they€had€heard,€so€I€really€donšštŠ  \ Šknow.šš€€The€trial€judge€followed€with€a€pointed€question:€š š[A]s€a€result€of€talking€with€these€otherŠ ųH Špeople,€these€people€you€work€with€or€anywhere€else€of€any€information,€did€you,€yourself,€form€orŠ ä4 Šexpress€any€opinion€as€to€the€innocence€or€guilt€of€either€Mr.€Joseph€Combs€or€Mrs.€EvangelineŠ Š  ŠCombs?šš€€Bishop€replied€that€what€she€had€heard€from€her€co„workers€sounded€š šbad,šš€but€she€hadŠ ¼  Šnot€š šheard€from€any€reputable€forum€other€than€this€person€at€work.šš€€Consequently,€she€could€notŠ Øų Šsay€that€she€had€š šactually€formed€a€strong€opinion€about€it€because€[she€had]€not€heard€any€real€factsŠ ”ä Šabout€it.šš€€Following€a€few€more€brief€questions,€Bishop€concluded€that€she€had€not€š šheard€enoughŠ €Š Što€really€form€an€opinion.šš€€The€trial€judge€explained€to€Bishop€that€one€of€his€duties€was€to€ensureŠ l¼ Šš šan€absolutely€even€playing€field,šš€and€then€he€asked€her€the€following€question:€š š[I]f€you€wereŠ X Ø Šselected€as€a€juror€and€I€instructed€you€that€you€could€not€consider€any€outside€information,€T.V.,Š D!” Šcomments€of€friends€or€family,€that€type€of€thing€.€.€.€.€[c]ould€you,€without€doubt,€follow€thatŠ 0"€  Šinstruction€.€.€.€and€not€consider€anything€except€the€evidence€that€comes€in€at€trial?šš€€Bishop€replied,Š #l! Šš šYes.šš€€Š $X" ŠĢą  ąNext,€Joseph€Combsšš€attorney€questioned€Bishop€whether€she€had€a€š šsuspicionšš€that€theŠ ą%0!$ ŠDefendants€were€guilty.€€Again,€Bishop€stated€that€she€did€not€have€enough€information€to€form€anŠ Ģ&"% Šopinion.€€The€attorney€then€asked€whether€some€degree€of€evidence€was€required€š što€do€away€withŠ ø'#& Šwhat€[the€co„worker]€told€[her]šš€and€whether€the€Defendants€š šwould€have€to€prove€something€toŠ ¤(ō#' Š[her].šš€€Bishop€responded€that€she€would€need€evidence€š što€see€both€sides.šš€€Thereafter,€the€attorneyŠ )ą$( Šrepresenting€Evangeline€Combs€asked€Bishop€similar€questions,€including€whether€the€informationŠ |*Ģ%) Šshe€previously€received€had€raised€a€suspicion€of€guilt€in€her€mind.€€Bishop€replied€affirmatively:Š h+ø&* Ša€suspicion€of€guilt€had€been€raised.€€The€attorney€then€asked€whether€it€was€fair€to€state€that,€sinceŠ ° Šshe€had€this€š šsuspicion,šš€she€was€š šgoing€to€need€to€hear€something€from€[the€Defendants]€to€proveŠ œģ Štheyššre€innocent.šš€€Bishop€replied€that€this€was€š šprobably€a€fair€statement.šš€€Š ˆŲ ŠĢą  ąThe€following€colloquy€then€transpired€between€Bishop€and€the€trial€judge:Š `° ŠĢ[THE€COURT]:ą0 ø ąAll€right.€€Let€me€ask€you€this,€Ms.€Bishop.Š8 ˆø (#ø (# ŠĢ[BISHOP]:ą0 ` ąą0ø ` (#` (#ąYes,€sir.Š `ø (#ø (# ŠĢ[THE€COURT]:ą0 ø ąA€defendant,€in€any€criminal€case,€is€not€required€to€prove€anything.Šč 8 ø (#ø (# ŠĢ[BISHOP]:ą0 ` ąą0ø ` (#` (#ąYes.ŠĄ ø (#ø (# ŠĢ[THE€COURT]:ą0 ø ąThey€have€no€burden€in€the€case.€€The€burden€is€always€upon€the€State€toŠ ˜č  Šprove€guilt€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€And€this€burden€of€the€State,€it€goesŠ „Ō  Što€each€and€every€element€required€to€make€up€the€offense€and€a€juror€mustŠ pĄ Šgrant€the€presumption€of€innocence€to€any€defendant€on€trial.€€Now,€can€youŠ \¬ Šdo€that?ŠH˜ø (#ø (# ŠĢ[BISHOP]:ą0 ` ąą0ø ` (#` (#ąI€believe€so.Š pø (#ø (# ŠĢ[THE€COURT]:ą0 ø ąAll€right.€€Now,€the€reason€I€asked€you€that€you€had€indicated€you€might€notŠ ųH Šhave€known€that€standard,€but€you€say€you€believe€so.€€Is€there€any€questionŠ ä4 Šabout€it?€€If€there€is,€just€„„ŠŠ ø (#ø (# ŠĢ[BISHOP]:ą0 ` ąą0ø ` (#` (#ąI€donššt„„I€donššt€think€that€I€would€have€a€problem€doing€that.€€Like€I€said€IššveŠ Øų Šnot€heard€any€information€from€a€reputable€source€to€tell€me€the€details€aboutŠ ”ä Šexactly€what€happened€or€exactly€what€went€on€and€I€heard€this€from€a€co„Š €Š Šworker€and€Iššve€not€heard€it€from€the€news€.€.€.€.€As€far€as€believing€theyššreŠ l¼ Šinnocent€until€proven€guilty,€I€believe€I€can„„I€could€say€that.ŠX Øø (#ø (# ŠĢ[THE€COURT]:ą0 ø ąCould€you€tell€me€you€would€require€the€State€to€do€that?€€To€prove€the€guiltŠ 0"€  Šbeyond€a€reasonable€doubt.Š#l!ø (#ø (# ŠĢ[BISHOP]:ą0 ` ąą0ø ` (#` (#ąRight.€€Šō$D #ø (#ø (# ŠĢ[THE€COURT]:ą0 ø ąIf€they€failed€to€do€so,€would€you€acquit€the€defendants?ŠĢ&"%ø (#ø (# ŠĢ[BISHOP]:ą0 ` ąą0ø ` (#` (#ąYes.Š¤(ō#'ø (#ø (# ŠĢą  ąImmediately€thereafter,€the€attorneys€for€both€sides€argued€that€Bishop€should€be€excusedŠ |*Ģ%) Šš šfor€cause,šš€based€upon€her€admission€that€she€had€a€š šsuspicion€of€guiltšš€which€must€be€š šovercomeŠ h+ø&* Šby€evidence.šš€€€In€denying€the€attorneysšš€request,€the€trial€judge€inferred€that€Bishopššs€equivocalŠ ° Šanswers€on€the€issue€of€suspicion€were€a€result€of€the€way€the€attorneysšš€questions€were€phrased.€Š œģ ŠHe€then€made€the€following€comment:€Š ˆŲ ŠĢą8  ąNow,€the€question€that€you€feel€any€suspicion,€well,€Iššm€sure,€probably,€I„„I€think€anyŠ `° Šdamn€fool€sitting€on€a€jury€is€going€to€feel€some€suspicion.€€The€fact€that€somebodyššsŠ L œ Šcharged.€€But€the€point€is€how€is€this€going€to€hurt€them,€in€their€deliberations,€orŠ 8 ˆ Šthem€to€function€or€do€their€duty.Š$ tŠ Š  ŠĢą  ąFollowing€a€review€of€the€record,€it€appears€to€this€Court€that€Bishop€was€clearly€reluctantŠ ü L  Što€form€an€opinion€without€sufficient€information€and€that€the€equivocal€nature€of€BishopššsŠ č 8  Šresponses€to€questions€regarding€her€own€š šsuspicions€of€guiltšš€may€have€been€begged€by€theŠ Ō$  Šquestions€put€to€her.€€Questions€designed€or€framed€to€elicit€answers€which€suggest€impartiality€areŠ Ą  Šdisapproved€of€by€the€Advisory€Commission.€€ņņSeeóó€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€24,€Advisory€CommissionŠ ¬ü  ŠComments.€€In€any€event,€the€critical€issue€is€not€whether€or€not€a€prospective€juror€harbors€aŠ ˜č  Šscintilla€of€suspicion,€but€š šwhether€the€jurorššs€views€would€ššprevent€or€substantially€impair€theŠ „Ō  Šperformance€of€his€[or€her]€duties€as€a€juror€in€accordance€with€his€[or€her]€oath.šššš€€ņņWainwright€v.Š pĄ ŠWittóó,€469€U.S.€412,€424,€105€S.€Ct.€844,€852,€83€L.€Ed.€2d€841€(1985)€(this€standard€does€not€requireŠ \¬ Šthat€a€jurorššs€bias€be€proved€with€š šunmistakable€clarityšš).€€The€record€indicates€that€after€the€issueŠ H˜ Šof€š šsuspicionšš€was€raised,€the€trial€judge€informed€Bishop€of€the€legal€standards€involved€and€theŠ 4„ Špresumption€of€innocence€due€a€defendant.€€The€trial€judge€then€questioned€Bishop€further€and,Š  p Šthereafter,€was€satisfied€that€Bishop€would€be€capable€of€fulfilling€the€role€of€an€impartial€juror€inŠ  \ Šthis€case.€€The€trial€courtššs€determinations€concerning€the€fitness€and€credibility€of€a€potential€jurorŠ ųH Šare€accorded€great€deference.€€ņņId.óó€at€426,€105€S.Ct.€at€853€(š šdeference€must€be€paid€to€the€trial€judgeŠ ä4 Šwho€sees€and€hears€the€jurorsšš);€ņņState€v.€Keenóó,€31€S.W.3d€196,€228€(Tenn.€2000)€(because€the€trialŠ Š  Šcourt€has€the€opportunity€to€observe€the€demeanor€of€prospective€jurors€and,€thus,€evaluate€theirŠ ¼  Šcredibility,€its€findings€are€accorded€great€deference€and€shall€not€be€set€aside€unless€clearlyŠ Øų Šerroneous).€€We€find€no€abuse€of€discretion€by€the€trial€court€in€this€matter.Š ”ä ŠĢą  ąWith€regard€to€the€Defendantsšš€argument€that€the€trial€judge€improperly€limited€the€scope€ofŠ l¼ Štheir€questions€during€voir€dire,€we€cannot€find€any€statement€by€the€trial€judge€in€the€record€whichŠ X Ø Šcould€be€construed€to€affirmatively€restrict€or€š šlimit€the€scopešš€of€the€attorneysšš€questions.€Š D!” ŠMoreover,€neither€Defendant€has€cited€any€specific€circumstance€where€the€trial€judgeššs€š šrulingššŠ 0"€  Šunduly€circumscribed€their€ability€to€uncover€bias.€€As€for€the€ultimate€goal€of€voir€dire„„to€impanelŠ #l! Šjurors€who€are€competent,€unbiased,€and€impartial„„we€do€not€find€it€unsatisfied€here.€Š $X" ŠĢą  ąIn€summary,€we€conclude€that€the€trial€court€did€not€abuse€its€discretion€in€refusing€to€excuseŠ ą%0!$ Šeither€Hunter€Jones€or€Misty€Bishop€for€cause.€€š šJurors€need€not€be€totally€ignorant€of€the€facts€ofŠ Ģ&"% Šthe€case€on€which€they€sit,€and€may€sit€on€a€case€even€if€they€have€formed€an€opinion€on€the€meritsŠ ø'#& Šof€the€case,€if€they€are€able€to€set€aside€that€opinion€and€render€a€verdict€based€on€the€evidenceŠ ¤(ō#' Špresented€in€court.šš€€ņņState€v.€Sammonsóó,€656€S.W.2d€862,€869€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1982);€ņņsee€alsoóóŠ )ą$( ŠņņMurphy€v.€Floridaóó,€421€S.€Ct.€794,€799-800,€95€S.€Ct.€2031,€2035-36,€44€L.€Ed.€2d€589€(1975);€ņņIrvinŠ |*Ģ%) Šv.€Dowdóó,€366€U.S.€717,€722-23,€81€S.€Ct.€1639,€1642-43,€6€L.€Ed.€2d€751€(1961);€ņņAdams€v.€Stateóó,Š h+ø&* Š563€S.W.2d€804,€807€(Tenn.€1978).€€The€determination€of€impartiality€is€a€matter€within€theŠ ° Šdiscretion€of€the€trial€court,€ņņSammonsóó,€656€S.W.2d€at€869,€which€may€be€overturned€only€in€casesŠ œģ Šof€š šmanifest€error.šš€ņņPatton€v.€Yountóó,€467€U.S.€1025,€1031,€104€S.€Ct.€2885,€2889,€81€L.€Ed.€2d€847Š ˆŲ Š(1984).€€Since€we€are€unpersuaded€that€neither€Bishop€nor€Jones€was€incapable€of€delivering€a€fairŠ tÄ Šand€impartial€verdict,€we€also€find€no€reversible€error.€€The€Defendants€are€not€entitled€to€relief€onŠ `° Šthis€issue.Š L œ ŠĢņ ņą@  ģąII.€€Amendment€of€the€Presentmentó óˆŠ $ t ŠĢą  ąThe€Defendants€contend€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€allowing€a€non„consensual€amendmentŠ ü L  Što€count€1€of€the€presentment,€charging€both€Defendants€with€especially€aggravated€kidnapping,Š č 8  Šbecause€the€amendment€alleged€a€different€offense€than€that€in€the€original€presentment.€Š Ō$  ŠSpecifically,€the€Defendants€assert€that€the€amendment€changed€certain€essential€elements€of€theŠ Ą  Šoffense€and€also€removed€defenses€which€were€theretofore€available€to€them.€€As€a€result,€they€argueŠ ¬ü  Šthat€their€substantial€rights€were€affected,€in€direct€contravention€of€Rule€7(b)€of€Tennesseeššs€RulesŠ ˜č  Šof€Criminal€Procedure,€and€that€the€Stateššs€failure€to€seek€grand€jury€review€of€the€š šmaterialŠ „Ō  Švariancešš€created€by€said€amendment€also€violated€their€constitutional€rights.€€We€disagree.Š pĄ ŠĢą  ąAccording€to€the€record,€count€1€of€the€original€presentment€charged€both€Defendants€withŠ H˜ Šcommitting€the€offense€of€especially€aggravated€kidnapping,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€39„13„305,€betweenŠ 4„ ŠNovember€16,€1989€and€October€3,€1997.€€However,€on€the€date€that€the€offense€allegedlyŠ  p Šcommenced,€November€16,€1989,€the€crime€of€especially€aggravated€kidnapping€did€not€yet€exist.€Š  \ ŠInstead,€the€offense€in€issue€would€have€been€defined€in€the€applicable€statute€as€aggravatedŠ ųH Škidnapping,€which€provided€as€follows:Š ä4 ŠĢŅ°ŅŅ°ŅA€person€is€guilty€of€aggravated€kidnapping€who€unlawfully€removes€or€confinesŠ ¼  Šanother:Š Øų Š(1)€To€hold€for€ransom€or€reward,€or€as€a€shield€or€hostage;Š ”ä Š(2)€To€facilitate€commission€of€any€felony€or€flight€thereafter;Š €Š Š(3)€To€inflict€serious€bodily€injury€on€or€to€terrorize€the€victim€or€another;Š l¼ Š(4)€To€interfere€with€the€performance€of€any€governmental€function;€orŠ X Ø Š(5)€While€armed€with€a€deadly€weapon.Š D!” ŠĢŅ°ŅŅ°ŅTenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€39„13„301(a)€(Supp.€1989).€€Subsection€(b)€of€that€statute€designated€aggravatedŠ #l! Škidnapping€as€a€Class€A€felony.€€Effective€April€30,€1990,€the€statute€defining€aggravated€kidnappingŠ $X" Šwas€amended€and€the€separate€offense€of€especially€aggravated€kidnapping€was€created,€which€isŠ ō$D # Šcurrently€defined€as€follows:Š ą%0!$ ŠĢŅ°ŅŅ°ŅEspecially€aggravated€kidnapping€is€false€imprisonment,€as€defined€in€šš€39-13-302Š ø'#& Š[i.e.,€the€knowing€removal€or€confinement€of€another€unlawfully€so€as€to€interfereŠ ¤(ō#' Šsubstantially€with€the€otherššs€liberty]:Š )ą$( Š(1)€Accomplished€with€a€deadly€weapon€or€by€display€of€any€article€used€orŠ |*Ģ%) Šfashioned€to€lead€the€victim€to€reasonably€believe€it€to€be€a€deadly€weapon;Š h+ø&* Š(2)€Where€the€victim€was€under€the€age€of€thirteen€(13)€at€the€time€of€the€removal€orŠ ° Šconfinement;Š œģ Š(3)€Committed€to€hold€the€victim€for€ransom€or€reward,€or€as€a€shield€or€hostage;€€orŠ ˆŲ Š(4)€Where€the€victim€suffers€serious€bodily€injury.Š tÄ ŠĢŅ°ŅŅ°ŅTenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€39„13„305(a)€(1997).€€Subsection€(b)(1)€of€this€statute€designates€especiallyŠ L œ Šaggravated€kidnapping€as€a€Class€A€felony.€€Aggravated€kidnapping€is€now€a€Class€B€felony.€€ņņSeeóóŠ 8 ˆ ŠTenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€39„13„304(b)(1)€(1997).Š $ t ŠĢą  ąDuring€a€motions€hearing€on€February€3,€2000,€the€trial€court€heard€arguments€from€theŠ ü L  ŠDefendants€and€the€State€concerning€the€fact€that€the€time€of€the€offense€alleged€in€count€1Š č 8  Šoverlapped€two€different€statutes.€€The€State€proposed€to€eliminate€the€problem€in€the€followingŠ Ō$  Šmanner:€(1)€amend€the€offense€commencement€date€in€the€presentment€from€November€16,€1989,Š Ą  Što€April€30,€1990,€which€would€move€the€entire€course€of€conduct€of€the€continuing€offense€into€theŠ ¬ü  Špurview€of€the€current€statute;€(2)€delete€the€language€š što€terrorize€the€victim,šš€which€did€not€existŠ ˜č  Šin€the€current€statute,€(3)€delete€the€reference€to€the€victimššs€age€at€the€time€of€the€offense,€anŠ „Ō  Šelement€under€the€current€statute€only,€and€(4)€change€the€cite€reference€in€the€presentment€to€reflectŠ pĄ Šthe€current€statute€code€number:€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€39„13„305.€€At€the€conclusion€of€the€hearing,Š \¬ Šthe€trial€court€permitted€the€State€to€amend€count€1,€over€the€objection€of€both€Defendants.€€The€trialŠ H˜ Šcourtššs€order,€filed€February€7,€2000,€stated€its€findings€in€this€matter€as€follows:€the€statutoryŠ 4„ Šlanguage€in€the€presentment€and€the€two€statutes€involved€is€concurrent,€in€that€they€all€describe€aŠ  p ŠClass€A€felony;€the€amendment€did€not€enlarge€the€time€frame€of€the€offense;€the€amendment€deletedŠ  \ Šone€aggravating€circumstance,€i.e.,€the€age€of€the€victim,€from€the€presentment;€and€the€language€inŠ ųH Šthe€original€presentment€clearly€described€the€offense€of€especially€aggravated€kidnapping.€Š ä4 ŠAccordingly,€the€court€found€that€š šno€substantial€right€of€the€defendants€would€be€prejudicedšš€byŠ Š  Šthe€amendment,€citing€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€7(b).€€Š ¼  ŠĢą  ąRule€7(b)€of€Tennesseeššs€Rules€of€Criminal€Procedure,€entitled€š šAmendments€of€Indictments,Š ”ä ŠPresentments€and€Informations,šš€provides€the€following:Š €Š ŠĢą8  ąAn€indictment,€presentment€or€information€may€be€amended€in€all€cases€with€theŠ X Ø Šconsent€of€the€defendant.€€If€no€additional€or€different€offense€is€thereby€charged€andŠ D!” Šno€substantial€rights€of€the€defendant€are€thereby€prejudiced,€the€court€may€permit€anŠ 0"€  Šamendment€without€the€defendantššs€consent€before€jeopardy€attaches.Š#l!Š Š  ŠĢą  ąThe€amendment€of€count€1€in€this€case€did€not€effectively€charge€the€Defendants€with€anŠ ō$D # Šadditional€or€different€offense€than€that€in€the€original€presentment.€€The€deletion€of€the€phraseŠ ą%0!$ Šconcerning€š šterrorizationšš€of€the€victim€had€no€substantive€effect€on€the€charge.€€As€shown€above,Š Ģ&"% Šthe€former€statute€contained€the€language€š š[t]o€inflict€serious€bodily€injury€on€or€to€terrorize€theŠ ø'#& Švictim€or€another.šš€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€39„13„301€(Supp.€1989).€€Clearly,€this€element€may€beŠ ¤(ō#' Šproven€by€terrorization€of€the€victim€ņņoróó€serious€bodily€injury,€because€the€two€possible€circumstancesŠ )ą$( Šā āare€connected€by€the€disjunctive€term€š šor.šš€€Serious€bodily€injury€is€an€element€of€both€the€formerŠ |*Ģ%) Šand€the€latter€statutes.€€Hence,€deletion€of€the€phrase€concerning€terrorization€is€of€no€consequenceŠ ° Šin€this€particular€case,€since€serious€bodily€injury€was€also€alleged€in€the€original€presentment.Š œģ Šā āĢą  ąThe€Defendants€also€argue€that€changing€the€date€of€the€commencement€of€the€offense€inŠ tÄ Šcount€1€from€November€16,€1989€to€April€30,€1990€removed€certain€defenses€which€would€haveŠ `° Šbeen€available€to€them€under€the€former€statute.€€However,€their€argument€is€based€on€an€assertionŠ L œ Šthat€they€can€prove€they€did€not€terrorize€the€victim,€and€we€have€concluded€that€whether€they€canŠ 8 ˆ Šprove€this€or€not€is€immaterial,€for€the€reasons€given€above.Š $ t ŠĢą  ąThe€Defendants€also€contend€that€the€Stateššs€deletion€of€the€reference€to€the€victimššs€age€atŠ ü L  Šthe€time€of€the€offense€prejudiced€their€case€by€making€unavailable€a€previously€viable€defense.€Š č 8  ŠThey€assert€that€the€confinement€of€Esther€was€not€unlawful€due€to€their€status€as€š šfoster€parentsššŠ Ō$  Šwhile€she€was€under€the€age€of€thirteen.€€In€this€argument,€Defendants€rely€on€the€statutory€definitionŠ Ą  Šof€š šunlawful,šš€which€states€the€following:€Š ¬ü  ŠĢą8  ąš šUnlawfulšš€means,€with€respect€to€removal€or€confinement,€one€which€isŠ „Ō  Šaccomplished€by€force,€threat€or€fraud,€or,€in€the€case€of€a€person€who€is€under€theŠ pĄ Šage€of€thirteen€(13)€or€incompetent,€accomplished€without€the€consent€of€a€parent,Š \¬ Šguardian€or€other€person€responsible€for€the€general€supervision€of€the€minorššs€orŠ H˜ Šincompetentššs€welfare.Š4„Š Š  ŠĢTenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€39„13„301(1997)€(this€definition€is€identical€in€all€material€aspects€to€theŠ  \ Šdefinition€contained€in€the€former€statute.€€ņņSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€39„13„301(b)€(1989)).€Š ųH ŠApparently,€the€Defendants€believe€that€the€removal€or€confinement€of€Esther€was,€arguably,€notŠ ä4 Šš šunlawfulšš€because€it€was€clearly€accomplished€with€their€consent,€as€š šother€person[s]€responsibleŠ Š  Šfor€the€general€supervision€of€[her]€welfare.šš€€ņņId.óó€€Once€again,€we€note€the€presence€of€the€disjunctiveŠ ¼  Šterm€š šor.šš€€A€plain€reading€of€the€statute€reveals€that€removal€or€confinement€by€force,€threat€or€fraudŠ Øų Šremains€unlawful,€even€if€accomplished€with€the€consent€of€a€parent,€guardian€or€other€personŠ ”ä Šentrusted€with€the€minorššs€care.€€Moreover,€we€further€note€that€Esther€turned€thirteen€years€of€ageŠ €Š Šon€November€16,€1990.€€Amending€the€presentment€to€read€April€30,€1990,€rather€than€NovemberŠ l¼ Š16,€1989,€merely€reduces€the€victimššs€alleged€period€of€confinement€while€under€the€age€of€thirteenŠ X Ø Šfrom€one€year€to€approximately€six€and€one„half€months,€a€reduction€of€five€months€and€two€weeks.€Š D!” ŠAny€š šdefensešš€arguably€available€under€the€old€statute€would€remain€not€only€viable€but€necessaryŠ 0"€  Šunder€the€amended€presentment,€since€the€presentment€as€amended€only€ņņreducedóó€the€period€of€timeŠ #l! ŠEsther€was€confined€while€under€thirteen€years€of€age„„it€did€not€eliminate€it.€€Nor€did€it€change€theŠ $X" Šfact€that,€after€Esther€turned€thirteen,€the€alleged€confinement€continued€for€more€than€six€years€andŠ ō$D # Šten€months.€€ņņSeeóó€ņņState€v.€Leggóó,€9€S.W.3d€111,€117€(Tenn.€1999)€(š šan€act€of€removal€or€confinementŠ ą%0!$ Šdoes€not€end€merely€upon€the€initial€restraint,€and€a€defendant€continues€to€commit€the€crime€at€everyŠ Ģ&"% Šmoment€the€victimššs€liberty€is€takenšš).€€In€any€event,€reducing€the€period€of€time€in€the€presentmentŠ ø'#& Šfor€the€continuing€offense€of€especially€aggravated€kidnapping€did€not€charge€any€additional€orŠ ¤(ō#' Šdifferent€offense.€€Moreover,€no€substantial€rights€of€either€Defendant€were€prejudiced.€€Thus,€RuleŠ )ą$( Šā ā7(b)€permits€the€court€to€allow€an€amendment€without€a€defendantššs€consent€before€jeopardyŠ |*Ģ%) Šattaches.€€Since€jeopardy€had€not€attached€at€the€time€of€the€amendment€in€this€case,€we€find€no€error.€Š ° ŠņņSeeóó€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€7(b).Š œģ Šā āĢą  ąWe€are€also€unpersuaded€that€the€Stateššs€failure€to€seek€grand€jury€review€prior€to€itsŠ tÄ Šamendment€of€the€presentment€violated€the€Defendantsšš€constitutional€rights.€€Specifically,€theŠ `° ŠDefendants€argue€that€the€amendment€infringed€upon€their€right€to€be€indicted€by€a€grand€jury€underŠ L œ ŠArticle€I,€section€14€of€the€Tennessee€Constitution,€because€the€crime€for€which€they€were€convictedŠ 8 ˆ Šin€count€1€constitutes€a€š šmaterial€variancešš€from€the€offense€charged€in€the€presentment.€€For€theŠ $ t Šreasons€stated€above,€we€have€already€determined€that€changing€the€commencement€date€of€theŠ  ` Šoffense,€along€with€deleting€the€reference€to€the€age€of€the€victim€and€the€language€involvingŠ ü L  Šterrorization,€did€not€charge€an€additional€or€different€offense.€€Analogously,€the€amendment€alsoŠ č 8  Šdid€not€constitute€a€material€variance,€and€we€find€no€constitutional€violation.€€ņņSeeóó€ņņState€v.€Kennedyóó,Š Ō$  Š10€S.W.3d€280,€284€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1999)€(where€the€date€on€an€indictment€was€immaterial,€andŠ Ą  Šthe€indictment€as€amended€did€not€charge€the€defendant€with€a€new€or€additional€crime,€Article€I,Š ¬ü  Šsection€14€concerns€are€not€implicated).Š ˜č  ŠĢą  ąUnder€both€the€United€States€and€Tennessee€Constitutions,€an€indictment€must€inform€theŠ pĄ Šaccused€of€š šthe€nature€and€cause€of€the€accusation.šš€€U.S.€Const.€amend.€VI;€ņņseeóó€Tenn.€Const.€art.Š \¬ ŠI,€šš€9.€€In€Tennessee,€its€form€must€also€satisfy€the€requirements€of€Tennessee€Code€AnnotatedŠ H˜ Šsection€40-13-202,€which€provides€that€an€indictmentŠ 4„ ŠĢą8  ą[M]ust€state€the€facts€constituting€the€offense€in€ordinary€and€concise€language,Š  \ Šwithout€prolixity€or€repetition,€in€such€a€manner€as€to€enable€a€person€of€commonŠ ųH Šunderstanding€to€know€what€is€intended,€and€with€that€degree€of€certainty€which€willŠ ä4 Šenable€the€court,€on€conviction,€to€pronounce€the€proper€judgment.€€ŠŠ Š Š  ŠĢą  ąThe€indictment€satisfies€the€constitutional€guarantees€of€notice€to€the€accused€š šif€it€providesŠ Øų Šsufficient€information€(1)€to€enable€the€accused€to€know€the€accusation€to€which€answer€is€required,Š ”ä Š(2)€to€furnish€the€court€an€adequate€basis€for€entry€of€a€proper€judgment,€and€(3)€to€protect€theŠ €Š Šaccused€from€double€jeopardy.šš€€ņņState€v.€Hillóó,€954€S.W.2d€725,€727€(Tenn.€1997)€(citations€omitted).€Š l¼ ŠĢą  ąIn€summation,€we€believe€that€the€allegations€in€the€unamended€presentment€were€quiteŠ D!” Šsufficient€to€advise€the€Defendants€of€the€offense€for€which€they€had€to€defend€and€for€which€theyŠ 0"€  Šwere€ultimately€convicted.€€The€amendment€did€not€mislead€either€Defendant€as€to€the€charge€inŠ #l! Šcount€1;€nor€did€it€destroy€any€potential€defenses.€€The€Defendants€are€not€entitled€to€relief€on€thisŠ $X" Šissue.€Š ō$D # ŠĢņ ņą@33ģąIII.€€Bill€of€Particularsó óˆŠ Ģ&"% ŠĢą  ąThe€Defendants€contend€that€the€State€failed€to€properly€comply€with€their€requests€for€a€billŠ ¤(ō#' Šof€particulars€regarding€the€charge€of€especially€aggravated€kidnapping.€€Specifically,€the€DefendantsŠ )ą$( Šargue€that€the€State€failed€to€allege€in€the€presentment€what€specific€acts€caused€the€confinement,Š |*Ģ%) Šwhen€the€acts€occurred,€what€specific€injuries€constituted€š šserious€bodily€injury,šš€and€what€weaponŠ h+ø&* Šwas€used€to€inflict€such€injury.€€Accordingly,€they€assert€that€the€trial€courtššs€denial€of€their€requestŠ ° Šfor€a€bill€of€particulars€was€error€because€this€information€was€necessary€to€diligently€prepare€aŠ œģ Šdefense,€avoid€prejudicial€surprise€at€trial,€and€preserve€a€plea€of€double€jeopardy.€€In€response,€theŠ ˆŲ ŠState€contends€that€it€gave€the€Defendants€all€of€the€information€in€its€possession€concerning€theŠ tÄ Šabove€circumstances,€in€accordance€with€Rules€3(c)€and€16€of€Tennesseeššs€Rules€of€CriminalŠ `° ŠProcedure,€and,€therefore,€no€error€exists.€€We€agree€with€the€State.Š L œ ŠĢą  ąThe€record€reflects€that€the€Defendants€filed€separate€motions€for€a€bill€of€particulars€onŠ $ t ŠFebruary€22,€1999,€both€requesting€various€facts€and€information€regarding€all€of€the€counts€againstŠ  ` Šeach€Defendant.€€On€March€24,€1999,€the€State€filed€an€answer€stating€that€each€offense€in€theŠ ü L  Špresentment€occurred€at€the€facilities€at€Emmanuel€Baptist€Church,€the€time€of€day€of€each€offenseŠ č 8  Šin€the€presentment€was€not€known,€and€the€dates€of€the€offenses€were€contained€in€the€presentment.€Š Ō$  ŠWith€regard€to€Defendant€Joseph€Combsššs€request€for€š šthe€manner€and€means€that€the€State€reliesŠ Ą  Šupon€to€show€the€guilt€of€the€Defendantšš€and€the€names€of€š šany€witnesses€to€each€specific€count€ofŠ ¬ü  Šthe€indictment,šš€the€State€responded€that€this€data€is€š šbeyond€the€scope€and€purpose€of€a€bill€ofŠ ˜č  Šparticulars.šš€€Š „Ō  ŠĢą  ąAt€a€subsequent€hearing€on€May€10,€1999,€the€Defendants€requested€additional€informationŠ \¬ Šconcerning€the€nature€of€the€injuries€and€which€injuries€were€associated€with€what€specific€charges.€Š H˜ ŠPursuant€to€an€order€of€the€trial€court,€the€State€filed€a€second€response€on€July€7,€1999,€which€listedŠ 4„ Šthe€type€of€injury€inflicted,€what€part€of€the€victimššs€body€was€involved,€and€the€type€of€weaponŠ  p Šused,€with€respect€to€the€nineteen€counts€against€the€Defendants.€€With€regard€to€count€1,€the€StateŠ  \ Šprovided€the€following€information:Š ųH ŠĢą8  ąThe€State€alleges€that€over€the€entire€period€of€time€that€Esther€Combs€was€in€custodyŠ Š  Šof€the€defendants€until€she€left€their€custody€on€or€about€October€3,€1997,€she€wasŠ ¼  Šsubjected€to€beatings,€cuttings,€and€burnings€over€almost€her€entire€body,€and€saidŠ Øų Šinjuries€were€caused€by€various€items€used€as€weapons,€to„wit,€but€not€limited€to:Š ”ä Šrope,€ball€bats,€curling€irons,€woodburners,€brooms€and/or€sticks,€pieces€of€tin,€metalŠ €Š Šwhip€device€obtained€from€an€umbrella,€wood€shoe,€pliers,€electrical€cords,€waterŠ l¼ Šhose,€and€other€similar€items.ŠX ØŠ Š  ŠĢą  ąIn€another€motions€hearing€on€January€28,€2000,€the€trial€court€ordered€the€State€to€makeŠ 0"€  Šavailable€any€š šdescriptive€informationšš€that€existed€which€would€tend€to€narrow€the€time€frame€ofŠ #l! Šthe€presentment€where€exact€dates€could€not€be€provided.€€On€February€2,€2000,€the€StateŠ $X" Šsupplemented€its€prior€bill€of€particulars€with€data€concerning€š šhow€the€dates€of€offenses€wereŠ ō$D # Šdeterminedšš€for€all€nineteen€counts.€€Concerning€count€1,€the€State€provided€the€followingŠ ą%0!$ Šinformation:€š šNovember€16,€1989€is€the€approximate€time€the€Combs€family€moved€into€EmmanuelŠ Ģ&"% ŠBaptist€Church€in€Bristol€and€October€3,€1997€is€the€date€Joseph€Combs€allegedly€secreted€EstherŠ ø'#& ŠCombs€to€keep€her€from€appearing€in€Court€to€have€a€conservator€appointed€for€her.ššŠ ¤(ō#' ŠĢą  ąRule€7(c)€of€Tennesseeššs€Rules€of€Criminal€Procedure€provides€that€š š[u]pon€motion€of€theŠ |*Ģ%) Šdefendant€the€court€may€direct€the€filing€of€a€bill€of€particulars€so€as€to€adequately€identify€theŠ h+ø&* Šoffense€charged.šš€€The€purposes€of€a€bill€of€particulars€are€threefold:€(1)€to€provide€the€defendantŠ ° Šwith€information€about€the€details€of€the€charge€if€this€is€necessary€to€the€preparation€of€the€defense,Š œģ Š(2)€to€avoid€prejudicial€surprise€at€trial,€and€(3)€to€enable€the€defendant€to€preserve€a€claim€of€doubleŠ ˆŲ Šjeopardy.€€ņņState€v.€Byrdóó,€820€S.W.2d€739,€741€(Tenn.€1991).€€The€Advisory€Commission€CommentsŠ tÄ Što€Rule€7(c)€clearly€state€that€the€bill€of€particulars€provision€has€a€š šsingular€purposešš:€to€enable€theŠ `° Šdefendant€to€know€precisely€what€he€or€she€is€charged€with.€€It€is€not€meant€to€be€used€for€purposesŠ L œ Šof€broad€discovery.€€ņņSeeóó€ņņState€v.€Stephensonóó,€878€S.W.2d€530,€539€(Tenn.€1994).€€š šThe€test€inŠ 8 ˆ Špassing€on€a€motion€for€a€bill€of€particulars€is€whether€it€is€necessary€that€the€defendant€have€theŠ $ t Šinformation€sought€in€order€to€prepare€his€defense€and€to€avoid€prejudicial€surprise.šš€€ņņId.óóŠ  ` ŠĢą  ąThe€trial€judge€in€this€case€ordered€the€State€to€supplement€the€presentment€with€additionalŠ č 8  Šinformation€concerning€the€charges€against€the€Defendants.€€As€a€result,€the€Defendants€wereŠ Ō$  Šprovided€with€facts€concerning€the€place€the€crimes€were€committed,€the€injuries€sustained€by€theŠ Ą  Švictim,€the€weapons€used,€and€the€times€the€crime€were€committed.€€With€regard€to€count€1€(theŠ ¬ü  Šcharge€of€especially€aggravated€kidnapping),€we€find€that€the€Defendants€had€sufficient€informationŠ ˜č  Što€prepare€their€defense€for€this€crime€and€also€avoid€prejudicial€surprise€at€trial.€€The€trial€courtŠ „Ō  Šstated€that€the€rules€of€discovery€required€the€State€to€be€as€specific€as€possible€and€informed€theŠ pĄ ŠDefendants€that,€if€evidence€subsequently€presented€at€trial€indicated€š šoverreaching€by€the€DistrictŠ \¬ ŠAttorney,šš€the€court€would€consider€suppressing€the€evidence€at€that€time.€€This€situation€did€notŠ H˜ Šarise.€€Moreover,€neither€Defendant€points€to€any€specific€evidence€withheld€by€the€State€whichŠ 4„ Šunduly€surprised€them€at€trial,€and€neither€Defendant€has€provided€this€Court€with€any€example€ofŠ  p Šhow€or€why€their€defense€was€prejudiced€by€a€lack€of€details€concerning€any€of€the€crimes€charged.Š  \ ŠĢą  ąThe€Defendants€argue€that€the€State€not€only€failed€to€properly€allege€which€specific€acts€orŠ ä4 Šinjuries€initiated€the€unlawful€confinement€or€caused€serious€bodily€injury€to€the€victim,€but€it€alsoŠ Š  Šfailed€to€prove€these€allegations€at€trial.€€With€regard€to€whether€these€specific€facts€must€be€allegedŠ ¼  Šin€an€indictment€or€presentment,€we€note€that€we€have€already€determined,€ņņsupraóó,€that€theŠ Øų Špresentment€for€this€offense€was€sufficient€under€the€principles€set€forth€in€ņņState€v.€Hillóó,€954€S.W.2dŠ ”ä Š725,€727€(Tenn.€1997).€€Moreover,€because€our€supreme€court€has€held€that€kidnapping€offenses€areŠ €Š Šcontinuing€offenses,€ņņState€v.€Leggóó,€9€S.W.3d€111,€118€(Tenn.€1999),€a€conviction€of€kidnapping€doesŠ l¼ Šnot€require€that€the€defendant€actually€took€part€in€the€initial€removal€or€confinement.€€ņņState€v.Š X Ø ŠAnthony€Perryóó,€No.€W1999-01370-CCA-R3-CD,€2001€WL€792627€at€*7€n.2,€Shelby€County€(Tenn.Š D!” ŠCrim.€App.,€Jackson,€July€13,€2001),€ņņno€perm.€to€app.€filedóó.€€Thus,€it€is€not€necessary€to€allege€orŠ 0"€  Šprove€that€either€Defendant€committed€a€specific€act€which€constituted€the€commencement€of€theŠ #l! Šcrime.€€As€for€whether€the€evidence€was€sufficient€to€sustain€the€convictions€for€the€offense€ofŠ $X" Šespecially€aggravated€kidnapping,€we€discuss€this€issue€in€greater€detail€later€in€this€opinion.€€ForŠ ō$D # Šnow,€we€merely€observe€that€a€conviction€for€especially€aggravated€kidnapping€in€this€case€requiresŠ ą%0!$ Šthat€the€State€prove€false€imprisonment€š š[w]here€the€victim€suffer€serious€bodily€injury.šš€€ņņSeeóó€Tenn.Š Ģ&"% ŠCode€Ann.€šššš€39-13-305(a)(1)(4),€-302€(1997);€ņņsee€alsoóó€ņņState€v.€Adamsóó,€24€S.W.3d€289,€291€(Tenn.Š ø'#& Š2000)€(where€the€conviction€was€for€a€continuing€offense€(aggravated€child€abuse€through€neglect),Š ¤(ō#' Šthe€jury€need€not€unanimously€agree€as€to€the€particular€serious€bodily€injury€it€used€to€support€theŠ )ą$( Šconviction).€€The€plain€language€of€the€statute€indicates€that€the€State€is€not€required€to€prove€theŠ |*Ģ%) ŠDefendants€actually€inflicted€serious€bodily€injury,€only€that€the€victim€suffered€such€injury€duringŠ h+ø&* Šthe€unlawful€confinement.€€ņņSeeóó€ņņState€v.€Paul€Lee€Whitedóó,€No.€M1998„00478„CCA„R3„CD,€1999€WLŠ ° Š1209786€at€**8,€Smith€County,€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Nashville,€Dec.€17,€1999),€ņņno€perm.€to€app.€filedóóŠ œģ Š(where€the€state€presented€š šno€proof€that€[the€victim]€sustained€serious€bodily€injury€ņņduringóó€anŠ ˆŲ Šunlawful€ņņconfinementóó€.€.€.€the€evidence€was€insufficient€to€support€the€conviction€for€especiallyŠ tÄ Šaggravated€kidnappingšš€(emphasis€in€original)).Š `° ŠĢą  ąFinally,€the€Defendants€also€contend€that€a€bill€of€particulars€was€necessary€because€theŠ 8 ˆ Špresentment€failed€to€inform€them€of€the€degree€of€responsibility€against€which€they€must€defend,Š $ t Ši.e.,€whether€they€were€charged€as€principal€actors€or€as€aiders/abettors.€€This€argument€has€no€merit.€Š  ` ŠThe€presentments€in€this€case€clearly€stated€that€each€Defendant€was€š ša€party€to€the€offense.šš€€EvenŠ ü L  Šif€this€language€could€be€considered€vague€or€misleading,€we€note€that€neither€Defendant€complainedŠ č 8  Šof€confusion€or€that€clarification€was€necessary€in€order€to€prepare€their€defense€prior€to€trial.€€ņņSeeóóŠ Ō$  ŠTenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€12(b)(2)€&€(f).Š Ą  ŠĢą  ąIn€summation,€we€conclude€that€the€presentment€in€this€case,€along€with€the€supplementalŠ ˜č  Šinformation€contained€in€the€two€bills€of€particulars€provided€by€the€State,€supplied€the€DefendantsŠ „Ō  Šwith€sufficient€information€about€the€details€of€the€charge€of€especially€aggravated€kidnapping€toŠ pĄ Šenable€them€to€adequately€prepare€their€defense,€avoid€prejudicial€surprise€at€trial,€and€preserve€aŠ \¬ Šclaim€of€double€jeopardy.€€Accordingly,€the€Defendants€are€not€entitled€to€relief€on€this€issue.Š H˜ ŠĢņ ņą@ŖŖģąIV.€€Evidence€of€Prior€Bad€Actsó óˆŠ  p ŠĢą  ąThe€Defendants€also€jointly€argue€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€allowing€evidence€of€prior€badŠ ųH Šacts€and€other€criminal€activity€allegedly€committed€by€the€Defendants€to€be€admitted€as€evidenceŠ ä4 Šat€trial.€€The€Defendants€contend€that€this€evidence€was€not€relevant€and,€further,€that€any€probativeŠ Š  Švalue€was€outweighed€by€the€danger€of€unfair€prejudice.€€Š ¼  ŠĢą  ąThe€State€acknowledges€that€a€significant€portion€of€the€proof€in€issue€here€was€š šoutside€theŠ ”ä Šscope€of€the€indictment[s].šš€€However,€the€State€submits€that€the€evidence€of€the€Defendantsšš€priorŠ €Š Šconduct€was€properly€admitted€to€show€the€Defendantsšš€š šguilty€knowledgešš€and€to€š štell€the€completeŠ l¼ Šstory.šš€€The€State€asserts€that€both€are€proper€foundations€for€allowing€evidence€of€prior€bad€actsŠ X Ø Šunder€Rule€404(b)€of€Tennesseeššs€Rules€of€Evidence.€€The€State€points€out€that€the€evidence€wasŠ D!” Šadmitted€only€after€an€exhaustive€two„day€hearing,€during€which€the€trial€court€heard€arguments€byŠ 0"€  Šboth€parties€and€conscientiously€reviewed€the€entire€body€of€evidence€in€question€prior€to€itsŠ #l! Špresentation€to€the€jury.€Š $X" ŠĢą  ąIn€the€case€ņņsubóó€ņņjudiceóó,€the€Defendants€specifically€object€to€the€trial€courtššs€admission€of€theŠ ą%0!$ Šfollowing€evidence:€photographs€of€scars€on€Estherššs€body;€photographs€of€the€Combsšš€home€inŠ Ģ&"% ŠIndiana;€the€victimššs€testimony€concerning€various€injuries€inflicted€by€the€Defendants,€both€priorŠ ø'#& Što€and€within€the€time€frame€stated€in€the€presentment;€and€the€testimonies€of€Gayland€Oaks,Š ¤(ō#' ŠMalinda€Oaks,€Kelly€Rose€Wood,€and€Dr.€Gretel€Harlan.Š )ą$( Šā āŠ |*Ģ%) Šą  ąThe€record€reflects€that€photographs€of€the€many€scars€on€Estherššs€body€were€introduced€asŠ ° Šā āevidence€during€the€testimony€of€Detective€McCauley.€€The€Defendants€objected€on€the€ground€thatŠ œģ Šmost€of€the€scars€depicted€were€not€associated€with€specific€counts€in€the€presentment.€€In€a€jury„outŠ ˆŲ Šdiscussion,€the€trial€court€noted€that€EMT€personnel,€nurses€at€the€hospital,€and€Dr.€Steifel€hadŠ tÄ Špreviously€testified€that€they€had€observed€myriad€scars€on€Estherššs€body,€and€witnesses€had€alsoŠ `° Štestified€as€to€the€Defendantsšš€explanations€for€the€scars,€to€wit:€Esther€š šfell€a€lot,šš€she€wasŠ L œ Šš šclumsy,šš€et€cetera.€€The€trial€court€ultimately€overruled€the€Defendantsšš€objection,€concluding€thatŠ 8 ˆ Šthe€photographs€were€admissible€to€show€the€Defendantsšš€knowledge€of€Estherššs€injuries€and/or€aŠ $ t Šcontinuing€course€of€conduct.Š  ` ŠĢą  ąDuring€another€jury„out€hearing,€the€Defendants€also€argued€that€eight€photographs€of€theŠ č 8  ŠCombsšš€residence€in€Indiana€(Exhibits€179€through€186),€taken€years€after€the€family€had€moved,Š Ō$  Šwere€not€relevant€and,€thus,€inadmissible€as€evidence€at€trial.€€The€State€responded€that€theŠ Ą  Šphotographs€were€relevant€because€(1)€some€of€the€photographs€depicted€areas€where€EstherššsŠ ¬ü  Šinjuries€occurred€and€(2)€the€kidnapping,€a€continuing€offense,€commenced€in€Indiana,€even€thoughŠ ˜č  Šthe€date€of€the€presentment€reflects€only€the€period€of€time€that€the€crime€took€place€in€Tennessee.€Š „Ō  ŠFollowing€argument,€the€trial€court€declared€the€photographs€admissible€to€show€the€š šcompleteŠ pĄ Šstory,šš€which€is€helpful€when€š šprior€crimes€and€the€present€alleged€crimes€are€logically€related€orŠ \¬ Šconnected€or€part€of€the€same€transaction€.€.€.€or€necessary€for€a€complete€account€thereof.šš€€TheŠ H˜ Šcourt€remarked€that€a€š šRule€404(b)€hearingšš€was€not€necessary€because€the€photographs€showed€onlyŠ 4„ Šthe€residence€in€Indiana€and€did€not€reveal€any€criminal€acts.€€Š  p ŠĢą  ąDuring€the€testimony€of€the€victim,€Esther€Combs,€the€Defendants€objected€when€theŠ ųH Šprosecutor€asked€what€sort€of€punishment€Esther€usually€suffered€when€she€failed€to€complete€herŠ ä4 Šchores.€€At€this€time,€the€jury€was€excused€and€a€Rule€404(b)€hearing€commenced€during€whichŠ Š  ŠEsther€Combs€gave€a€detailed€account€of€the€injuries€and€abuse€she€experienced€while€the€CombsŠ ¼  Šlived€in€Indiana,€Florida,€the€trailer,€and€Tennessee.€€The€hearing€spanned€nearly€two€days.€€WhenŠ Øų ŠEsther€completed€her€testimony€regarding€Indiana,€the€trial€court€evaluated€each€alleged€incident€andŠ ”ä Šdecided€that€not€all€of€them€had€been€proved€by€clear€and€convincing€evidence.€€For€those€thatŠ €Š Šsuccessfully€met€this€burden,€the€trial€court€found€Estherššs€testimony€concerning€them€admissibleŠ l¼ Šunder€two€theories:€(1)€to€prove€absence€of€mistake€or€accident,€under€the€š šguilty€knowledgeššŠ X Ø Šexception€to€Rule€404(b),€and€(2)€to€provide€the€š šcomplete€storyšš€regarding€confinement,€anŠ D!” Šessential€element€of€the€continuing€offense€of€kidnapping.€€The€trial€court€further€concluded€that€theŠ 0"€  Šprejudicial€effect€of€the€evidence€it€deemed€admissible€was€outweighed€by€the€probative€value.€€AtŠ #l! Šthe€conclusion€of€Estherššs€testimony€regarding€incidents€which€occurred€in€Florida,€the€trailer,€andŠ $X" ŠTennessee,€the€trial€court€made€determinations€similar€to€those€made€for€the€evidence€concerningŠ ō$D # ŠIndiana,€evaluating€each€episode€to€determine€(1)€whether€a€material€issue€was€involved€and€theŠ ą%0!$ Ševidence€was€relevant,€(2)€whether€the€probative€value€of€such€evidence€outweighed€the€prejudicialŠ Ģ&"% Šeffect,€and€(3)€whether€each€act€was€established€by€clear€and€convincing€evidence.€€The€trial€courtŠ ø'#& Šdeemed€a€significant€amount€of€Estherššs€testimony€inadmissible,€for€various€reasons,€which€wereŠ ¤(ō#' Šstated€in€the€record.€€Š )ą$( Šā āŠ |*Ģ%) Šą  ąDefendants€also€objected€to€the€testimony€of€Gayland€Oaks€(concerning€events€that€occurredŠ ° Šā āin€Florida)€on€the€ground€that€the€evidence€was€not€relevant€and€also€not€admissible€under€RuleŠ œģ Š404(b).€€Following€a€jury„out€hearing€to€review€the€proposed€testimony,€the€trial€court€concluded€thatŠ ˆŲ Šsome€of€the€evidence€was€admissible,€i.e.,€it€was€material€and€relevant,€and€the€probative€valueŠ tÄ Šoutweighed€any€prejudicial€effect.€€Specifically,€the€court€found€Oaksšš€testimony€concerning€EstherššsŠ `° Štreatment€as€a€š šservant,šš€the€methods€by€which€she€was€š šsequesteredšš€(or€š škept€away€from€theŠ L œ Šworldšš),€her€š šclumsinessšš€or€lack€thereof,€Joseph€Combsšš€statements€about€spanking,€and€EstherššsŠ 8 ˆ Šphysical€appearance,€was€admissible€to€show€confinement€and€a€continuing€course€of€conduct.€€TheŠ $ t Šcourt€also€found€some€of€the€testimony€inadmissible,€based€on€the€possibility€of€unfair€prejudice.€€Š  ` ŠĢą  ąThe€Defendants€additionally€requested€a€jury„out€hearing€to€review€the€testimony€of€MalindaŠ č 8  ŠOaks€prior€to€its€introduction€at€trial.€€The€Defendants€stated€that€their€request€was€based€š šon€theŠ Ō$  Šsame€line€of€objections€as€[they]€had€previously€[with€respect€to€Gayland€Oaks].šš€€Following€theŠ Ą  Šhearing,€the€trial€court€ruled€that€Malindaššs€testimony€would€be€admissible€if€limited€to€the€followingŠ ¬ü  Šgeneral€areas:€babysitting€the€Combs€children,€Estherššs€appearance€and€injuries,€and€her€desire€toŠ ˜č  Šteach€Esther€to€write.€€The€trial€court€found€her€testimony€relating€to€certain€other€matters€potentiallyŠ „Ō  Šprejudicial€and,€thus,€inadmissible.€€Thereafter,€Malinda€testified€within€the€parameters€set€forth€byŠ pĄ Šthe€trial€judge,€with€one€objection€by€defense€counsel€for€hearsay€testimony.€Š \¬ ŠĢą  ąDuring€the€testimony€of€Kelly€Rose€Wood,€the€Defendants€objected.€€The€jury€wasŠ 4„ Šsubsequently€excused,€and€the€trial€court€reviewed€Woodsšš€testimony€to€determine€its€potentialŠ  p Šprejudicial€effect€under€the€balancing€test€in€Rule€403€of€Tennesseeššs€Rules€of€Evidence.€€At€theŠ  \ Šconclusion€of€the€hearing,€the€trial€judge€prohibited€certain€testimony,€but€found€the€testimonyŠ ųH Šconcerning€her€babysitting€experiences,€her€observations€of€Estherššs€injuries,€and€other€relatedŠ ä4 Šmatters€were€admissible.€€When€the€jury€returned,€Wood€testified€as€instructed€and€no€objectionsŠ Š  Šwere€heard€from€any€parties€during€the€examinations€which€ensued.Š ¼  ŠĢą  ąLater,€when€Dr.€Gretel€Harlan€testified€concerning€her€examination€of€Esther€and€the€fourŠ ”ä Šdiagrams€she€produced€(showing€the€location€of€the€410€discrete€scars€on€Estherššs€body),€theŠ €Š ŠDefendants€objected€again.€€In€the€presence€of€the€jury,€but€not€within€its€hearing,€the€DefendantsŠ l¼ Šspecifically€argued€that€the€proof€concerning€most€of€the€scars€was€not€relevant€because€theŠ X Ø Šunderlying€injuries€had€not€been€associated€with€any€specific€charge€against€either€Defendant.€€TheŠ D!” Štrial€court€overruled€the€objection,€finding€the€testimony€relevant€based€on€the€Stateššs€theory€that€theŠ 0"€  Šconfinement€of€Esther€was€a€continuing€offense.Š #l! ŠĢą  ąņ ņA.€€Admissibility€Under€Rule€404(b)ó óŠ ō$D # ŠĢą  ąResolution€of€this€issue€is€controlled,€in€part,€by€Rule€404(b)€of€Tennesseeššs€Rules€ofŠ Ģ&"% ŠEvidence,€which€provides:Š ø'#& ŠĢŅ°ŅŅ°Ņą ` ąOther€Crimes,€Wrongs,€or€Acts.--Evidence€of€other€crimes,€wrongs,€or€actsŠ )ą$( Šā āis€not€admissible€to€prove€the€character€of€a€person€in€order€to€show€action€inŠ |*Ģ%) Šconformity€with€the€character€trait.€€It€may,€however,€be€admissible€for€otherŠ ° Špurposes.€€The€conditions€which€must€be€satisfied€before€allowing€such€evidence€are:Š œģ Šā āĢą ` ą(1)€The€court€upon€request€must€hold€a€hearing€outside€the€jury's€presence;Š tÄ ŠĢą ` ą(2)€The€court€must€determine€that€a€material€issue€exists€other€than€conductŠ L œ Šconforming€with€a€character€trait€and€must€upon€request€state€on€the€record€theŠ 8 ˆ Šmaterial€issue,€the€ruling,€and€the€reasons€for€admitting€the€evidence;€€andŠ $ t ŠĢą ` ą(3)€The€court€must€exclude€the€evidence€if€its€probative€value€is€outweighedŠ ü L  Šby€the€danger€of€unfair€prejudice.Š č 8  ŠĢŅ°ŅŅ°Ņą  ąIn€ņņState€v.€Bigbeeóó,€885€S.W.2d€797€(Tenn.€1994),€the€supreme€court€strongly€endorsed€theŠ Ą  Šabove€protective€procedures€to€avoid€prejudicing€the€rights€of€the€accused€and€to€maintain€the€focusŠ ¬ü  Šof€the€trial.€€ņņId.óó€at€806.€€It€is€well„settled€that€evidence€of€a€defendantššs€prior€misconduct€isŠ ˜č  Šinadmissible€to€establish€the€accusedššs€bad€character€or€criminal€propensity€and€should€usually€beŠ „Ō  Šexcluded.€€ņņState€v.€Mallardóó,€40€S.W.3d€473,€480€(Tenn.€2000);€ņņseeóó€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€404(b).€€However,Š pĄ Šin€the€exceptional€case€where€evidence€of€other€crimes,€wrongs,€or€acts€is€relevant€to€an€issue€otherŠ \¬ Šthan€the€accusedššs€character,€it€is€admissible€if€certain€criteria€are€met€and€the€trial€court€adheres€toŠ H˜ Šthe€procedures€set€forth€in€Rule€404(b).€€Issues€to€which€evidence€of€other€crimes,€wrongs€or€bad€actsŠ 4„ Šmay€be€relevant€typically€include€identity,€motive,€common€scheme€or€plan,€intent€or€the€rebuttal€ofŠ  p Šaccident€or€mistake€defenses.€€ņņState€v.€Hallóó,€958€S.W.2d€679,€707€(Tenn.€1997).€Š  \ ŠĢą  ąFirst,€upon€the€request€of€either€party,€Rule€404(b)€requires€the€trial€court€to€hold€a€hearingŠ ä4 Šoutside€the€juryššs€presence€to€determine€whether€š ša€material€issue€exists€other€than€conductŠ Š  Šconforming€with€a€character€trait.šš€€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€404(b)(1),€(2).€€This€satisfies€the€relevancyŠ ¼  Šrequirement.€€If€this€test€is€satisfied,€the€trial€judge€should€state€on€the€record€the€issue,€the€ruling,Š Øų Šand€the€reason€for€ruling€the€evidence€admissible.€€ņņId.óó€at€404(b)(2).€€Second,€subsection€(3)€states€thatŠ ”ä Šthe€trial€court€must€determine€whether€the€probative€value€of€the€evidence€outweighs€the€danger€ofŠ €Š Šunfair€prejudice€to€the€defendant.€€This€test€is€more€restrictive€that€the€balancing€test€established€forŠ l¼ Šrelevancy€in€Rule€403.€€ņņSee€id.óó€at€403€(requiring€that€the€danger€of€unfair€prejudice€ņņsubstantiallyóóŠ X Ø Šoutweigh€the€probative€value).€€Third,€the€trial€court€must€find€by€clear€and€convincing€evidence€thatŠ D!” Šthe€defendant€committed€the€specific€act€offered€under€Rule€404(b).€€ņņId.óó€at€404(b),€AdvisoryŠ 0"€  ŠCommission€Comments;€ņņState€v.€Partonóó,€694€S.W.2d€299,€303€(Tenn.€1985)€(citing€ņņWrather€v.€Stateóó,Š #l! Š169€S.W.2d€854€(1943)).€€Š $X" ŠĢą  ąBefore€we€begin€our€analysis€of€the€issues€presented€here,€we€observe€that€the€admissibilityŠ ą%0!$ Šof€evidence€is€a€matter€within€the€discretion€of€the€trial€court€and€will€be€overturned€only€when€thereŠ Ģ&"% Šis€an€abuse€of€that€discretion.€€ņņOtis€v.€Cambridge€Mut.€Fire€Ins.€Co.óó,€850€S.W.2d€439,€442Š ø'#& Š(Tenn.1993)€(citations€omitted);€ņņState€v.€Harrisóó,€839€S.W.2d€54,€66€(Tenn.€1992).€€However,Š ¤(ō#' Šdecisions€of€the€trial€court€regarding€admissibility€of€Rule€404(b)€evidence€shall€be€afforded€noŠ )ą$( Šdeference€on€appeal€unless€the€trial€court€has€substantially€complied€with€the€strict€proceduralŠ |*Ģ%) Šrequirements€of€that€rule.€€ņņState€v.€DuBoseóó,€953€S.W.2d€649,€652€(Tenn.€1997)€(the€standard€forŠ h+ø&* Šreview€is€abuse€of€discretion€where€admissibility€procedures€concerning€the€proffered€evidenceŠ ° Šcomply€with€Rule€404(b);€where€the€trial€court€did€not€fully€comply€with€the€requisite€procedures,Š œģ Šthe€reviewing€court€must€independently€determine€admissibility,€based€upon€the€record€and€evidenceŠ ˆŲ Špresented€at€the€jury„out€hearing).€€Because€the€term€š šdiscretionšš€essentially€š šdenotes€the€absenceŠ tÄ Šof€a€hard€and€fast€rule,šš€a€trial€courtššs€decision€to€admit€evidence€will€be€reversed€on€appeal€š šonlyŠ `° Šwhen€the€ššcourt€applied€an€incorrect€legal€standard,€or€reached€a€decision€which€is€against€logic€orŠ L œ Šreasoning€that€caused€an€injustice€to€the€party€complaining.šššš€€ņņState€v.€Gillilandóó,€22€S.W.3d€266,€271Š 8 ˆ Š(Tenn.€2000)€(citations€omitted).€€Š $ t ŠĢą  ąIn€the€case€ņņsubóó€ņņjudiceóó,€the€trial€court€did€not€conduct€Rule€404(b)€hearings€to€determineŠ ü L  Šadmissibility€for€all€of€the€evidence€presented€in€this€argument.€€Our€review€reveals€that€a€404(b)Š č 8  Šhearing€would€not€have€been€proper€in€every€case.€€Nor€did€the€Defendants€request€one.€€In€fact,€theŠ Ō$  Šrecord€reflects€that€a€404(b)€analysis€was€requested€and/or€conducted€only€to€review€the€testimoniesŠ Ą  Šof€Esther,€Gayland€Oaks,€and€Malinda€Oaks.€€Thus,€our€review€under€the€Rule€404(b)€guidelines€forŠ ¬ü  Šadmissibility€of€other€crimes,€wrongs,€and€acts€is€limited€to€this€proof.€Š ˜č  ŠĢą  ąFirst,€we€conclude€that€Estherššs€testimony€concerning€the€abuse€and€injuries€she€sufferedŠ pĄ Šwhile€the€Combs€lived€in€Indiana,€Florida,€the€trailer,€and€Tennessee,€was€not€inadmissible€underŠ \¬ ŠRule€404(b).€€The€Defendants€argue,€and€the€State€concedes,€that€the€testimony€in€issue€relates€to€actsŠ H˜ Šwhich€either€occurred€prior€to€the€time€frames€alleged€in€the€presentment€and/or€were€not€associatedŠ 4„ Šwith€any€specific€criminal€charge.€€However,€the€record€reflects€that€the€trial€court€š šsubstantiallyŠ  p Šcompliedšš€with€the€procedural€requirements€for€admitting€evidence€of€other€crimes,€wrongs,€or€actsŠ  \ Šunder€Tennessee€Rule€of€Evidence€404(b).€€That€is,€the€trial€court€conducted€a€404(b)€hearing,Š ųH Šoutside€the€presence€of€the€jury,€to€consider€whether€this€evidence€violated€Rule€404's€generalŠ ä4 Šproscription€against€character€evidence.€€The€proceeding€continued€for€nearly€two€days.€€During€thisŠ Š  Štime,€the€trial€court€evaluated€each€incident€described€by€the€victim€to€determine€whether€a€materialŠ ¼  Šissue€existed€other€than€conduct€conforming€with€a€character€trait€and€whether€the€evidence€wasŠ Øų Šrelevant€to€the€issue.€€The€court€also€reviewed€the€evidence€to€determine€whether€the€probative€valueŠ ”ä Šwas€outweighed€by€the€danger€of€unfair€prejudice,€and€whether€it€was€established€by€clear€andŠ €Š Šconvincing€evidence.€€€The€issues,€rulings,€and€reasons€for€admitting€the€evidence€were€then€placedŠ l¼ Šon€the€record.€€Š X Ø ŠĢą  ąSignificantly,€the€trial€court€excluded€a€substantial€portion€of€Estherššs€testimony€on€variousŠ 0"€  Šgrounds,€which€included€findings€that€the€acts€allegedly€committed€by€the€Defendants€were€notŠ #l! Šproved€by€clear€and€convincing€evidence€and/or€the€probative€value€was€outweighed€by€the€dangerŠ $X" Šof€unfair€prejudice.€€The€testimony€ultimately€admitted€at€trial€was€deemed€relevant€as€follows:€withŠ ō$D # Šregard€to€the€especially€aggravated€kidnapping€charge€against€both€Defendants,€Estherššs€testimonyŠ ą%0!$ Šwas€deemed€admissible€to€provide€the€š šcomplete€storyšš€concerning€confinement,€an€essentialŠ Ģ&"% Šelement€of€the€continuing€offense€of€kidnapping.€€As€to€the€child€abuse€charges€against€EvangelineŠ ø'#& ŠCombs€and€the€assault€charges€against€both€Defendants,€her€testimony€was€considered€relevant€toŠ ¤(ō#' Šshow€absence€of€mistake€or€accident,€under€the€š šguilty€knowledgešš€exception€to€Rule€404(b).€€TheŠ )ą$( Šrecord€further€reveals€that€the€trial€court€gave€explicit€and€extensive€instructions€to€the€jury€as€to€howŠ |*Ģ%) Šit€should€consider€the€evidence,€e.g.,€to€which€Defendant€and€to€which€charges€the€jury€shouldŠ h+ø&* Šallocate€the€information€received.€€Because€the€trial€court€was€diligent€in€its€strict€adherence€to€theŠ ° Šrequirements€provided€for€this€evidence,€its€decisions€concerning€the€admissibility€of€the€Rule€404(b)Š œģ Ševidence€shall€be€reviewed€under€an€abuse€of€discretion€standard.€€ņņSeeóó€ņņDuBoseóó,€953€S.W.2d€at€652.€Š ˆŲ ŠĢą  ąThe€trial€court€found€Estherššs€testimony€admissible€on€the€ground€that€it€providedŠ `° Šbackground€evidence;€it€was€helpful€to€convey€the€š šcomplete€storyšš€of€Estherššs€confinement,€anŠ L œ Šessential€element€in€the€charge€of€especially€aggravated€kidnapping.€€Evidence€offered€to€showŠ 8 ˆ Šcontextual€background€may€be€admissible,€even€if€it€involves€evidence€of€a€defendantššs€prior€acts,Š $ t Šin€cases€where€the€evidence€is€relevant€to€an€issue€other€than€criminal€propensity€and€its€probativeŠ  ` Švalue€is€not€outweighed€by€the€danger€of€unfair€prejudice.€€ņņGillilandóó,€22€S.W.3d€at€271.€€TheŠ ü L  Šstandard€by€which€a€court€determines€relevance€is€set€forth€in€Rule€401€of€Tennesseeššs€Rules€ofŠ č 8  ŠEvidence€(evidence€is€relevant€if€it€has€š šany€tendency€to€make€the€existence€of€any€fact€that€is€ofŠ Ō$  Šconsequence€to€the€determination€of€the€action€more€probable€or€less€probable€then€it€would€beŠ Ą  Šwithout€the€evidencešš).€€Although€this€threshold€for€admitting€evidence€is€š šrelatively€lenient,ššŠ ¬ü  Šbackground€evidence€used€to€show€the€context€of€events€may€not€always€pass€even€this€low€thresholdŠ ˜č  Šof€admission€because€it€is€rarely€probative€of€an€actual€material€issue€at€trial.€€ņņId.óó€€While€the€standardŠ „Ō  Šunder€which€background€evidence€involving€other€crimes,€wrongs,€or€acts€will€be€admissible€shouldŠ pĄ Šbe€š šnarrowly€drawn€to€avoid€the€negative€implications€associated€with€criminal€propensity€evidence,Š \¬ Šthe€standard€should€not€be€so€narrow€as€to€sacrifice€the€juryššs€understanding€of€the€necessary€contextŠ H˜ Šof€the€case.šš€€ņņId.óó€at€272.€€Accordingly,€our€supreme€court€has€held€that,€in€cases€where€the€state€seeksŠ 4„ Što€offer€evidence€of€other€crimes,€wrongs,€or€acts€that€are€relevant€only€to€provide€a€contextualŠ  p Šbackground,€the€state€must€first€establish€that€(1)€the€absence€of€the€evidence€would€create€aŠ  \ Šchronological€or€conceptual€void€in€its€presentation€of€its€case;€(2)€the€void€created€by€the€lack€ofŠ ųH Šsuch€evidence€would€likely€result€in€significant€jury€confusion€as€to€the€material€issues€or€evidenceŠ ä4 Šin€the€case;€and€(3)€the€probative€value€of€the€evidence€is€not€outweighed€by€the€danger€of€unfairŠ Š  Šprejudice.€€ņņId.ó󀀩 ¼  ŠĢą  ąThe€criteria€for€admitting€contextual€background€evidence€were€satisfied€in€this€case.€Š ”ä ŠClearly,€the€beatings€and€abuse€inflicted€upon€Esther€over€the€course€of€her€life€could€be€consideredŠ €Š Šprobative€of€the€Defendantsšš€attempt€to€confine€and€maintain€control€over€her.€€Without€knowledgeŠ l¼ Šof€her€lifeššs€experiences€and€the€abuse€which€began€with€her€earliest€memories,€the€jury€may€haveŠ X Ø Šhad€difficulty€understanding€the€reasons€for€her€submissiveness€and€reluctance€to€escape€whenŠ D!” Šopportunities€to€do€so€presented€themselves.€€Whether€the€years€of€physical€and€psychological€tortureŠ 0"€  Šendured€by€Esther€enabled€the€Defendants€to€accomplish€the€crime€of€false€imprisonment€was€aŠ #l! Šmatter€for€the€jury€to€decide.€€Without€this€evidence,€a€conceptual€void€might€be€created€which€couldŠ $X" Šlikely€result€in€jury€confusion€as€to€the€material€issues€or€evidence€presented€by€the€State.€TheŠ ō$D # Šprobative€value€of€this€evidence€is€considerable,€and€we€find€that€it€is€not€outweighed€by€the€dangerŠ ą%0!$ Šof€unfair€prejudice€to€the€Defendants.€€Š Ģ&"% ŠĢą  ąAdmissibility€of€the€contextual€background€evidence€in€this€case€is€supported€by€the€fact€thatŠ ¤(ō#' Škidnapping€statutes€are€designed€to€punish€a€continuing€course€of€conduct.€€ņņState€v.€Leggóó,€9€S.W.3dŠ )ą$( Š111,€117€(Tenn.€1999).€€Thus,€by€definition,€conduct€which€proves€this€offense€cannot€be€strictlyŠ |*Ģ%) Šlimited,€as€a€matter€of€law,€but€must€be€determined€in€accordance€with€the€circumstances€presentedŠ h+ø&* Šin€each€case.€€Here,€the€false€imprisonment€element€of€the€kidnapping€charge€did€not€commence€withŠ ° Ša€single€event,€as€would€occur€with€a€victim€who€was€snatched€from€a€car€or€taken€hostage€duringŠ œģ Ša€crime.€€Rather,€it€was€established€by€proof€that€the€victim€suffered€years€of€physical€andŠ ˆŲ Špsychological€torture,€which€makes€relevant€the€proof€of€other€acts€committed€by€the€Defendants€toŠ tÄ Šaccomplish€the€confinement.Š `° ŠĢą  ąAs€previously€noted,€evidence€of€other€crimes€may€be€admissible€to€show€identity,€motive,Š 8 ˆ Šcommon€scheme€or€plan,€intent,€guilty€knowledge€or€the€absence€of€accident€or€mistake.€€ņņState€v.Š $ t ŠHallóó,€958€S.W.2d€679,€707€(Tenn.€1997);€ņņCollard€v.€Stateóó,€526€S.W.2d€112,€114€(Tenn.1975).€€OnŠ  ` Šthe€question€of€intent,€proof€concerning€the€relations€which€existed€between€a€defendant€and€theŠ ü L  Švictim€of€a€crime€of€violence€may€present€relevant€matters€for€the€juryššs€consideration.€€ņņSeeóó€ņņStateŠ č 8  Šv.€Turnbillóó,€640€S.W.2d€40,€47€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1982);€ņņState€v.€Glebockóó,€616€S.W.2d€897,€905„06Š Ō$  Š(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1981).€€Here,€evidence€of€the€Defendantsšš€continued€hostility€and€abusiveŠ Ą  Šbehavior€toward€Esther€is€relevant€to€demonstrate€their€intent€to€confine€or€imprison€her.€€In€addition,Š ¬ü  Šthis€proof€demonstrates€the€Defendantsšš€guilty€knowledge€that€their€actions€caused€serious€bodilyŠ ˜č  Šinjury,€and€rebuts€any€notion€that€the€systematic,€long„term€abuse€of€the€victim€was€an€accident€orŠ „Ō  Šmistake.Š pĄ ŠĢą  ąThe€Defendants€argue€that€the€presentation€of€rebuttal€evidence€to€show€š šguilty€knowledgeššŠ H˜ Šwas€not€proper€because€neither€Defendant€had€claimed€that€Estherššs€injuries€were€an€accident.€Š 4„ ŠHowever,€Defendant€Joseph€Combs€claimed€that€he€never€harmed€Esther€and€had€no€knowledge€ofŠ  p Šher€scars,€and€Evangeline€Combs€was€charged€with€multiple€counts€of€aggravated€child€abuse.€€AŠ  \ Šperson€commits€the€offense€of€aggravated€child€abuse€who€š šknowingly,€ņņother€than€by€accidentalŠ ųH Šmeansóó,€treats€a€child€under€eighteen€(18)€years€of€age€in€such€a€manner€as€to€inflict€injury€.€.€.šš€andŠ ä4 Šš š[t]he€act€of€abuse€results€in€serious€bodily€injury€to€the€child.šš€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šššš€39„15„401,€402Š Š  Š(1997)€(emphasis€added).€€Consequently,€proof€that€the€Defendants€injured€Esther€knowingly,€whichŠ ¼  Šclearly€infers€ņņnon„accidentalóó€conduct,€was€necessary€and€proper€to€both€rebut€the€testimony€ofŠ Øų ŠJoseph€Combs€and€assist€in€proving€the€offense€of€aggravated€child€abuse.Š ”ä ŠĢą  ąOur€review€of€the€testimonies€of€Gayland€and€Malinda€Oaks€reveals€that€this€proof€is€alsoŠ l¼ Šadmissible€to€show€confinement€and€a€continuing€course€of€conduct€on€grounds€similar€to€thoseŠ X Ø Šdiscussed€above.€€Therefore,€we€find€no€abuse€of€discretion€or€error€with€regard€to€the€trial€courtššsŠ D!” Šdecisions€to€admit€the€evidence€of€other€crimes,€wrongs,€or€acts€in€this€case.Š 0"€  ŠĢą  ąņ ņB.€€Admissibility€Under€Rules€401€and€403ó óŠ $X" ŠĢą  ąThe€Defendants€also€contend€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€admitting€two€sets€of€photographsŠ ą%0!$ Šas€evidence€at€trial.€€The€photographs€in€issue€do€not€specifically€concern€prior€bad€acts,€wrongs€orŠ Ģ&"% Šcriminal€activity€by€either€Defendant,€and,€in€the€case€of€Estherššs€scars,€the€photographs€do€not€showŠ ø'#& Šthe€identity€of€the€person€who€ņņcausedóó€her€injuries.€€Thus,€this€evidence€was€not€inadmissible€underŠ ¤(ō#' ŠRule€404(b)€as€reflecting€upon€the€character€of€the€Defendants,€and€no€404(b)€hearings€wereŠ )ą$( Šconducted€prior€to€admitting€this€proof.€€ņņSeeóó€ņņDuBoseóó,€953€S.W.2d€at€653€(where€medical€examinerššsŠ |*Ģ%) Štestimony€did€not€show€identity€of€the€person€who€caused€the€victimššs€abdominal€injuries,€it€was€notŠ h+ø&* Šprohibited€by€Rule€404(b)€as€reflecting€upon€the€defendantššs€character).€€Rather,€admissibility€of€thisŠ ° Ševidence€is€dependent€upon€the€principles€set€forth€in€our€rules€of€evidence€regarding€relevance.€€ņņSeeóóŠ œģ ŠTenn.€R.€Evid.€401„€403.€€Š ˆŲ ŠĢą  ąRule€401€of€Tennesseeššs€Rules€of€Evidence€defines€relevant€evidence€to€mean€š ševidenceŠ `° Šhaving€any€tendency€to€make€the€existence€of€any€fact€that€is€of€consequence€to€the€determinationŠ L œ Šof€the€action€more€probable€or€less€probable€than€it€would€be€without€the€evidence.šš€€Rule€402€statesŠ 8 ˆ Šthat€relevant€evidence€is€admissible,€except€as€provided€by€our€State€and€Federal€Constitutions,€and,Š $ t Šconversely,€irrelevant€evidence,€ņņipsoóó€ņņfactoóó,€is€not€admissible.€€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€402.€€Rule€403€requiresŠ  ` Šexclusion€of€evidence,€even€when€relevant,€if€the€š šprobative€value€is€substantially€outweighed€by€theŠ ü L  Šdanger€of€unfair€prejudice,€confusion€of€the€issues,€or€misleading€the€jury,€or€by€considerations€ofŠ č 8  Šundue€delay,€waste€of€time,€or€needless€presentation€of€cumulative€evidence.šš€€ņņId.óó€at€403.€€Š Ō$  ŠĢą  ąWith€these€principles€in€mind,€we€find€the€photographs€of€the€scars€on€Estherššs€body€wereŠ ¬ü  Šclearly€admissible.€€Given€that€the€Defendants€were€charged€with€various€counts€involving€physicalŠ ˜č  Šabuse€and/or€serious€bodily€injury,€the€condition€of€Estherššs€body€is€inordinately€relevant.€€TheŠ „Ō  Šphotographs€are€further€relevant€to€demonstrate€the€Defendantsšš€š šguilty€knowledgešš€of€EstherššsŠ pĄ Šinjuries,€effectively€rebutting€any€claim€of€accident€or€mistake,€and€they€showed€the€DefendantsššŠ \¬ Šintent€to€control€and/or€confine€Esther€through€physical€and,€to€a€lesser€extent,€psychological€torture.€Š H˜ ŠIn€addition,€the€sheer€magnitude€of€Estherššs€injuries,€disclosed€by€proof€of€more€than€400€separateŠ 4„ Šscars,€indicated€a€continuing€course€of€abusive€conduct.€€We€also€find€that€the€probative€value€of€thisŠ  p Ševidence€is€not€substantially€outweighed€by€the€danger€of€unfair€prejudice,€confusion€of€the€issues,Š  \ Šor€other€negative€considerations€which€would€require€the€trial€court€to€exclude€it€under€the€principlesŠ ųH Šset€forth€in€Rule€403€of€Tennesseeššs€Rules€of€Evidence.Š ä4 ŠĢą  ąThe€Defendants€argue€that€the€issue€concerning€this€evidence€is€analogous€to€that€presentedŠ ¼  Šin€ņņState€v.€Copennyóó,€888€S.W.2d€450€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993),€where€proof€of€several€prior€scarsŠ Øų Šon€the€victimššs€body€was€properly€excluded€under€Rule€403€because€the€probative€value€wasŠ ”ä Šoutweighed€by€the€potential€for€unfair€prejudice,€confusion€of€the€issues,€and€misleading€the€jury.€Š €Š ŠHowever,€in€ņņCopennyóó,€the€defendant€claimed€to€have€shot€the€victim€in€self„defense,€and€he€soughtŠ l¼ Što€use€proof€of€the€victimššs€prior€scars€to€demonstrate€the€victimššs€propensity€for€violence.€€SinceŠ X Ø Šwe€find€no€correlation€between€the€circumstances€and€issues€presented€here€and€those€in€ņņCopennyóó,Š D!” Šthe€Defendantsšš€reliance€on€this€case€is€misplaced.€€Š 0"€  ŠĢą  ąTurning€to€the€eight€photographs€of€the€Combsšš€Indiana€home,€we€find€one€photographŠ $X" Šshowed€a€view€of€the€entire€front€of€the€house;€five€revealed€different€angles€of€an€interior€staircase;Š ō$D # Šand€the€remaining€two€showed€a€small€area€inside€of€the€house€and€a€window,€with€a€few€chairsŠ ą%0!$ Šnearby.€€The€photographs,€taken€sometime€in€1999,€showed€the€Combsšš€residence€approximatelyŠ Ģ&"% Šthirteen€years€after€they€had€lived€there.€€The€State€argued€that€the€photographs€were€relevant€(1)€toŠ ø'#& Športray€an€area€where€Estherššs€injuries€occurred€and€(2)€because€the€kidnapping€commenced€whileŠ ¤(ō#' Šthe€family€lived€there.€€The€trial€court€decided€that€the€photographs€would€help€the€jury€comprehendŠ )ą$( Šthe€š šcomplete€story.šš€€Esther€testified€at€trial€that€she€was€injured€on€the€stairway€in€the€photographs.€Š |*Ģ%) ŠTherefore,€we€agree€that€the€five€photographs€of€the€staircase€were€relevant€to€show€where€oneŠ h+ø&* Šparticular€injury€occurred.€€As€for€the€others,€we€fail€to€see€how€the€photographs€of€the€exterior€ofŠ ° Šthe€house€and€the€area€in€front€of€a€window€possess€any€relevancy,€namely,€any€tendency€to€makeŠ œģ Šthe€existence€of€any€fact€of€consequence€to€the€determination€of€the€action€more€probable€or€lessŠ ˆŲ Šprobable€than€it€otherwise€would€have€been.€€ņņSeeóó€Tenn.€R.€Evid.€401.€€For€the€same€reasons€we€findŠ tÄ Šno€evidentiary€relevance,€we€also€find€the€danger€of€unfair€prejudice€caused€by€the€admission€ofŠ `° Šthese€three€photographs€into€evidence€to€be€nil.€€Thus,€the€admission€of€this€evidence,€while€error,Š L œ Šwas€nevertheless€harmless€because€it€could€not€have€affected€the€result€of€the€trial€on€the€merits.€€ņņSeeóóŠ 8 ˆ ŠTenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€52(a);€ņņsee€alsoóó€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€36(b).€Š $ t ŠĢą  ąThe€admissibility€of€the€testimonies€of€Kelly€Rose€Wood€and€Dr.€Gretel€Harlan€are€likewiseŠ ü L  Šdependent€on€their€relevance€under€Rules€401€through€403.€€As€for€Woodššs€testimony,€the€recordŠ č 8  Šreveals€that€a€jury„out€hearing€was€conducted€beforehand.€€During€the€proceeding,€the€trial€courtŠ Ō$  Šfound€certain€testimony€inadmissible€under€Rule€404,€on€the€ground€that€it€suggested€a€crime€hadŠ Ą  Šbeen€committed€by€one€or€both€Defendants€but€it€had€not€been€established€by€clear€and€convincingŠ ¬ü  Ševidence.€€By€contrast,€the€court€found€relevant€and€admissible€the€testimony€concerning€WoodššsŠ ˜č  Šbabysitting€experiences€in€Florida,€her€observations€concerning€Estherššs€injuries,€Estherššs€lack€ofŠ „Ō  Šclumsiness€and€the€fact€that€the€Defendants€treated€Esther€differently€than€the€other€children.€€In€ourŠ pĄ Šopinion,€Woodššs€testimony€is€relevant,€under€Rule€401,€to€show€a€continuing€course€of€conduct€andŠ \¬ Šcorroborate€Estherššs€testimony,€and€we€find€the€probative€value€is€not€outweighed€by€the€danger€ofŠ H˜ Šunfair€prejudice,€confusion€of€the€issues,€or€any€of€the€other€negative€considerations€listed€in€RuleŠ 4„ Š403€which€would€mandate€exclusion.€€Regarding€the€testimony€of€Dr.€Gretel€Harlan,€we€agree€withŠ  p Šthe€trial€court€that€it€was€relevant€€to€show€a€continuing€offense.€€Dr.€Harlanššs€testimony€concerningŠ  \ Šthe€extent€of€Estherššs€injuries€was€also€relevant€to€show€serious€bodily€injury,€and€we€find€that€theŠ ųH Šprobative€value€of€her€testimony€substantially€outweighed€the€danger€of€unfair€prejudice.Š ä4 ŠĢą  ąWith€the€exception€of€the€three€photographs€which€we€deemed€were€admitted€erroneously,Š ¼  Šalbeit€harmless,€we€conclude€that€the€evidence€was€admissible€under€the€rules€of€evidence€discussed.€Š Øų ŠThe€Defendants€are€not€entitled€to€relief€on€this€issue.Š ”ä ŠĢņ ņą@ÖÖģąV.€€Sufficiency€of€the€Evidenceó óˆŠ l¼ ŠĢą  ąBoth€Defendants€contend€that€the€evidence€was€insufficient€to€sustain€their€convictions€forŠ D!” Šespecially€aggravated€kidnapping.€€Defendant€Joseph€Combs€further€contends€that€the€evidence€wasŠ 0"€  Šinsufficient€to€sustain€his€convictions€for€aggravated€rape,€rape,€and€aggravated€perjury.€€WeŠ #l! Šdisagree.Š $X" ŠĢą  ąWhen€evidentiary€sufficiency€is€questioned€on€appeal,€the€standard€of€review€is€whether,€afterŠ ą%0!$ Šconsidering€all€the€evidence€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€the€State,€any€rational€trier€of€fact€couldŠ Ģ&"% Šhave€found€all€the€essential€elements€of€the€offense€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€ņņJackson€v.€Virginiaóó,Š ø'#& Š443€U.S.€307,€318-319,€99€S.€Ct.€2781,€2789,€61€L.€Ed.€2d€560€(1979);€ņņState€v.€Hallóó,€8€S.W.3d€593,Š ¤(ō#' Š599€(Tenn.€1999);€ņņseeóó€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(e).€€š šThis€rule€applies€to€findings€of€guilt€based€uponŠ )ą$( Šā ādirect€evidence,€circumstantial€evidence,€or€a€combination€of€direct€and€circumstantial€evidence.šš€Š |*Ģ%) ŠņņState€v.€Lewisóó,€36€S.W.3d€88,€93€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€2000)€(citing€ņņState€v.€Dykesóó,€803€S.W.2d€250,Š ° Š253€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1990)).Š œģ Šā āĢą  ąIn€determining€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence,€we€will€not€reweigh€the€evidence€or€substituteŠ tÄ Šour€own€inferences€for€those€drawn€by€the€trier€of€fact.€€ņņSeeóó€ņņState€v.€Sheffieldóó,€676€S.W.2d€542,€547Š `° Š(Tenn.€1984);€ņņState€v.€Cabbageóó,€571€S.W.2d€832,€835€(Tenn.€1978).€€Instead,€on€appeal€the€State€isŠ L œ Šentitled€to€the€strongest€legitimate€view€of€the€evidence€and€to€all€reasonable€and€legitimateŠ 8 ˆ Šinferences€that€may€be€drawn€therefrom.€€ņņHallóó,€8€S.W.3d€at€599.€€A€guilty€verdict€by€a€jury,€approvedŠ $ t Šby€the€trial€court,€accredits€the€testimony€of€the€witnesses€for€the€State€and€resolves€all€conflicts€inŠ  ` Šfavor€of€the€prosecutionššs€theory,€effectively€removing€the€presumption€of€innocence€and€replacingŠ ü L  Šit€with€a€presumption€of€guilt.€€ņņSeeóó€ņņState€v.€Blandóó,€958€S.W.2d€651,€659€(Tenn.€1997).€€QuestionsŠ č 8  Šconcerning€the€credibility€of€witnesses,€the€weight€and€value€of€evidence,€and€factual€issues€raisedŠ Ō$  Šby€the€evidence€are€matters€to€be€resolved€by€the€trier€of€fact,€not€this€Court.€€ņņId.óó€€The€defendantŠ Ą  Šbears€the€burden€of€demonstrating€that€the€evidence€is€insufficient€to€support€his€or€her€conviction.€Š ¬ü  ŠņņState€v.€Pikeóó,€978€S.W.2d€904,€914€(Tenn.€1998);€ņņState€v.€Tuggleóó,€639€S.W.2d€913,€914€(Tenn.Š ˜č  Š1982).€Š „Ō  ŠĢą  ąņ ņA.€€Especially€Aggravated€Kidnappingó óŠ \¬ ŠĢą  ąTo€obtain€a€conviction€for€especially€aggravated€kidnapping,€as€relevant€here,€the€State€mustŠ 4„ Šprove:€(1)€the€defendant€knowingly€removed€or€confined€the€victim€unlawfully€so€as€to€interfereŠ  p Šsubstantially€with€her€liberty;€and€(2)€the€victim€suffered€serious€bodily€injury.€€ņņSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.Š  \ Ššššš€39-13-305(a)(4),€39-13-302(a)€(1997).€€š šSerious€bodily€injuryšš€means€bodily€injury€that€involvesŠ ųH Ša€substantial€risk€of€death;€protracted€unconsciousness;€extreme€physical€pain;€protracted€or€obviousŠ ä4 Šdisfigurement;€or€protracted€loss€or€substantial€impairment€of€a€function€of€a€bodily€member,€organ,Š Š  Šor€mental€faculty.€€ņņSee€id.ó󀚚€39-11-106(a)(34).€€With€respect€to€removal€or€confinement,€€š šunlawfulššŠ ¼  Šmeans€š šone€which€is€accomplished€by€force,€threat,€or€fraud,€or,€in€the€case€of€a€person€who€is€underŠ Øų Šthe€age€of€thirteen€(13)€or€incompetent,€accomplished€without€the€consent€of€a€parent,€guardian€orŠ ”ä Šother€person€responsible€for€the€general€supervision€of€the€minorššs€or€incompetentššs€welfare.šš€€ņņId.óóŠ €Š Ššš€39-13-301(2).€€€Š l¼ ŠĢą  ąThe€Defendants€argue€that€the€convictions€cannot€stand€because€the€State€failed€to€prove€thatŠ D!” Šthe€Defendants€š šconfinedšš€Esther€or€that€any€confinement€was€š šunlawful.šš€€According€to€theŠ 0"€  ŠDefendants,€the€presentment€alleged€that€they€š šcontinuouslyšš€confined€Esther€from€April€30,€1990Š #l! Šthrough€October€3,€1997.€€The€Defendants€point€out€that€Esther€ran€away€twice,€but€returned€homeŠ $X" Šof€her€own€volition€the€second€time,€and€that€she€also€asked€to€return€home€after€her€stay€in€theŠ ō$D # Šhospital.€€The€Defendants€contend€that,€because€these€events€š šbroke€the€continuity€of€any€allegedŠ ą%0!$ Šunlawful€confinement,šš€an€essential€element€of€the€kidnapping€charge€remains€unproven.€€Š Ģ&"% ŠĢą  ąIn€support€of€this€argument,€Defendants€cite€ņņState€v.€Paul€Lee€Whitedóó,€No.€M1998„00478„Š ¤(ō#' ŠCCA„R3„CD,€1999€WL€1209786,€Smith€County,€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Nashville,€Dec.€17,€1999)€ņņnoŠ )ą$( Šperm€to€app.€filedóó.€€In€ņņWhitedóó,€the€proof€showed€that€the€defendant€had€unlawfully€confined€theŠ |*Ģ%) Švictim€by€locking€her€in€a€closet€on€various€occasions.€€The€proof€also€revealed€that€the€victimŠ h+ø&* Šsuffered€serious€bodily€injury,€but€it€failed€to€show€that€the€victim€sustained€the€injuries€ņņduringóó€theŠ ° Šconfinement.€€ņņId.óó€at€**7.€€The€State€theorized€(1)€that€the€defendant€unlawfully€confined€the€victimŠ œģ Šfor€the€entire€six€month€period€preceding€her€death€by€controlling€her€money,€governing€her€foodŠ ˆŲ Šintake,€and€by€cursing,€beating,€and€humiliating€her;€and€(2)€that€the€victim€sustained€serious€bodilyŠ tÄ Šinjury€during€this€time.€€A€panel€of€this€Court€decided€that,€although€the€defendantššs€conduct€towardŠ `° Šthe€victim€was€cruel€and€despicable,€the€state€had€presented€no€proof€that€the€defendant€physicallyŠ L œ Šrestrained€the€victimššs€freedom€of€movement€for€the€entire€six€month€period,€or€that€the€victim€hadŠ 8 ˆ Šfelt€š šmentally€restrainedšš€by€any€force,€threat,€or€fraud€on€the€part€of€the€defendant€during€that€time.€Š $ t ŠņņId.óó€at€**8.€€Although€the€proof€of€serious€bodily€injury€was€undeniable€(in€fact,€the€victim€died€asŠ  ` Ša€result€of€injuries€inflicted€by€the€defendant),€this€Court€modified€the€conviction€from€especiallyŠ ü L  Šaggravated€kidnapping€to€false€imprisonment.€€ņņSee€id.óó€at€**9.Š č 8  ŠĢą  ąThe€circumstances€in€ņņWhitedóó€are€distinguishable€from€those€presented€in€the€case€ņņsubóó€ņņjudiceóó.€Š Ą  ŠAs€previously€noted,€the€element€of€false€imprisonment€in€ņņWhitedóó€was€proved€by€evidence€that€theŠ ¬ü  Šdefendant€confined€the€victim€by€locking€her€in€a€closet.€€Here,€the€Defendants€confined€Esther€byŠ ˜č  Šrestraining€her€inside€of€a€house€for€years,€during€which€time€she€suffered€serious€bodily€injury.€€InŠ „Ō  ŠņņWhitedóó,€the€victim€was€dead,€and,€thus,€proof€in€the€form€of€the€victimššs€testimony€could€not€beŠ pĄ Šoffered.€€In€the€case€ņņsubóó€ņņjudiceóó,€the€testimony€of€the€victim€gave€the€State€an€opportunity€to€proveŠ \¬ Šconfinement€in€a€much€broader€sense€than€that€presented€in€ņņWhitedóó,€where€the€state€showed€only€thatŠ H˜ Šthe€victim€was€locked€in€a€closet€on€one€or€more€occasions.€€Š 4„ ŠĢą  ąIn€addition,€the€victim€in€ņņWhitedóó€left€the€defendantššs€home€(where€the€victim€resided)€onŠ  \ Šnumerous€occasions.€€Sometimes€the€defendant€was€home€when€she€left,€and€other€times€he€was€not.€Š ųH ŠSometimes,€the€victim€would€be€alone€in€the€house€for€an€entire€day.€€Here,€the€proof€indicated€thatŠ ä4 ŠEsther€had€no€similar€freedom€of€movement.€€Esther€testified€that€she€was€restricted€to€her€room€onŠ Š  Šmore€than€one€occasion.€€The€punishment€for€disobedience€took€the€form€of€beatings€and€otherŠ ¼  Štorture,€and€Evangeline€Combs€placed€powder€outside€of€her€door€to€ascertain€whether€she€hadŠ Øų Šobeyed.€€Esther€testified€that€she€had€never€been€allowed€to€visit€other€children€or€go€anywhere€orŠ ”ä Šdo€anything€without€Evangeline,€Joseph,€or€a€sibling€present.€€No€visitors€were€permitted€inside€theŠ €Š ŠCombs€residence€when€they€lived€at€EBC.€€Esther€further€claimed€that€both€Defendants€hadŠ l¼ Šrepeatedly€informed€her€over€the€course€of€her€life€that€her€š špurposešš€was€to€be€a€servant€in€theŠ X Ø ŠCombs€family.€€On€those€occasions€when€she€did€not€perform€this€function€properly,€she€wasŠ D!” Špunished€severely.€In€addition€to€not€being€able€to€read€or€write€well,€Esther€did€not€possess€aŠ 0"€  Šdriverššs€license,€a€Social€Security€number,€or€any€other€standard€form€of€identification.€€She€was€toldŠ #l! Šby€both€Defendants€that€they€had€adopted€her,€an€intentional€misrepresentation€of€the€facts€on€theirŠ $X" Špart.€€Esther€had€been€treated€this€way€as€far€back€as€she€could€remember.€€Estherššs€testimony€as€toŠ ō$D # Šthese€facts€was€corroborated€by€the€testimony€of€numerous€other€witnesses€at€trial.€Š ą%0!$ ŠĢą  ąFrom€the€evidence,€taken€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€the€state,€a€jury€could€have€reasonablyŠ ø'#& Šinferred€that€Esther€was€confined€by€force,€threat€or€fraud€on€the€part€of€the€Defendants.€€ņņSeeóó€ņņStateŠ ¤(ō#' Šv.€Leggóó,€9€S.W.3d€111,€118€(Tenn.€1999)€(š šWhile€the€appellee€argues€that€[the€victim]€had€a€numberŠ )ą$( Šof€opportunities€to€escape€and€was€therefore€not€confined,€this€Court€will€not€reweigh€or€reevaluateŠ |*Ģ%) Šthe€evidence€presented€where€the€evidence€is€sufficient€for€conviction€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.šš).€Š h+ø&* ŠThe€evidence€indicates€that€Esther€was€not€only€psychologically€and€physically€beaten€intoŠ ° Šsubmission,€she€was€also€prevented€from€obtaining€even€the€most€rudimentary€tools€for€livingŠ œģ Šindependently€in€society.€€Moreover,€we€reject€the€Defendantsšš€argument€that€no€confinement€wasŠ ˆŲ Šproved€because€she€escaped€on€three€occasions€and€voluntarily€returned€twice.€€The€evidenceŠ tÄ Šsuggests€that€she€believed€she€had€no€choice€in€this€matter:€her€third€š šescapešš€was€the€result€of€anŠ `° Šattempt€to€commit€suicide€because€she€š šcouldnššt€take€it€anymorešš€and€š šwanted€to€die.ššŠ L œ ŠĢą  ąDefendants€also€argue€that€any€confinement€occurring€prior€to€Estherššs€thirteenth€birthdayŠ $ t Šcould€not€be€š šunlawfulšš€because€it€was€not€accomplished€without€the€consent€of€a€parent,€guardianŠ  ` Šor€other€person€responsible€for€the€general€supervision€of€the€minorššs€welfare,€pursuant€to€theŠ ü L  Šdefinition€of€š šunlawfulšš€provided€in€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€39„13„301(2)€(removal€or€confinement€isŠ č 8  Šunlawful€when€š šaccomplished€by€force,€threat,€or€fraud,€or,€in€the€case€of€a€person€who€is€under€theŠ Ō$  Šage€of€thirteen€(13)€or€incompetent,€accomplished€without€the€consent€of€a€parent,€guardian€or€otherŠ Ą  Šperson€responsible€for€the€general€supervision€of€the€minorššs€or€incompetentššs€welfarešš).€€In€theirŠ ¬ü  Šbriefs,€the€Defendants€assert€that€they€gave€themselves€consent€to€confine€Esther,€and,€after€sheŠ ˜č  Šbecame€thirteen€years€of€age,€their€status€as€foster€parents€conferred€upon€them€the€right€to€continueŠ „Ō  Što€do€so€š šsince€it€is€by€force€of€law€that€all€parents,€guardians€or€other€persons€responsible€for€theŠ pĄ Šgeneral€supervision€of€a€minorššs€welfare€are€possessed€of€the€power€to€confine€them.šš€€DefendantsŠ \¬ Šcite€no€legal€support€for€this€proposition,€and€we€find€the€argument€without€merit.€€As€the€recordŠ H˜ Šshows,€any€š šlegalšš€guardianship€claimed€by€the€Defendants€is€a€travesty.€€They€misrepresented€theirŠ 4„ Šstatus€as€Estherššs€adoptive€parents€from€the€beginning€of€her€life€with€them,€and€to€believe€that€theyŠ  p Šdid€anything€but€detrimentally€affect€her€welfare€would€go€against€a€considerable€weight€of€evidenceŠ  \ Što€the€contrary.€€Š ųH ŠĢą  ąMoreover,€as€we€discussed€ņņsupraóó€(in€our€analysis€of€the€issue€concerning€amendment€of€theŠ Š  Špresentment),€the€disjunctive€term€š šoršš€in€the€definition€indicates€that€removal€or€confinement€byŠ ¼  Šforce,€threat€or€fraud€may€be€unlawful,€even€if€accomplished€with€the€consent€of€a€parent,€guardianŠ Øų Šor€other€person€entrusted€with€the€minorššs€care.€€Esther€turned€thirteen€years€of€age€on€NovemberŠ ”ä Š16,€1990,€which€means€that€the€period€of€confinement€(alleged€in€the€presentment)€while€under€theŠ €Š Šage€of€thirteen€lasted€approximately€six€and€one„half€months€and,€after€she€turned€thirteen,€itŠ l¼ Šcontinued€for€more€than€six€years.€The€Defendants€also€maintain€that€the€State€failed€to€prove€thatŠ X Ø ŠEstherššs€confinement€was€accomplished€€through€the€use€or€display€of€a€deadly€weapon.€€ThisŠ D!” Šargument€is€also€without€merit,€because€the€convictions€in€issue€here€are€not€based€upon€proof€of€thisŠ 0"€  Šelement.Š #l! ŠĢą  ą€The€proof€also€supports€the€juryššs€finding€that€the€victim€suffered€serious€bodily€injuryŠ ō$D # Šduring€her€confinement.€€ņņSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šššš€39-13-305(a)(4).€€š šSerious€bodily€injuryšš€isŠ ą%0!$ Šdefined€as€bodily€injury€that€involves€a€substantial€risk€of€death;€protracted€unconsciousness;Š Ģ&"% Šextreme€physical€pain;€protracted€or€obvious€disfigurement;€or€protracted€loss€or€substantialŠ ø'#& Šimpairment€of€a€function€of€a€bodily€member,€organ,€or€mental€faculty.€€ņņSee€id.ó󀚚€39-11-106(a)(34).€Š ¤(ō#' ŠAccording€to€Estherššs€testimony,€among€other€things,€she€has€been€choked€with€a€rope€until€she€lostŠ )ą$( Šconsciousness;€she€was€burned,€whipped,€beaten€with€a€baseball€bat,€cut,€and€sewn€together€withoutŠ |*Ģ%) Šanesthesia;€and€her€elbow€has€been€permanently€damaged.€€This€is€sufficient€to€prove€that€herŠ h+ø&* Šinjuries€involved€unconsciousness,€extreme€physical€pain,€protracted€disfigurement,€ņņandóó€substantialŠ ° Šimpairment€of€a€bodily€member.€€The€Defendants€argue€that€the€State€was€required€to€elect€whichŠ œģ Šspecific€injuries€caused€the€serious€bodily€injury€in€order€to€sustain€a€conviction.€€This€is€not€trueŠ ˆŲ Šwhere€the€crime€is€viewed€as€a€single,€continuing€course€of€conduct.€€ņņSeeóó€ņņState€v.€Adamsóó,€24€S.W.3dŠ tÄ Š289,€291€(Tenn.€2000)€(š šIn€cases€where€the€nature€of€the€charged€offense€is€meant€to€punish€aŠ `° Šcontinuing€course€of€conduct€.€.€.€election€of€offenses€is€not€required€because€the€offense€is,€byŠ L œ Šdefinition,€a€single€offense.šš);€ņņLeggóó,€9€S.W.3d€at€118€(the€offense€of€aggravated€kidnapping€punishesŠ 8 ˆ Ša€continuing€course€of€conduct).Š $ t Šą  ąĢą  ąIn€summation,€after€considering€all€the€evidence€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€the€State,€weŠ ü L  Šbelieve€that€any€rational€trier€of€fact€could€have€found€that€all€the€essential€elements€of€this€offenseŠ č 8  Šwere€proved€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€Thus,€we€hold€that€the€evidence€is€sufficient€to€support€theŠ Ō$  Šconvictions€of€both€Defendants€for€the€offense€of€especially€aggravated€kidnapping.Š Ą  ŠĢą  ąņ ņB.€€Aggravated€Rape,€Rape,€and€Aggravated€Perjuryó óŠ ˜č  ŠĢą  ąDefendant€Joseph€Combs€contends€that€the€evidence€was€also€insufficient€to€sustain€hisŠ pĄ Šconvictions€for€aggravated€rape,€seven€counts€of€rape,€and€aggravated€perjury.€€Concerning€theŠ \¬ Šaggravated€rape€and€rape€convictions,€he€argues€that€the€State€failed€to€prove€coercion,€an€essentialŠ H˜ Šelement€of€these€offenses.€€Š 4„ ŠĢą  ąDefendantššs€assertion€that€coercion€is€an€essential€element€of€these€offenses€is€only€partiallyŠ  \ Šcorrect.€€Proof€of€force€or€coercion€to€accomplish€the€unlawful€sexual€penetration€of€Esther€isŠ ųH Šnecessary€to€sustain€his€seven€convictions€for€rape,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€39„13„503(a)(1),€but€not€theŠ ä4 Šconviction€for€aggravated€rape.€€In€April€1989€(the€date€alleged€in€count€12€of€the€presentment€forŠ Š  Šthe€offense€of€aggravated€rape),€the€offense€of€aggravated€rape€was€defined€as€š šunlawful€sexualŠ ¼  Špenetration€of€anotheršš€when€accompanied€by€any€one€of€four€enumerated€circumstances,€includingŠ Øų Šwhere€š š[t]he€victim€is€less€than€thirteen€(13)€years€of€age.šš€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€39„2„603€(Supp.Š ”ä Š1988)€(the€1992€Tenn.€Pub.€Acts,€ch.€878,€created€the€current€Class€A€felony€offense€of€š šrape€of€aŠ €Š Šchild,šš€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€39-13-522).€€Appropriately,€count€12€did€not€allege€that€force€or€coercionŠ l¼ Šwas€used€to€accomplish€the€act.Š X Ø ŠĢą  ąBy€contrast,€counts€13€through€19€alleged€that€Defendant€š šdid€unlawfully,€feloniously,€andŠ 0"€  Šby€means€of€force€or€coercion€sexually€penetrate€Esther€A.€Combs€.€.€.€.šš€€As€relevant€here,€š šrapeššŠ #l! Šis€statutorily€defined€as€the€š šunlawful€sexual€penetration€of€a€victim€by€the€defendant€or€of€theŠ $X" Šdefendant€by€a€victim,šš€and€š š[f]orce€or€coercion€is€used€to€accomplish€the€act.šš€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.Š ō$D # Ššš€39„13„503(a)(1)€(1991€&€1997).€€š šššCoercionšš€means€threat€of€kidnapping,€extortion,€force€orŠ ą%0!$ Šviolence€to€be€performed€immediately€or€in€the€future€or€the€use€of€parental,€custodial,€or€officialŠ Ģ&"% Šauthority€over€a€child€less€than€fifteen€(15)€years€of€age.šš€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€39„13„501(1)€(1997).€Š ø'#& ŠĢĢą  ąWe€find€the€proof€sufficient€to€sustain€the€conviction€for€aggravated€rape€and€the€sevenŠ |*Ģ%) Šconvictions€for€rape.€€As€to€the€former,€the€proof€clearly€shows€that€Esther€was€under€the€age€ofŠ h+ø&* Šthirteen€in€April€of€1989,€and€we€believe€that€a€rational€jury€could€further€find€that€DefendantŠ ° Šsexually€penetrated€her€on€that€date.€€The€earliest€of€the€seven€counts€of€rape€was€committed€onŠ œģ ŠNovember€16,€1990€and€the€most€recent€was€alleged€to€have€occurred€during€the€summer€monthsŠ ˆŲ Šof€1995.€€Regarding€proof€of€force€or€coercion€as€to€the€rape€counts,€we€find€the€evidence€clearlyŠ tÄ Šsufficient€for€any€rational€jury€to€find€that€Defendant€similarly€sexually€penetrated€Esther€on€theŠ `° Šdates€alleged€and€that,€given€the€substantial€proof€of€the€Defendantššs€abusive€treatment€of€her€inŠ L œ Šgeneral,€she€was€acting€under€the€threat€of€force€or€coercion€to€comply€with€Defendantššs€demands.€Š 8 ˆ ŠĢą  ąRegarding€the€conviction€for€aggravated€perjury,€Defendant€contends€that€it€must€be€reversedŠ  ` Šbecause€the€State€failed€to€prove€š šmateriality,šš€an€essential€element€of€the€charge.€€Specifically,€heŠ ü L  Šclaims€that€his€false€statements€to€the€court€during€the€conservatorship€proceeding€were€š šimmaterialššŠ č 8  Šbecause€she€had€š šalready€left€the€jurisdiction€of€the€court.ššŠ Ō$  ŠĢą  ąA€person€commits€the€offense€of€aggravated€perjury€who,€with€intent€to€deceive:€š š(1)Š ¬ü  Š[c]ommits€perjury€as€defined€in€šš€39-16-702;€(2)€[t]he€false€statement€is€made€during€or€inŠ ˜č  Šconnection€with€an€official€proceeding;€€and€(3)€[t]he€false€statement€is€material.šš€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.Š „Ō  Ššš€39„16„703(a)€(1997).€€Further,€š šņņit€is€no€defense€that€the€person€mistakenly€believed€the€statementŠ pĄ Što€be€immaterialóó.šš€€ņņId.ó󀚚€39„16„703(b)€(emphasis€added).€€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€39„16„Š \¬ Š702€provides,€in€relevant€part,€that€a€person€commits€the€offense€of€perjury€who,€š šwith€intent€toŠ H˜ Šdeceive,€makes€a€false€statement,€under€oath.šš€€ņņId.ó󀚚€39„16„702(a).€Š 4„ ŠĢą  ąThe€record€reveals€that€Defendant€made€the€untruthful€statements€concerning€EstherššsŠ  \ Šwhereabouts€during€the€conservatorship€proceeding€on€October€3,€1997.€€Attorney€David€Tipton,Š ųH ŠDetective€Debbie€Richmond„McCauley,€and€Chancellor€Richard€Ladd€all€testified€that€DefendantŠ ä4 Šhad€informed€the€court,€under€oath,€that€he€had€no€knowledge€of€Estherššs€whereabouts€and€that€heŠ Š  Šhad€not€seen€her€in€at€least€a€couple€of€weeks.€€Clearly,€this€was€a€false€statement,€made€during€anŠ ¼  Šofficial€proceeding,€which€was€intended€to€deceive€the€court.€€We€further€find€sufficient€evidenceŠ Øų Što€support€a€juryššs€determination€that€his€statements€were€material.€€The€hearing€was€convened€forŠ ”ä Šthe€sole€purpose€of€making€decisions€concerning€Estherššs€future.€€Thus,€it€was€imperative€that€sheŠ €Š Šbe€present€and€her€whereabouts€were€clearly€of€considerable€import.Š l¼ ŠĢą  ą€To€summarize,€after€considering€all€the€evidence€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€the€State,€weŠ D!” Šconclude€that€any€rational€trier€of€fact€could€have€found€all€the€essential€elements€of€the€offensesŠ 0"€  Šdiscussed€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€Therefore,€the€Defendants€are€not€entitled€to€relief€on€thisŠ #l! Šissue.Š $X" ŠĢņ ņą@~ ~ ģąVI.€€Instruction€on€Lesser„Included€Offensesó óˆŠ ą%0!$ ŠĢą  ąThe€Defendants€contend€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€failing€to€instruct€the€jury€on€allŠ ø'#& Šappropriate€lesser„included€offenses€of€certain€offenses€charged,€as€required€under€ņņState€v.€Burnsóó,Š ¤(ō#' Š6€S.W.3d€453€(Tenn.€1999),€and€ņņState€v.€Dominyóó,€6€S.W.3d€472€(Tenn.€1999).€€The€State€respondsŠ )ą$( Šā āthat€any€lesser„included€offenses€upon€which€the€trial€court€failed€to€instruct€the€jury€eitherŠ |*Ģ%) Šconstituted€harmless€error,€under€ņņState€v.€Williamsóó,€977€S.W.2d€101€(Tenn.€1998),€or€failed€to€satisfyŠ ° Šthe€criteria€requiring€jury€instruction€set€forth€in€ņņBurnsóó.€€With€one€exception,€we€agree€with€the€State.Š œģ Šā āĢŌ‡XOqXXXOqŌą  ą€A€trial€court€is€required€by€statute€to€charge€juries€as€to€the€law€of€each€offense€š šincludedššŠ tÄ Šin€an€indictment.€€ņņSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€40-18-110€(1997).€€Our€supreme€court€has€interpreted€thisŠ `° Šprovision€to€mean€that€š ša€trial€court€must€instruct€the€jury€on€all€lesser-included€offenses€if€theŠ L œ Ševidence€introduced€at€trial€is€legally€sufficient€to€support€a€conviction€for€the€lesser€offense.šš€€ņņStateŠ 8 ˆ Šv.€Burnsóó,€6€S.W.3d€453,€464€(Tenn.€1999)€(quoting€ņņState€v.€Langfordóó,€994€S.W.2d€126,€128€(Tenn.Š $ t Š1999)€(addššl€citations€omitted)).€€Further,€š š[t]his€mandate€to€charge€lesser-included€offenses€appliesŠ  ` Šwhether€or€not€a€defendant€requests€such€an€instruction.šš€€ņņId.ó󀀩 ü L  ŠĢą  ąIn€ņņBurnsóó,€the€supreme€court€also€set€forth€the€factors€to€consider€in€determining€whether€anŠ Ō$  Šoffense€is€a€lesser„included€offense€of€another€crime.€€Specifically,€an€offense€is€a€lesser„includedŠ Ą  Šoffense€of€another€ifŠ ¬ü  ŠŌ#†XOqXXXOqt#ŌĢą8  ą(a)€all€of€its€statutory€elements€are€included€within€the€statutory€elements€of€theŠ „Ō  Šoffense€charged;€or€ŠpĄŠ Š  ŠĢą8  ą(b)€it€fails€to€meet€the€definition€in€part€(a)€only€in€the€respect€that€it€contains€aŠ H˜ Šstatutory€element€or€elements€establishing€(1)€a€different€mental€state€indicating€aŠ 4„ Šlesser€kind€of€culpability;€and/or€(2)€a€less€serious€harm€or€risk€of€harm€to€the€sameŠ  p Šperson,€property€or€public€interest;€orŠ \Š Š  ŠĢą8  ą(c)€it€consists€of€(1)€facilitation€of€the€offense€charged€or€of€an€offense€that€otherwiseŠ ä4 Šmeets€the€definition€of€lesser„included€of€lesser„included€offense€in€part€(a)€or€(b);Š Š  Šor€(2)€an€attempt€to€commit€the€offense€charged€or€an€offense€that€otherwise€meetsŠ ¼  Šthe€definition€of€lesser-included€offense€in€part€(a)€or€(b);€or€(3)€solicitation€toŠ Øų Šcommit€the€offense€charged€or€an€offense€that€otherwise€meets€the€definition€ofŠ ”ä Šlesser-included€offense€in€part€(a)€or€(b).Š€ŠŠ Š  ŠĢņņId.óó€at€466„467.€€The€mere€existence€of€a€lesser€offense€to€a€charged€offense€is€not€sufficient€in€itselfŠ X Ø Što€warrant€a€charge,€however.€€ņņId.óó€at€467.€€The€trial€court€is€not€required€to€instruct€the€jury€on€lesserŠ D!” Šoffenses€unless€it€has€also€determined€that€(1)€evidence€exists€that€reasonable€minds€could€acceptŠ 0"€  Šas€to€the€lesser€charge€and€(2)€such€evidence€is€legally€sufficient€to€support€a€conviction.€€ņņId.óó€at€466„Š #l! Š67.€€Š $X" ŠĢą  ąBecause€a€failure€to€give€lesser-included€offense€instructions€is€an€error€of€constitutionalŠ ą%0!$ Šdimensions,€it€š šis€ššpresumedšš€reversible;€€it€will€result€in€reversal€unless€the€State€convinces€theŠ Ģ&"% Šreviewing€court€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt€that€the€error€did€not€affect€the€outcome€of€the€trial.šš€Š ø'#& ŠņņState€v.€Elyóó,€48€S.W.3d€710,€725€(Tenn.€2001)€€€€The€question€whether€a€given€offense€should€haveŠ ¤(ō#' Šbeen€submitted€to€the€jury€as€a€lesser-included€offense€is€a€mixed€question€of€law€and€fact.€€ņņState€v.Š )ą$( ŠRushóó,€50€S.W.3d€424,€427€(Tenn.€2001).€€Thus,€the€standard€of€review€is€ņņdeóó€ņņnovoóó€without€aŠ |*Ģ%) Špresumption€of€correctness.€€ņņId.ó󀀩 h+ø&* Š‡ą  ąņ ņA.€€Especially€Aggravated€Kidnappingó óŠ ° ŠĢą  ąThe€Defendants€were€each€convicted€of€one€count€of€especially€aggravated€kidnapping,Š ˆŲ Šdefined€as€false€imprisonment€where€the€victim€suffers€serious€bodily€injury.€€ņņSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.Š tÄ Ššš€39„13„305(a)(4)€(1997).€€The€trial€court€gave€the€jury€instructions€on€especially€aggravatedŠ `° Škidnapping,€and€the€lesser€offenses€of€aggravated€kidnapping€and€kidnapping.€€Both€DefendantsŠ L œ Šcontend€that€the€jury€should€have€been€instructed€on€the€additional€lesser€offenses€of€falseŠ 8 ˆ Šimprisonment€and€aggravated€assault.€€Defendant€Joseph€Combs€adds€that€instructions€on€facilitationŠ $ t Šof€the€charged€offense€should€have€been€included.Š  ` ŠĢą  ąš šA€person€commits€the€offense€of€false€imprisonment€who€knowingly€removes€or€confinesŠ č 8  Šanother€unlawfully€so€as€to€interfere€substantially€with€the€otherššs€liberty.šš€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€39„Š Ō$  Š13„302(a)€(1997).€€š šA€person€is€criminally€responsible€for€the€facilitation€of€a€felony€if,€knowing€thatŠ Ą  Šanother€intends€to€commit€a€specific€felony,€but€without€the€intent€required€for€criminalŠ ¬ü  Šresponsibility€.€.€.€,€the€person€knowingly€furnishes€substantial€assistance€in€the€commission€of€theŠ ˜č  Šfelony.šš€€ņņId.ó󀚚€39„11„403.€€As€relevant€here,€a€person€commits€aggravated€assault€who€intentionallyŠ „Ō  Šor€knowingly€or€recklessly€commits€an€assault,€as€defined€in€šš€39-13-101,€and€causes€serious€bodilyŠ pĄ Šinjury€or€uses€or€displays€a€deadly€weapon.€€ņņSee€id.ó󀚚€39„13„102(a),€„101.Š \¬ ŠĢą  ą€With€regard€to€false€imprisonment,€we€note€that€the€offense€is€incorporated€by€reference€intoŠ 4„ Šthe€statutory€definition€of€especially€aggravated€kidnapping.€€ņņSee€id.ó󀚚€39„13„305(a).€€Therefore,€itŠ  p Šis€clearly€a€lesser„included€offense€under€part(a)€of€the€ņņBurnsóó€test,€ņņsupraóó.€€The€second€determinationŠ  \ Šunder€ņņBurnsóó,€i.e.,€whether€evidence€exists€that€reasonable€minds€could€accept€as€to€this€lesser€chargeŠ ųH Šand€whether€it€is€legally€sufficient€to€support€a€conviction,€is€unnecessary,€however,€based€on€theŠ ä4 Šdecision€of€our€supreme€court€in€ņņState€v.€Williamsóó,€977€S.W.2d€101€(Tenn.€1998).€€ņņSee€alsoóó€ņņStateŠ Š  Šv.€Bowlesóó,€52€S.W.3d€69€(Tenn.€2001).Š ¼  ŠĢą  ąIn€ņņState€v.€Williamsóó,€the€defendant€was€convicted€of€first€degree€premeditated€murder.€€TheŠ ”ä Štrial€court€refused€the€defendantššs€request€to€instruct€the€jury€on€voluntary€manslaughter€as€a€lesser„Š €Š Šincluded€offense,€but€did€instruct€the€jury€on€second€degree€murder€and€reckless€homicide.€Š l¼ ŠņņWilliamsóó,€977€S.W.2d€at€104.€€Holding€that€the€trial€courtššs€failure€to€instruct€on€voluntaryŠ X Ø Šmanslaughter€was€harmless,€the€Tennessee€Supreme€Court€drew€the€following€conclusion:Š D!” ŠŅ°ŅŅ°ŅĢ[B]y€finding€the€defendant€guilty€of€the€highest€offense€to€the€exclusion€of€theŠ #l! Šimmediately€lesser€offense,€second€degree€murder,€the€jury€necessarily€rejected€allŠ $X" Šother€lesser€offenses,€including€voluntary€manslaughter.€€Accordingly,ņņ€the€trialŠ ō$D # Šcourtššs€erroneous€failure€to€charge€voluntary€manslaughter€is€harmless€beyond€aŠ ą%0!$ Šreasonable€doubt€because€the€juryššs€verdict€of€guilty€on€the€greater€offense€of€firstŠ Ģ&"% Šdegree€murder€and€its€disinclination€to€consider€the€lesser€included€offense€of€secondŠ ø'#& Šdegree€murder€clearly€demonstrates€that€it€certainly€would€not€have€returned€aŠ ¤(ō#' Šverdict€on€voluntary€manslaughteróó.Š )ą$( Šā āŠ |*Ģ%) ŠŅ°ŅŅ°ŅņņId.óó€at€106€(emphasis€added).€€This€holding€was€restated€by€the€supreme€court€in€ņņState€v.€Bowlesóó,€52Š ° Šā āS.W.3d€at€78€(defendantššs€conviction€for€aggravated€rape€affirmed;€the€trial€courtššs€failure€to€chargeŠ œģ Šthe€jury€on€the€lesser„included€offense€of€sexual€battery€was€harmless€beyond€a€reasonable€doubtŠ ˆŲ Šwhere€the€jury€was€instructed€on€the€lesser€offenses€of€rape€and€aggravated€sexual€battery).€€Š tÄ ŠĢą  ąThe€record€reveals€that€the€instructions€given€the€jury€by€the€trial€court€on€the€lesser„includedŠ L œ Šoffense€of€aggravated€kidnapping€embraced€only€the€elements€requiring€the€jury€to€find€(1)€that€theŠ 8 ˆ ŠDefendant€knowingly€and€unlawfully€confined€the€victim,€and€(2)€that€the€victim€suffered€bodilyŠ $ t Šinjury€or€that€the€Defendant€possessed€or€threatened€the€use€of€a€deadly€weapon.€€ņņSeeóó€Tenn.€CodeŠ  ` ŠAnn.€šš€39„13„304(a)(4)€and€(5)€(1997).€€Likewise,€the€courtššs€instructions€on€the€lesser„includedŠ ü L  Šoffense€of€kidnapping€only€required€the€jury€to€find€(1)€that€the€Defendant€knowingly€and€unlawfullyŠ č 8  Šconfined€the€victim,€and€(2)€that€the€confinement€was€under€circumstances€that€exposed€the€victimŠ Ō$  Što€substantial€risk€of€bodily€injury.€€ņņSee€id.ó󀚚€39„13„303(a)(1).€€Consequently,€the€jury€was€presentedŠ Ą  Šwith€proper€lesser„included€offenses€for€the€offense€of€especially€aggravated€kidnapping€as€chargedŠ ¬ü  Šin€this€case.€€Therefore,€under€ņņWilliamsóó€and€ņņBowlesóó€we€may€conclude€that€(1)€by€finding€theŠ ˜č  ŠDefendants€guilty€of€the€greater€offense,€especially€aggravated€kidnapping,€in€lieu€of€the€lesserŠ „Ō  Šoffenses€of€aggravated€kidnapping€and€kidnapping,€the€jury€necessarily€weighed€the€evidence€andŠ pĄ Šdetermined€that€the€greater€offense€was€the€most€appropriate€charge€supported€by€the€evidence;€andŠ \¬ Š(2)€the€result€would€have€been€the€same,€even€if€the€jury€had€received€instructions€on€the€offense€ofŠ H˜ Šfalse€imprisonment.€€We€may€further€conclude€that€the€trial€courtššs€failure€to€charge€the€jury€on€thisŠ 4„ Šoffense,€although€error,€was€nevertheless€harmless€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€ņņSee€alsoóó€Tenn.€R.Š  p ŠApp.€P.€36(b);€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€52(a).Š  \ ŠĢą  ąEven€if€ņņWilliamsóó€was€not€applicable€here,€the€Defendantsšš€argument€would€similarly€failŠ ä4 Šunder€the€harmless€error€analysis€set€forth€by€our€supreme€court€in€ņņState€v.€Allenóó,€69€S.W.3d€181Š Š  Š(Tenn.€2002)ņņóó:Š ¼  ŠĢą8  ąą ` ąWhen€a€lesser„included€offense€instruction€is€improperly€omitted,€.€.€.€theŠ ”ä Šharmless€error€inquiry€is€the€same€as€for€other€constitutional€errors:€whether€itŠ €Š Šappears€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt€that€the€error€did€not€affect€the€outcome€of€theŠ l¼ Štrial.€€(Citation€omitted.)€€In€making€this€determination,€a€reviewing€court€shouldŠ X Ø Šconduct€a€thorough€examination€of€the€record,€including€the€evidence€presented€atŠ D!” Štrial,€the€defendantššs€theory€of€defense,€and€the€verdict€returned€by€the€jury.Š0"€ Š Š  ŠĢņņId.óó€at191.€€A€thorough€examination€of€the€record€and€the€evidence€presented€at€trial€leads€us€toŠ $X" Šconclude€that€the€trial€courtššs€error€did€not€affect€the€outcome€of€the€trial€or,€more€specifically,€theŠ ō$D # Šjuryššs€verdict€for€this€offense.€€The€fact€that€Esther€suffered€serious€injury€was€uncontroverted.€€Thus,Š ą%0!$ Šwe€are€convinced€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt€that€a€jury,€if€given€the€opportunity,€would€not€haveŠ Ģ&"% Šconvicted€either€Defendant€of€the€offense€of€false€imprisonment.Š ø'#& ŠĢą  ąAn€ņņAllenóó€harmless€error€analysis€applies€with€equal€veracity€to€Defendant€Joseph€CombsŠ )ą$( Šargument€concerning€the€trial€courtššs€failure€to€instruct€the€jury€on€the€lesser€offense€of€facilitationŠ |*Ģ%) Šof€especially€aggravated€kidnapping,€clearly€a€lesser„included€offense€under€ņņBurnsóó,€part€(c).€Š h+ø&* ŠSpecifically,€the€proof€of€Joseph€Combsšš€participation€in€and€criminal€responsibility€for€this€offenseŠ ° Šis€so€overwhelming€that€we€are€convinced€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt€that€no€jury,€if€given€theŠ œģ Šopportunity,€would€find€him€guilty€of€the€offense€of€facilitation€of€especially€aggravated€kidnapping.€Š ˆŲ ŠConsequently,€the€trial€courtššs€failure€to€instruct€the€jury,€while€error,€is€nevertheless€harmlessŠ tÄ Šbeyond€a€reasonable€doubt.Š `° ŠĢą  ąTurning€to€whether€jury€instructions€were€required€for€aggravated€assault,€as€a€lesser„includedŠ 8 ˆ Šoffense€of€especially€aggravated€kidnapping,€we€find€that€the€trial€court€did€not€err€because€theŠ $ t Šoffense€of€aggravated€assault€is€not€a€lesser„included€offense€under€ņņBurnsóó.€€Specifically,€we€first€findŠ  ` Šthat€part€(a)€of€the€ņņBurnsóó€test€is€not€satisfied,€whereas€all€of€the€statutory€elements€in€aggravatedŠ ü L  Šassault€are€not€included€within€the€statutory€elements€of€especially€aggravated€kidnapping.€€AsŠ č 8  Špreviously€noted,€a€conviction€of€aggravated€assault€requires€proof€that€the€accused€intentionally,Š Ō$  Šknowingly€or€recklessly€caused€serious€bodily€injury€to€the€victim.€€ņņSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€39„13„Š Ą  Š101,€„102€(1997).€€In€this€case,€especially€aggravated€kidnapping€requires€proof€that€a€personŠ ¬ü  Šknowingly€and€unlawfully€confined€the€victim€so€as€to€interfere€substantially€with€his€or€her€liberty,Š ˜č  Šwhere€the€victim€suffers€serious€bodily€injury.€€ņņSee€id.ó󀚚€39„13„305,€„302.€€A€plain€reading€of€theŠ „Ō  Šstatute€indicates€that€a€conviction€for€the€kidnapping€offense€requires€proof€only€that€the€victimššsŠ pĄ Šserious€bodily€injury€occurred€during€the€unlawful€confinement,€and€not€as€the€result€of€any€specificŠ \¬ Šņņintentóó€on€the€part€of€the€accused€to€harm€or€injure€the€victim.€€ņņId.ó󀀩 H˜ ŠĢą  ąNeither€is€part€(b)€of€the€ņņBurnsóó€test€satisfied.€€Part€(b)€states€that€a€lesser„included€offenseŠ  p Šmay€be€found€in€cases€where€the€offense€š šfails€to€meet€the€definition€in€part€(a)€only€in€the€respectŠ  \ Šthat€it€contains€a€statutory€element€or€elements€establishing€(1)€a€different€mental€state€indicating€aŠ ųH Šlesser€kind€of€culpability;€and/or€(2)€a€less€serious€harm€or€risk€of€harm€to€the€same€person,€propertyŠ ä4 Šor€public€interest.šš€€ņņBurnsóó,€6€S.W.3d€at€467.€€Both€offenses€involve€serious€bodily€injury,€theŠ Š  Šessential€difference€being€whether€especially€aggravated€kidnapping€associates€a€mental€state€withŠ ¼  Šņņcausationóó€of€the€injury.€€Because€we€find€that€the€mental€state€required€to€intentionally,€knowingly,Š Øų Šor€recklessly€cause€a€victimššs€serious€bodily€injury€cannot€be€considered€a€lesser€kind€of€culpabilityŠ ”ä Šor€harm€than€that€required€in€an€offense€where€serious€bodily€injury€merely€results,€part€(b)€is€notŠ €Š Šsatisfied.€€Clearly,€part€(c)€is€also€not€satisfied€since€the€lesser€offense€does€not€involve€facilitation,Š l¼ Šattempt,€or€solicitation€of€either€the€charged€offense€or€an€offense€that€otherwise€meets€the€definitionŠ X Ø Šof€lesser-included€offense€in€part€(a)€or€(b).Š D!” ŠĢą  ąOur€research€reveals€that€the€issue€whether€the€crime€of€assault€is€a€lesser„included€offenseŠ #l! Šof€especially€aggravated€kidnapping€was€raised€in€ņņState€v.€Leggóó,€9€S.W.3d€111€(Tenn.€1999),€butŠ $X" Šdecided€on€other€grounds.€€ņņId.óó€at€118.€€The€supreme€court€made€the€following€observation€during€itsŠ ō$D # Šconsideration€of€the€two€offenses:€š šUnlike€aggravated€kidnapping,€the€elements€of€the€crime€ofŠ ą%0!$ Šassault€do€not€contemplate€a€continuing€course€of€conduct€.€.€.€.€Rather,€the€crime€itself€contemplatesŠ Ģ&"% Šthat€it€is€consummated€or€completed€the€moment€bodily€injury€occurs.šš€€ņņId.óó€€This€suggests€that€evenŠ ø'#& Šthe€nature€of€the€crimes€are€quite€dissimilar.€€In€any€event,€because€we€find€that€the€assault€offenseŠ ¤(ō#' Šrequires€proof€of€some€intent€to€cause€injury,€while€the€kidnapping€charge€requires€confinementŠ )ą$( Šā āwhere€injury€ņņresultsóó,€but€which€need€not€even€be€caused€by€either€Defendant,€the€Burns€test€forŠ |*Ģ%) Šlesser„included€offense€status€is€not€satisfied€in€this€case.€€Thus,€the€trial€court€did€not€err€by€failingŠ ° Što€instruct€the€jury€on€the€offense€of€aggravated€assault.Š œģ Šā āĢą  ąDefendant€Joseph€Combs€singularly€contends€that€the€trial€court€also€erred€by€not€giving€theŠ tÄ Šjury€instructions€on€š šinvoluntary€servitude,šš€as€a€lesser„included€offense€of€especially€aggravatedŠ `° Škidnapping.€€š šInvoluntary€servitudešš€is€defined€as€š šthe€condition€of€a€person€who€is€compelled€byŠ L œ Šforce,€coercion€or€imprisonment€and€against€the€personššs€will€to€labor€for€another,€whether€paid€orŠ 8 ˆ Šnot.šš€€ņņSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€39„13„301(1)€(1997).€€Involuntary€servitude€is€not€a€distinct€offense,Š $ t Šbut€one€of€two€elements€describing€a€condition€of€confinement€which€must€be€proved€to€convict€aŠ  ` Šperson€of€kidnapping.€€ņņSee€id.ó󀚚€39„13„303(a)(2)€(1997).€€This€argument€has€no€merit.Š ü L  ŠĢą  ąņ ņB.€€Aggravated€Assaultó óŠ Ō$  ŠĢą  ąCount€2€of€the€presentment€in€this€case€charged€Defendant€Joseph€Combs€with€aggravatedŠ ¬ü  Šassault,€i.e.,€intentionally€and€knowingly€causing€bodily€injury€to€Esther€Combs€by€the€display€of€aŠ ˜č  Šdeadly€weapon,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€39„13„102€(a)(1)(B).€€The€jury€was€instructed€onŠ „Ō  Šintentional/knowing€aggravated€assault,€the€crime€charged,€and€reckless€aggravated€assault€as€aŠ pĄ Šlesser„included€offense.€€Defendant€contends€that€the€trial€court€committed€reversible€error€by€failingŠ \¬ Što€also€charge€the€jury€on€the€offenses€of€reckless€endangerment€and€assault,€as€additional€lesser„Š H˜ Šincluded€offenses€of€aggravated€assault.€€We€disagree.Š 4„ ŠĢą  ąš šReckless€endangermentšš€is€committed€when€the€defendant€š šrecklessly€engages€in€conductŠ  \ Šwhich€places€or€may€place€another€person€in€imminent€danger€of€death€or€serious€bodily€injury.šš€Š ųH ŠTenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€39„13„103€(1997).€€š šAggravated€assaultšš€is€committed€when€a€personŠ ä4 Šintentionally€or€knowingly€or€recklessly€commits€an€assault,€as€defined€in€šš€39-13-101€[which€meansŠ Š  Šthe€defendant€caused€bodily€injury€or€another€to€reasonably€fear€imminent€bodily€injury],€and€causesŠ ¼  Šserious€bodily€injury€or€uses€or€displays€a€deadly€weapon.€€ņņSee€id.ó󀚚€39„13„102(a),€„101€(1997).€Š Øų ŠWhen€the€defendant€is€convicted€of€committing€the€crime€of€aggravated€assault€ņņrecklesslyóó,€the€crimeŠ ”ä Šis€a€Class€D€felony,€as€opposed€to€a€Class€C€felony€when€the€crime€is€committed€ņņintentionallyóó€orŠ €Š Šņņknowinglyóó.€€ņņId.ó󀚚€39„13„102(d).Š l¼ ŠĢą  ąUnder€the€circumstances€presented€here,€we€find€that€the€trial€courtššs€failure€to€instruct€theŠ D!” Šjury€on€the€offense€of€reckless€endangerment,€if€error,€was€harmless€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt€underŠ 0"€  ŠņņState€v.€Williamsóó,€977€S.W.2d€101€(Tenn.€1998).€€By€finding€the€Defendant€guilty€of€ņņóóintentional€orŠ #l! Šknowing€aggravated€assault,€in€lieu€of€reckless€aggravated€assault,€the€jury€expressly€rejected€anyŠ $X" Šnotion€that€the€Defendant€committed€the€crime€ņņrecklesslyóó.€€ņņSee€id.óó€at€106.€€The€juryššs€disinclinationŠ ō$D # Što€consider€the€lesser„included€offense€of€reckless€aggravated€assault€clearly€demonstrates€that€it€alsoŠ ą%0!$ Šwould€not€have€returned€a€verdict€on€the€lesser€crime€of€reckless€endangerment.€€Under€similarŠ Ģ&"% Šreasoning,€we€also€reject€Defendantššs€argument€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€failing€to€instruct€the€juryŠ ø'#& Šon€the€lesser„included€offense€of€assault.Š ¤(ō#' ŠĢĢŠ h+ø&* Šą  ąņ ņC.€€Aggravated€Rapeó óŠ ° ŠĢą  ąDefendant€Joseph€Combs€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€not€instructing€the€jury€on€rapeŠ ˆŲ Šand€aggravated€assault,€as€lesser„included€offenses€of€aggravated€rape.€€We€disagree.Š tÄ ŠĢą  ąCount€12€of€the€presentment,€charging€Defendant€with€aggravated€rape,€alleges€that€on€orŠ L œ Šabout€April€1989,€Joseph€Combs€unlawfully€and€feloniously€sexually€penetrated€Esther,€a€childŠ 8 ˆ Šunder€thirteen€years€of€age,€contrary€to€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€39„13„502.€€€In€AprilŠ $ t Š1989,€the€offense€of€aggravated€rape€was€defined€as€š šunlawful€sexual€penetration€of€anotherŠ  ` Šaccompanied€by€any€of€the€following€circumstances:€Š ü L  ŠĢŅ°ŅŅ°Ņą ` ą(1)€Force€or€coercion€is€used€to€accomplish€the€act€and€the€defendant€is€armedŠ Ō$  Šwith€a€weapon€or€any€article€used€or€fashioned€in€a€manner€to€lead€the€victimŠ Ą  Šreasonably€to€believe€it€to€be€a€weapon;Š ¬ü  Šą ` ą(2)€The€defendant€causes€personal€injury€to€the€victim;€Š ˜č  Šą ` ą(3)€The€defendant€is€aided€or€abetted€by€one€(1)€or€more€other€persons;€andŠ „Ō  Š(A)€Force€or€coercion€is€used€to€accomplish€the€act;€or€(B)€The€defendant€knows€orŠ pĄ Šhas€reason€to€know€that€the€victim€is€mentally€defective,€mentally€incapacitated€orŠ \¬ Šphysically€helpless;€orŠ H˜ Šą ` ą(4)€The€victim€is€less€than€thirteen€(13)€years€of€age.Š 4„ ŠĢŅ°ŅŅ°ŅTenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€39„2„603€(Supp.€1988)€(rape€of€a€victim€less€than€thirteen€years€of€age€isŠ  \ Šcurrently€codified€as€š šrape€of€a€child,šš€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€39-13-522€(1997)).€€At€that€time,€theŠ ųH Šoffense€of€rape€was€defined€as€the€š šunlawful€sexual€penetration€of€a€victim€by€the€defendant€or€theŠ ä4 Šunlawful€sexual€penetration€of€a€defendant€by€a€victim,šš€where€Š Š  ŠĢŅ°ŅŅ°Ņą ` ą(1)€Force€or€coercion€is€used€to€accomplish€the€act;€Š Øų Šą ` ą(2)€The€actor€knows€or€has€reason€to€know€that€the€victim€is€mentallyŠ ”ä Šdefective,€mentally€incapacitated€or€physically€helpless;€or€Š €Š Šą ` ą(3)€The€actor€accomplishes€sexual€penetration€by€fraud.€€Š l¼ ŠĢŅ°ŅŅ°ŅņņSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€39„2„604€(Supp.€1988).€€Š D!” ŠĢą  ąIn€our€prior€discussion€of€the€issue€regarding€sufficiency€of€the€evidence,€we€pointed€out€thatŠ #l! Šthe€conviction€of€aggravated€rape€required€only€proof€of€š šunlawful€sexual€penetration€of€a€victimŠ $X" Šby€the€defendant€or€the€defendant€by€a€victim,šš€where€š š[t]he€victim€is€less€than€thirteen€(13)€yearsŠ ō$D # Šof€age.šš€€ņņId.ó󀚚€39„2„603.€€Since€the€conviction€for€aggravated€rape€did€not€require€the€State€toŠ ą%0!$ Šestablish€any€one€of€the€three€elements,€or€š šcircumstances,šš€enumerated€in€the€offense€of€rape,€theŠ Ģ&"% Šoffense€clearly€does€not€satisfy€part€(a)€of€ņņBurnsóó.€€It€is€equally€obvious€that€the€criteria€for€part€(c)Š ø'#& Šare€not€met.€€Furthermore,€under€ņņState€v.€Allenóó,€discussed€ņņsupraóó,€even€if€it€was€error€to€not€instructŠ ¤(ō#' Šthe€jury€on€the€offense€of€rape,€the€error€was€harmless€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt,€based€upon€theŠ )ą$( Šproof€and€the€theory€of€defense.€€ņņAllenóó,€69€S.W.3d€at€191.Š |*Ģ%) ŠŠ h+ø&* Šą  ąThe€offense€of€aggravated€assault€also€fails€to€satisfy€the€ņņBurnsóó€criterion€for€a€lesser„includedŠ ° Šoffense€of€aggravated€rape,€where€the€victim€was€less€than€thirteen€(13)€years€of€age.€€ņņSee€id.ó󀚚€39„2„Š œģ Š603.€€Aggravated€assault€requires€proof€that€the€accused€(1)€willfully,€knowingly€or€recklessly€causedŠ ˆŲ Šor€attempted€to€cause€serious€bodily€injury€to€another;€or€(2)€willfully€or€knowingly€caused€orŠ tÄ Šattempted€to€cause€bodily€injury€while€using€or€displaying€a€deadly€weapon.€€ņņSee€id.ó󀚚€39„2„101(b).€Š `° ŠNeither€of€these€elements€are€included€in€the€offense€of€aggravated€rape€as€charged€here,€whichŠ L œ Šmeans€that€part€(a)€is€not€satisfied.€€Since€parts€(b)€and€(c)€are€also€clearly€not€satisfied,€the€trial€courtŠ 8 ˆ Šdid€not€err€by€failing€to€instruct€the€jury€on€this€crime.€€Š $ t ŠĢą  ąņ ņD.€€Aggravated€Perjuryó óŠ ü L  ŠĢą  ąDefendant€Joseph€Combs€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€failing€to€instruct€the€jury€onŠ Ō$  Šthe€offense€of€perjury,€as€a€lesser„included€offense€of€aggravated€perjury.€€We€agree.Š Ą  ŠĢą  ąA€person€commits€the€offense€of€aggravated€perjury€who,€with€intent€to€deceive,€makes€aŠ ˜č  Šfalse€statement,€under€oath;€the€false€statement€is€made€during€or€in€connection€with€an€officialŠ „Ō  Šproceeding;€and€the€false€statement€is€material.€€ņņSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€39„16„703,€„702€(1997).€€AsŠ pĄ Šrelevant€here,€a€conviction€for€the€offense€of€perjury€merely€requires€proof€that€the€accused€made€aŠ \¬ Šfalse€statement,€under€oath,€with€intent€to€deceive.€€ņņSee€id.ó󀚚€39„16„702.€€Š H˜ ŠĢą  ąDefendant€correctly€asserts€that€the€statutory€elements€constituting€perjury€are€incorporatedŠ  p Šby€reference€within€the€statutory€elements€of€the€offense€charged,€aggravated€perjury.€€This€satisfiesŠ  \ Špart€(a)€of€the€test€in€ņņBurnsóó.€€ņņSeeóó€ņņBurnsóó,€6€S.W.3d€at€467.€€Having€concluded€that€perjury€is€a€lesser„Š ųH Šincluded€offense,€we€use€the€following€two„step€analysis€to€determine€whether€the€evidence€justifiedŠ ä4 Šan€instruction€on€that€offense:Š Š  ŠĢą8  ąFirst,€the€trial€court€must€determine€whether€any€evidence€exists€that€reasonableŠ Øų Šminds€could€accept€as€to€the€lesser-included€offense.€€In€making€this€determination,Š ”ä Šthe€trial€court€must€view€the€evidence€liberally€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€theŠ €Š Šexistence€of€the€lesser-included€offense€without€making€any€judgments€on€theŠ l¼ Šcredibility€of€such€evidence.€€Second,€the€trial€court€must€determine€if€the€evidence,Š X Ø Šviewed€in€this€light,€is€legally€sufficient€to€support€a€conviction€for€theŠ D!” Šlesser-included€offense.Š0"€ Š Š  ŠĢņņId.óó€at€469.€€Clearly,€evidence€exists€which€reasonable€minds€could€accept€as€to€the€offense€of€perjuryŠ $X" Šand€the€proof€is€sufficient€to€support€a€conviction.€€Defendant€admitted€that€he€made€a€falseŠ ō$D # Šstatement,€under€oath,€with€intent€to€deceive.€€The€proof€also€shows€that€the€false€statement€wasŠ ą%0!$ Šunquestionably€made€during€or€in€connection€with€an€official€proceeding,€i.e.,€to€the€court€during€theŠ Ģ&"% Šconservatorship€proceeding€on€October€3,€1997.€€The€contested€issue€was€whether€Defendantššs€falseŠ ø'#& Šstatement€was€š šmaterial.ššŠ ¤(ō#' ŠĢą  ąBecause€the€trial€courtššs€failure€to€instruct€the€jury€on€this€offense€was€indeed€error,€we€mustŠ |*Ģ%) Šdetermine€whether€the€error€was€harmless€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€ņņState€v.€Elyóó,€48€S.W.3d€710,Š h+ø&* Š727€(Tenn.€2001).€€An€erroneous€failure€to€give€a€lesser-included€offense€instruction€will€result€inŠ ° Šreversal€unless€a€reviewing€court€concludes€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt€that€the€error€did€not€affectŠ œģ Šthe€outcome€of€the€trial.€€ņņId.óó€at€725;€ņņState€v.€Bowlesóó,€52€S.W.3d€69,€77€(Tenn.€2001).€€ņņWilliamsóó€doesŠ ˆŲ Šnot€apply€here,€because€the€trial€court€instructed€the€jury€solely€on€aggravated€perjury,€withoutŠ tÄ Šinstructions€for€any€lesser„included€offenses.€€ņņSeeóó€ņņWilliamsóó,€977€S.W.2d€at€106.€€š š[The€supremeŠ `° Šcourt€has]€never€held,€however,€that€a€failure€to€instruct€on€a€lesser-included€offense€can€be€harmlessŠ L œ Šbeyond€a€reasonable€doubt€only€when€an€intermediate€offense€is€rejected.šš€€ņņState€v.€Allenóó,€69€S.W.3dŠ 8 ˆ Š181,€189€(Tenn.€2002)€(The€improper€omission€of€a€lesser-included€offense€is€analogous€to€theŠ $ t Šimproper€omission€of€an€element€of€an€offense,€where€the€proper€inquiry€is€whether€the€recordŠ  ` Šcontains€evidence€that€could€rationally€lead€to€a€contrary€finding€with€respect€to€the€omitted€element.€Š ü L  ŠņņId.óó€at€190„91.).Š č 8  ŠĢą  ąHere,€the€issue€essentially€turns€on€whether€Defendantššs€false€statement€to€the€courtŠ Ą  Šconcerning€Estherššs€whereabouts€could€be€considered€š šmaterial.šš€€For€our€purposes,€š šmaterialššŠ ¬ü  Šmeans€the€š šstatement,€irrespective€of€its€admissibility€under€the€rules€of€evidence,€could€haveŠ ˜č  Šaffected€the€course€or€outcome€of€the€official€proceeding.šš€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€39„16„702€(1997).€Š „Ō  ŠConsequently,€this€Court€must€determine€whether€the€record€contains€any€evidence€from€which€theŠ pĄ Šjury€could€rationally€conclude€that€Defendantššs€statement€was€not€material.€€In€light€of€the€subjectiveŠ \¬ Šcharacter€of€the€statutory€definition€of€š šmaterial,šš€we€are€unable€to€conclude€beyond€a€reasonableŠ H˜ Šdoubt€that€the€jury,€if€given€the€opportunity,€would€not€have€decided€that€Defendantššs€false€statement€Š 4„ Šdid€not€affect€the€course€or€outcome€of€the€conservatorship€proceeding.€€As€a€result,€we€are€alsoŠ  p Šunable€to€conclude€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt€that€the€trial€courtššs€failure€to€instruct€on€the€offenseŠ  \ Šof€perjury€did€not€affect€the€juryššs€verdict.€€Because€the€error€is€not€harmless,€we€reverse€DefendantššsŠ ųH Šconviction€for€aggravated€perjury€and€remand€this€matter€for€a€new€trial€on€that€charge.€Š ä4 ŠĢņ ņą@¹ ¹ ģąVII.€€Instruction€on€Especially€Aggravated€Kidnappingó óˆŠ ¼  ŠĢą  ąThe€Defendants€also€contend€that€trial€court€erred€by€failing€to€give€the€complete€and€properŠ ”ä Šdefinition€of€š šunlawful,šš€when€instructing€the€jury€on€the€especially€aggravated€kidnapping€charge.€Š €Š ŠThe€Defendants€assert€that€if€the€trial€judge€had€not€deleted€the€reference€to€the€victimššs€age,€asŠ l¼ Šprovided€in€the€statute,€the€jury€would€have€been€able€to€consider,€as€a€š šdefense,šš€the€fact€that€aŠ X Ø Šparent€or€guardian€may€consent€to€and€thus€confine€the€victim€ņņlawfullyóó,€where€the€victim€is€underŠ D!” Šthe€age€of€thirteen.€€We€disagree.Š 0"€  ŠĢą  ąIt€is€well„settled€that€a€defendant€has€a€constitutional€right€to€a€correct€and€complete€chargeŠ $X" Šof€the€law,€so€that€each€issue€of€fact€raised€by€the€evidence€will€be€submitted€to€the€jury€on€properŠ ō$D # Šinstructions.€€ņņState€v.€Garrisonóó,€40€S.W.3d€426,€432€(Tenn.€2000);€ņņState€v.€Teelóó,€793€S.W.2d€236,Š ą%0!$ Š249€(Tenn.€1990).€€In€determining€whether€jury€instructions€are€erroneous,€this€Court€must€read€theŠ Ģ&"% Šentire€charge€and€only€invalidate€it€if,€when€read€as€a€whole,€it€fails€to€fairly€submit€the€legal€issuesŠ ø'#& Šor€misleads€the€jury€as€to€the€applicable€law.€€ņņSeeóó€ņņState€v.€Vannóó,€976€S.W.2d€93,€101€(Tenn.€1998).€Š ¤(ō#' Šš šIt€is€the€duty€of€the€trial€judge€without€request€to€give€the€jury€proper€instructions€as€to€the€lawŠ )ą$( Šgoverning€the€issues€raised€by€the€nature€of€the€proceedings€and€the€evidence€introduced€duringŠ |*Ģ%) Štrial.šš€€ņņTeelóó,€793€S.W.2d€at€249.€Š h+ø&* Š‡ą  ąIn€the€context€of€kidnapping€and€false€imprisonment€offenses,€š šunlawfulšš€is€statutorilyŠ ° Šdefined,€with€respect€to€removal€or€confinement,€as€š šone€which€is€accomplished€by€force,€threat€orŠ œģ Šfraud,€or,€in€the€case€of€a€person€who€is€under€the€age€of€thirteen€(13)€or€incompetent,€accomplishedŠ ˆŲ Šwithout€the€consent€of€a€parent,€guardian€or€other€person€responsible€for€the€general€supervision€ofŠ tÄ Šthe€minorššs€or€incompetentššs€welfare.šš€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€39„13„301(2)€(1997).€€The€record€reflectsŠ `° Šthat€the€Defendants€requested€the€jury€be€given€this€definition,€in€its€entirety,€before€the€jury€wasŠ L œ Šcharged.€€The€trial€judge€denied€the€request,€finding€that€the€age€of€the€victim€as€an€aggravatingŠ 8 ˆ Šfactor€had€been€removed€from€the€presentment€prior€to€trial,€pursuant€to€an€amendment€approvedŠ $ t Šby€the€court.€Š  ` ŠĢą  ąThe€Defendantsšš€assertion€concerning€the€loss€of€a€š šdefensešš€based€upon€the€victimššs€age€isŠ č 8  Šessentially€a€restatement€of€an€argument€previously€presented.€€(See€the€analysis€of€evidentiaryŠ Ō$  Šsufficiency€concerning€Defendantsšš€convictions€for€especially€aggravated€kidnapping.)€€In€thatŠ Ą  Šargument,€the€Defendants€contended€that€any€confinement€occurring€prior€to€Estherššs€thirteenthŠ ¬ü  Šbirthday€could€not€be€š šunlawful,šš€because€it€was€not€accomplished€without€the€consent€of€a€parent,Š ˜č  Šguardian€or€other€person€responsible€for€the€general€supervision€of€the€minorššs€welfare€pursuant€toŠ „Ō  Šthe€definition€of€š šunlawfulšš€provided€by€the€statute.€€The€Defendants€asserted€that€they€gaveŠ pĄ Šthemselves€consent€to€confine€Esther,€and,€after€she€became€thirteen€years€of€age,€their€status€asŠ \¬ Šfoster€parents€conferred€upon€them€the€right€to€continue€to€do€so€since€it€was€š šby€force€of€law€thatŠ H˜ Šall€parents,€guardians€or€other€persons€responsible€for€the€general€supervision€of€a€minorššs€welfareŠ 4„ Šare€possessed€of€the€power€to€confine€them.šš€€Š  p ŠĢą  ąIn€our€analysis€of€that€issue,€we€observed€that€the€Defendants€cited€no€legal€support€for€thisŠ ųH Šassertion.€€They€still€fail€to€do€so.€€We€also€noted€that€the€Defendants€never€completed€the€legalŠ ä4 Šformalities€necessary€to€establish€either€of€them€as€Estherššs€legal€parent,€guardian€or€other€personŠ Š  Šresponsible€for€the€general€supervision€of€her€welfare.€€The€fact€that€the€Defendantsšš€parental€statusŠ ¼  Šwas€never€legally€sanctioned€makes€any€alleged€š šdefensešš€on€this€ground€completely€without€merit.Š Øų ŠA€plain€reading€of€the€statutory€definition€indicates€that€removal€or€confinement€by€force,€threat€orŠ ”ä Šfraud€may€be€unlawful,€even€if€accomplished€with€the€consent€of€a€parent,€guardian€or€other€personŠ €Š Šentrusted€with€the€minorššs€care.€€We€concluded€that€the€evidence€was€sufficient€to€find€that€theŠ l¼ ŠDefendants€confined€Esther€by€š šforce,€threat€or€fraud.šš€€Here,€we€reemphasize€that€Esther€turnedŠ X Ø Šthirteen€years€of€age€on€November€16,€1990,€which€means€that€she€endured€the€great€majority€of€theŠ D!” Šperiod€of€š šconfinementšš€(more€than€six€years)€ņņafteróó€attaining€the€age€of€thirteen.€Š 0"€  ŠĢą  ąMoreover,€we€do€not€find€a€provision€for€this€š šdefensešš€among€the€statutes€dealing€withŠ $X" Šš šGeneral€Defensesšš€or€š šJustification€Excluding€Criminal€Responsibility,šš€where€the€great€majorityŠ ō$D # Šof€valid€š šdefensesšš€are€located.€€ņņSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šššš€39„11„€501€to€505,€601€to€621€(1997).€Š ą%0!$ ŠHence,€the€Defendantsšš€classification€of€the€proposed€instruction€as€a€š šdefense,šš€even€loosely„Š Ģ&"% Šdefined,€is€without€support€by€either€statute€or€case€law.€€Š ø'#& ŠĢą  ąIn€summation,€a€thorough€review€of€the€relevant€law€and€the€entire€charge€submitted€to€theŠ )ą$( Šjury€reveals€that€the€instructions€given€by€the€trial€judge€fairly€and€correctly€submitted€the€properŠ |*Ģ%) Šlegal€issues€and€that€they€do€not€mislead€the€jury€as€to€the€applicable€law.€€Accordingly,€we€concludeŠ h+ø&* Šthat€the€constitutional€rights€of€the€Defendants€were€not€violated€and€the€trial€court€did€not€err.€€TheŠ ° ŠDefendants€are€not€entitled€to€relief€on€this€issue.Š œģ ŠĢņ ņą@®®ģąVIII.€€Merger€of€Offensesó óˆŠ tÄ ŠĢą  ąDefendant€Evangeline€Combs€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€failing€to€merge€her€Š L œ Šconvictions€for€aggravated€child€abuse€into€the€conviction€for€especially€aggravated€kidnapping.€Š 8 ˆ ŠDefendant€Joseph€Combs€argues€that€it€was€also€error€not€to€merge€his€conviction€for€aggravatedŠ $ t Šassault€into€the€conviction€for€especially€aggravated€kidnapping.€€The€Defendants€claim€that€theŠ  ` Šseparate€convictions€in€this€case€violate€firmly€established€rules€against€multiplicity€in€indictmentsŠ ü L  Šbecause€(a)€the€time€periods€in€the€child€abuse€and€assault€offenses€overlap€the€time€period€allegedŠ č 8  Šin€the€especially€aggravated€kidnapping€count,€(b)€the€elements€for€these€offenses€are€the€same€asŠ Ō$  Šthose€for€especially€aggravated€kidnapping,€and€(c)€the€same€proof€was€used€to€establish€their€guiltŠ Ą  Šfor€different€crimes.€€We€disagree.Š ¬ü  ŠĢą  ąš šMultiplicity€concerns€the€division€of€conduct€into€discrete€offenses,€creating€several€offensesŠ „Ō  Šout€of€a€single€offense.šš€€ņņState€v.€Phillipsóó,€924€S.W.2d€662,€665€(Tenn.€1996).€€Multiple€convictionsŠ pĄ Šand/or€punishments€for€the€same€offense€violate€federal€and€state€constitutional€prohibitions€againstŠ \¬ Šdouble€jeopardy.€€ņņSeeóó€U.S.€Const.€amend.€V;€Tenn.€Const.€Art.€I,€šš€10.€€In€ņņState€v.€Dentonóó,€938Š H˜ ŠS.W.2d€373€(Tenn.€1996),€our€supreme€court€established€a€framework€for€determining€whether€aŠ 4„ Šdefendant€has€received€multiple€punishments€for€the€š šsame€offense.šš€€The€reviewing€court€mustŠ  p Šconsider€(1)€the€statutory€elements€of€the€offenses,€(2)€the€evidence€used€to€prove€the€offenses,€(3)Š  \ Šwhether€there€were€multiple€victims€or€discrete€acts,€and€(4)€the€purposes€underlying€the€statutesŠ ųH Šinvolved.€€ņņId.óó€at€381.Š ä4 ŠĢą  ąņ ņA.€€Aggravated€Child€Abuseó óŠ ¼  ŠĢą  ąDefendant€Evangeline€Combs€was€convicted€of€four€counts€of€aggravated€child€abuse.€€AŠ ”ä Šperson€commits€the€offense€of€aggravated€child€abuse€or€aggravated€child€neglect€who€knowingly,Š €Š Šother€than€by€accidental€means,€treats€a€child€under€eighteen€(18)€years€of€age€in€such€a€manner€asŠ l¼ Što€inflict€injury€or€neglects€such€a€child€so€as€to€adversely€affect€the€childššs€health€and€welfare,€andŠ X Ø Šthe€criminal€act€was€accomplished€with€a€deadly€weapon€or€results€in€serious€bodily€injury€to€theŠ D!” Šchild.€€ņņSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šššš€39„15„401,€„402€(1991€&€1997).€€(The€jury€found€Evangeline€CombsŠ 0"€  Šguilty€of€two€counts€of€aggravated€child€abuse€where€serious€bodily€injury€resulted,€and€two€countsŠ #l! Šwhere€serious€bodily€injury€resulted€ņņandóó€a€deadly€weapon€was€used.)€€Especially€aggravatedŠ $X" Škidnapping,€as€relevant€here,€required€proof€that€(1)€the€defendant€knowingly€removed€or€confinedŠ ō$D # Šthe€victim€unlawfully,€i.e.,€by€force,€threat€or€fraud,€so€as€to€interfere€substantially€with€her€liberty,Š ą%0!$ Šand€(2)€the€victim€suffered€serious€bodily€injury.€€ņņSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šššš€39-13-305(a)(4),Š Ģ&"% Š39-13-302(a),€„301(2)€(1997).Š ø'#& ŠĢą  ąApplying€the€ņņDentonóó€analysis€to€Evangeline€Combsšš€convictions€for€these€offenses,€we€firstŠ )ą$( Šnote€that€each€required€an€element€that€the€other€one€did€not.€€First,€we€note€that€the€offense€ofŠ |*Ģ%) Šaggravated€child€abuse€required€the€jury€to€find€that€Defendant€ņņnon„accidentallyóó€treated€Esther,€ņņaŠ h+ø&* Šchild€under€eighteen€years€of€ageóó,€in€such€a€manner€as€to€inflict€serious€bodily€injury€or€neglectedŠ ° Šher€so€as€to€adversely€affect€her€health€and€welfare.€€The€kidnapping€offense€(as€charged)€did€notŠ œģ Šrequire€a€finding€concerning€Estherššs€age€or€that€Evangeline€Combs€non„accidentally€neglected€orŠ ˆŲ Šinflicted€injury€upon€her.€€Second,€the€kidnapping€offense€required€ņņremoval€or€confinement€by€force,Š tÄ Šthreat,€or€fraud/deceptionóó,€and€the€child€abuse€offense€did€not.€€This€initial€determination€indicatesŠ `° Šthat€the€two€offenses€should€not€be€considered€one€for€double€jeopardy€purposes.Š L œ ŠĢą  ąIn€a€similar€vein,€we€find€that€the€evidence€relied€upon€by€the€State€to€prove€the€child€abuseŠ $ t Šoffenses€was€clearly€different€than€that€used€to€prove€the€kidnapping€offense.€€Two€of€the€child€abuseŠ  ` Šconvictions€were€based€on€the€juryššs€finding€that€Evangeline€Combs€knowingly€inflicted€specificŠ ü L  Šserious€bodily€injuries€upon€Esther,€in€February€1994€and€September€1995,€with€a€deadly€weapon,Š č 8  Što€wit:€a€baseball€bat.€€The€remaining€two€convictions€required€proof€that€Evangeline€CombsŠ Ō$  Šinflicted€serious€bodily€injury€in€November€1994€and,€again,€in€September€1994.€€All€four€offensesŠ Ą  Šrequired€proof€that€Esther€was€under€the€age€of€eighteen€when€the€crimes€were€committed.€€ByŠ ¬ü  Šcontrast,€the€kidnapping€conviction€was€based€upon€the€juryššs€finding€that€Evangeline€CombsŠ ˜č  Šknowingly€and€unlawfully€confined€Esther€for€more€than€seven€years€and€that€she€suffered€seriousŠ „Ō  Šbodily€injury€during€such€confinement.€€As€we€previously€noted,€the€statute€concerning€kidnappingŠ pĄ Šalso€does€not€require€the€State€to€prove€that€the€accused€actually€ņņintendedóó€to€injure€the€victim.€Š \¬ ŠConsequently,€this€second€factor€further€supports€separate€offenses.€€It€follows€that€the€offenses€wereŠ H˜ Šalso€committed€by€discrete€acts,€the€third€factor,€which€weighs€in€favor€of€finding€two€differentŠ 4„ Šcrimes.Š  p ŠĢą  ąFinally,€a€comparison€of€the€purposes€of€the€respective€statutes€reveals€that,€although€bothŠ ųH Šstatutes€are€aimed€at€prohibiting€behavior€which€causes€injury,€they€are€aimed€at€different€evils.€€TheŠ ä4 Šcrime€of€child€abuse€is€located€in€the€chapter€concerned€with€offenses€against€the€family€andŠ Š  Šspecifically€protects€children.€€The€statutes€prohibiting€kidnapping€generally€protect€a€personššsŠ ¼  Šliberty.€€Based€on€the€forgoing,€we€have€no€trouble€concluding€that€a€defendant€who€unlawfullyŠ Øų Šconfined€a€person,€which€resulted€in€serious€bodily€injury,€should€be€subject€to€separate€convictionsŠ ”ä Šand€separate€punishments€when€the€evidence€shows€that,€during€the€confinement,€the€defendant€alsoŠ €Š Štreated€the€victim€(a€child€under€eighteen€years€of€age)€in€such€a€manner€as€to€inflict€serious€bodilyŠ l¼ Šinjury.€€Thus,€Evangeline€Combsšš€convictions€for€aggravated€child€abuse€and€especially€aggravatedŠ X Ø Škidnapping€should€not€be€merged.€€Š D!” ŠĢą  ąņ ņB.€€Aggravated€Assaultó óŠ #l! ŠĢą  ąAs€relevant€here,€š šaggravated€assaultšš€is€committed€when€a€person€intentionally€orŠ ō$D # Šknowingly€causes€bodily€injury€to€another€and€uses€or€displays€a€deadly€weapon.€€ņņSeeóó€Tenn.€CodeŠ ą%0!$ ŠAnn.€šš€39„13„102(a),€„101(a)(1)€(Supp.€1994€&€1997).€€The€presentment€alleged€that€DefendantŠ Ģ&"% ŠJoseph€Combs€did€š šunlawfully,€feloniously,€intentionally,€and€knowingly€cause€bodily€injury€toŠ ø'#& ŠEsther€A.€Combs,€by€the€display€of€a€deadly€weapon,€to„wit:€a€rope€.€.€.€.šš€€The€jury€found€JosephŠ ¤(ō#' ŠCombs€guilty€of€committing€intentional/knowing€aggravated€assault€by€display€of€a€deadly€weapon.€Š )ą$( Šā āŠ |*Ģ%) Šą  ąUnder€ņņDentonóó,€we€again€note€that€each€of€these€offenses€required€an€element€that€the€otherŠ ° Šā āone€did€not.€€That€is,€the€aggravated€assault€(as€charged€in€this€case)€required€the€jury€to€find€thatŠ œģ ŠJoseph€Combs€caused€bodily€injury€and€displayed€a€deadly€weapon,€to€wit:€a€rope.€€Although€theŠ ˆŲ Škidnapping€count€alleged€that€Joseph€Combs€displayed€a€deadly€weapon,€the€jury€did€not€base€itsŠ tÄ Šverdict€on€such€a€finding.€€Rather,€the€conviction€of€especially€aggravated€kidnapping€requiredŠ `° Šņņseriousóó€bodily€injury€ņņresulting€from€confinementóó.€€Confinement€is€not€an€element€of€aggravatedŠ L œ Šassault.€€This€determination€suggests€that€the€two€offenses€are€not€one€for€double€jeopardy€purposes.Š 8 ˆ ŠĢą  ąIn€addition,€the€evidence€used€to€prove€the€two€offenses€was€different.€€The€assault€convictionŠ  ` Šwas€based€on€proof€that€Joseph€Combs,€during€the€time€period€extending€from€June€1,€1996€toŠ ü L  ŠSeptember€1,€1996,€caused€bodily€injury€to€Esther€by€display€of€a€rope.€€His€kidnapping€convictionŠ č 8  Šwas€based€on€proof€that€he€unlawfully€confined€Esther€from€April€30,€1990€to€October€3,€1997,€aŠ Ō$  Šcontinuous€offense,€and€that€serious€bodily€injury€occurred€during€that€time.€€Proof€of€a€deadlyŠ Ą  Šweapon€was€not€necessary€for€the€kidnapping€conviction.€Thus,€this€factor€also€supports€separateŠ ¬ü  Šoffenses.€€Since€we€find€that€the€offenses€clearly€involved€discrete€acts,€the€third€factor€further€failsŠ ˜č  Što€support€Joseph€Combsšš€argument.Š „Ō  ŠĢą  ąAs€with€our€previous€analysis,€even€though€the€purposes€underlying€both€statutes€appear€toŠ \¬ Šprohibit€behavior€which€causes€injury,€the€provisions€are€aimed€at€different€evils:€one€protectsŠ H˜ Šagainst€an€unlawful€infringement€on€liberty;€the€other€protects€against€fear€of€harm€and€bodily€injury.€Š 4„ ŠAccordingly,€we€conclude€that€Joseph€Combs€is€properly€subject€to€separate€convictions€and€separateŠ  p Špunishments€for€the€criminal€acts€which€led€to€his€convictions€for€these€individual€crimes.Š  \ ŠĢą  ąBoth€Defendants€assert€that€merger€was€also€proper€on€the€ground€that€the€crimes€wereŠ ä4 Šalleged€to€occur€during€time€periods€which€š šoverlappedšš€that€period€set€forth€in€the€count€forŠ Š  Šespecially€aggravated€kidnapping.€€This€argument€is€without€merit.€€Nothing€in€the€law€prohibitsŠ ¼  Šconvictions€for€crimes€committed€contemporaneously€with€other€crimes,€and€the€Defendants€haveŠ Øų Šcited€no€legal€precedent€to€support€their€assertion.€€Š ”ä Š€€Š €Š Šą  ąņ ņC.€€Analysis€Under€ņņAnthonyóóó óŠ l¼ ŠĢą  ąBoth€Defendants€further€argue€that€separate€convictions€are€improper€under€the€principlesŠ D!” Šenunciated€in€ņņState€v.€Anthonyóó,€817€S.W.2d€299€(Tenn.€1991).€€In€ņņAnthonyóó,€our€supreme€courtŠ 0"€  Šrecognized€that€a€separate€kidnapping€conviction€may€violate€due€process€when€the€kidnapping€isŠ #l! Šessentially€incidental€to€an€accompanying€felony€conviction€and€not€š šsignificant€enough,€in€and€ofŠ $X" Šitself,€to€warrant€independent€prosecution.šš€€ņņAnthonyóó,€817€S.W.2d€at€306.€€The€first€question€in€anŠ ō$D # Šanalysis€of€this€issue€is€whether€the€movement€or€confinement€used€was€beyond€that€necessary€toŠ ą%0!$ Šcommit€the€accompanying€felony.€€ņņState€v.€Dixonóó,€957€S.W.2d€532,€535€(Tenn.1997)€(citingŠ Ģ&"% ŠņņAnthonyóó,€817€S.W.2d€at€306).€€š šIf€so,€the€next€inquiry€is€whether€the€additional€movement€orŠ ø'#& Šconfinement:€(1)€prevented€the€victim€from€summoning€help;€(2)€lessened€the€defendantššs€risk€ofŠ ¤(ō#' Šdetection;€or€(3)€created€a€significant€danger€or€increased€the€victimššs€risk€of€harm.šš€€ņņId.óó€€BecauseŠ )ą$( Šā āthe€holding€in€ņņAnthonyóó€rested€upon€the€courtššs€understanding€of€due€process,€rather€than€a€concernŠ |*Ģ%) Šfor€constitutional€protections€against€double€jeopardy,€ņņseeóó€ņņAnthonyóó,€817€S.W.2d€at€306,€we€shallŠ ° Šbriefly€address€this€argument.Š œģ Šā āĢą  ąFirst,€we€find€that€the€confinement€of€Esther€for€more€than€seven€years€was€unquestionablyŠ tÄ Šbeyond€that€necessary€to€commit€the€accompanying€felonies€of€aggravated€assault€and€aggravatedŠ `° Šchild€abuse€in€this€case.€€Second,€it€is€just€as€apparent€to€this€Court€that€the€psychological€andŠ L œ Šphysical€torture€which€š šunlawfully€confinedšš€Esther€also€prevented€her€from€summoning€help,€sinceŠ 8 ˆ Šthe€torture€merely€increased€after€acts€of€disobedience.€€Third,€we€believe€that€the€threats€ofŠ $ t Špunishment,€and€near„constant€presence€of€the€Defendants€or€an€alleged€sibling€at€Estherššs€sideŠ  ` Šwhenever€she€was€outside€the€home,€certainly€lessened€the€risk€that€anyone€would€detect€theŠ ü L  ŠDefendantsšš€criminal€actions.€€Finally,€we€also€find€that€the€fact€and€sheer€length€of€EstherššsŠ č 8  Šconfinement€positively€increased€her€risk€of€harm,€since€nearly€every€day€risked€additional€injury.€Š Ō$  ŠĢą  ąIn€summation,€we€conclude€that€the€trial€court€did€not€err€by€failing€to€merge€the€convictionsŠ ¬ü  Šfor€the€aforementioned€offenses€into€the€conviction€for€especially€aggravated€kidnapping.€Š ˜č  ŠSpecifically,€we€find€that€separate€convictions€do€not€violate€the€constitutional€principles€of€dueŠ „Ō  Šprocess€or€prohibitions€against€double€jeopardy€in€this€case€for€the€reasons€given.€€ņņSeeóó€21€Am.€Jur.Š pĄ Š2d€Criminal€Law€šš€21€(1998)€(citations€omitted)€(š šThe€doctrine€of€merger€does€not€apply€where€theŠ \¬ Šoffenses€are€separate€and€distinct,€but€only€where€the€identical€criminal€acts€constitute€bothŠ H˜ Šoffenses.šš).€€The€Defendants€are€not€entitled€to€relief€on€this€issue.Š 4„ ŠĢņ ņą@__#ģąIX.€€Sentencingó óˆŠ  \ ŠĢą  ąThe€Defendants€also€argue€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€(1)€misapplying€various€enhancementŠ ä4 Šfactors,€(2)€failing€to€award€sufficient€weight€to€appropriate€mitigating€factors,€and€(3)€orderingŠ Š  Šconsecutive€sentences€under€ņņState€v.€Wilkersonóó,€905€S.W.2d€933€(Tenn.€1995).€€After€a€thoroughŠ ¼  Šreview€of€the€record,€we€disagree.Š Øų ŠĢą  ąWhen€an€accused€challenges€the€length,€range,€or€the€manner€of€service€of€a€sentence,€thisŠ €Š ŠCourtššs€review€of€the€sentence€imposed€by€the€trial€court€is€ņņdeóó€ņņnovoóó€with€a€presumption€ofŠ l¼ Šcorrectness.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€40„35„401(d).€€This€presumption€is€conditioned€upon€an€affirmativeŠ X Ø Šshowing€in€the€record€that€the€trial€judge€considered€the€sentencing€principles€and€all€relevant€factsŠ D!” Šand€circumstances.€€ņņState€v.€Pettusóó,€986€S.W.2d€540,€543€(Tenn.€1999).€€If€the€trial€court€fails€toŠ 0"€  Šcomply€with€the€statutory€directives,€there€is€no€presumption€of€correctness€and€our€review€is€ņņdeóóŠ #l! Šņņnovoóó.€€ņņState€v.€Pooleóó,€945€S.W.2d€93,€96€(Tenn.€1997).Š $X" ŠĢą  ąThe€burden€is€upon€the€appealing€party€to€show€that€the€sentence€is€improper.€€Tenn.€CodeŠ ą%0!$ ŠAnn.€šš€40„35„401(d),€Sentencing€Commission€Comments.€€In€conducting€our€review,€we€areŠ Ģ&"% Šrequired,€pursuant€to€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€40„35„210,€to€consider€the€following€factors€in€sentencing:Š ø'#& ŠĢą8  ą(1)€[t]he€evidence,€if€any,€received€at€the€trial€and€the€sentencing€hearing;€(2)€[t]heŠ )ą$( Špresentence€report;€(3)€[t]he€principles€of€sentencing€and€arguments€as€to€sentencingŠ |*Ģ%) Šalternatives;€(4)€[t]he€nature€and€characteristics€of€the€criminal€conduct€involved;€(5)Š h+ø&* Š[e]vidence€and€information€offered€by€the€parties€on€the€enhancement€and€mitigatingŠ ° Šfactors€in€šššš€40„35„113€and€40„35„114;€and€(6)€[a]ny€statement€the€defendant€wishesŠ œģ Što€make€in€the€defendantššs€own€behalf€about€sentencing.€€ŠˆŲŠ Š  ŠĢą  ąIf€our€review€š šreflects€that€the€trial€court€followed€the€statutory€sentencing€procedure,Š `° Šimposed€a€lawful€sentence€after€having€given€due€consideration€and€proper€weight€to€the€factors€andŠ L œ Šprinciples€set€out€under€the€sentencing€law,€and€that€the€trial€courtššs€findings€of€fact€are€adequatelyŠ 8 ˆ Šsupported€by€the€record,€then€we€may€not€modify€the€sentence€even€if€we€would€have€preferred€aŠ $ t Šdifferent€result.šš€€ņņState€v.€Pikeóó,€978€S.W.2d€904,€926„27€(Tenn.€1998).€€In€the€case€ņņsubóó€ņņjudiceóó,€ourŠ  ` Šreview€is€ņņdeóó€ņņnovoóó€with€a€presumption€of€correctness.Š ü L  Šą  ąĢņ ņą  ąA.€€Sentencing€Factorsó óŠ Ō$  ŠĢą  ąIf€no€mitigating€or€enhancement€factors€for€sentencing€are€present,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€40„35„Š ¬ü  Š210(c)€provides€that€the€presumptive€sentence€for€Class€B,€C,€D,€and€E€felony€offenses€shall€be€theŠ ˜č  Šminimum€sentence€within€the€applicable€range.€€ņņóóņņState€v.€Lavenderóó,€967€S.W.2d€803,€806€(Tenn.Š „Ō  Š1998);€ņņState€v.€Fletcheróó,€805€S.W.2d€785,€788€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1991).€€The€presumptive€sentenceŠ pĄ Šfor€a€Class€A€felony€under€these€circumstances€is€the€midpoint€of€the€range.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€40„Š \¬ Š35„210(c).€€However,€if€such€factors€do€exist,€a€trial€court€should€enhance€the€presumptive€sentence,Š H˜ Šas€appropriate,€within€the€range€for€enhancement€factors€and€also€reduce€the€sentence,€as€appropriate,Š 4„ Šwithin€the€range€for€any€mitigating€factors.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€40„35„210(e);€ņņState€v.€Arnettóó,€49Š  p ŠS.W.3d€250,€257€(Tenn.€2001).€€No€particular€weight€for€each€factor€is€prescribed€by€the€statute,€asŠ  \ Šthe€weight€given€to€each€factor€is€left€to€the€discretion€of€the€trial€court€as€long€as€the€trial€courtŠ ųH Šcomplies€with€the€purposes€and€principles€of€the€sentencing€act€and€its€findings€are€supported€by€theŠ ä4 Šrecord.€€ņņState€v.€Mossóó,€727€S.W.2d€229,€238€(Tenn.€1986);€ņņState€v.€Kelleyóó,€34€S.W.3d€471,€479Š Š  Š(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€2000);€ņņseeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€40„35„210,€Sentencing€Commission€Comments.€Š ¼  ŠNevertheless,€should€there€be€no€mitigating€factors,€but€enhancement€factors€are€present,€a€trial€courtŠ Øų Šmay€set€the€sentence€above€the€presumptive€sentence€but€within€the€applicable€range.€€Tenn.€CodeŠ ”ä ŠAnn.€šš€40„35„210(d);€ņņState€v.€Imfeldóó,€70€S.W.3d€698,€704€(Tenn.€2002).€€Š €Š ŠĢą  ąWith€regard€to€Defendant€Joseph€Combs,€the€trial€court€found€the€following€sentencingŠ X Ø Šfactors€applicable€to€the€sentence€specified:€Concerning€Defendantššs€sentence€for€especiallyŠ D!” Šaggravated€kidnapping,€the€trial€court€applied€enhancement€factor€(1)€š š[t]he€defendant€has€a€previousŠ 0"€  Šhistory€of€criminal€convictions€or€criminal€behavior€in€addition€to€those€necessary€to€establish€theŠ #l! Šappropriate€rangešš;€(2)€š š[t]he€defendant€was€a€leader€in€the€commission€of€an€offense€involving€twoŠ $X" Š(2)€or€more€criminal€actorsšš;€(4)€š š[a]€victim€of€the€offense€was€particularly€vulnerable€because€ofŠ ō$D # Šage€or€physical€or€mental€disabilityšš;€and€(15)€š š[t]he€defendant€abused€a€position€of€public€or€privateŠ ą%0!$ Štrust.šš€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€40„35„114(1),€(2),€(4),€and€(15)€(1997).€€The€trial€court€appliedŠ Ģ&"% Šenhancement€factors€(1)€and€(15)€also€to€the€sentence€for€aggravated€assault,€and€enhancement€factorŠ ø'#& Š(1)€to€the€sentence€for€aggravated€perjury.€€ņņóóTo€Defendantššs€sentences€for€aggravated€rape€and€theŠ ¤(ō#' Šseven€counts€of€rape,€the€trial€court€applied€enhancement€factors€(1)€and€(15),€in€addition€toŠ )ą$( Šenhancement€factor€(7),€applicable€where€š š[t]he€offense€involved€a€victim€and€was€committed€toŠ |*Ģ%) Šgratify€the€defendant's€desire€for€pleasure€or€excitement.šš€€ņņId.ó󀚚€40„35„114(7).€€As€for€mitigatingŠ h+ø&* Šfactors,€the€trial€court€found€the€following€circumstances€applicable€to€all€sentences:€Defendant€hadŠ ° Šno€prior€criminal€record€and€had€accomplished€some€good€in€the€community€through€charitable€workŠ œģ Šand€his€teaching€vocation.€€ņņSee€id.ó󀚚€40„35„113(13).€€Š ˆŲ ŠĢą  ąDefendant€Joseph€Combs€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€applying€enhancement€factorsŠ `° Š(1),€(2)€and€(4).€€To€support€his€argument€regarding€the€impropriety€of€factor€(1),€Defendant€statesŠ L œ Šmerely€that€he€š šdid€not€have€a€criminal€record.šš€€A€criminal€record,€ņņperóó€ņņseóó,€is€not€necessary€forŠ 8 ˆ Šapplication€of€this€factor,€however.€€Our€supreme€court€has€held€that€a€trial€court€may€utilize€previousŠ $ t Šcriminal€behavior,€which€did€not€result€in€a€conviction,€to€enhance€a€sentence€where€the€criminalŠ  ` Šbehavior€was€shown€by€a€preponderance€of€the€evidence.€€ņņState€v.€Winfieldóó,€23€S.W.3d€279,€283Š ü L  Š(Tenn.€2000);€ņņState€v.€Caricoóó,€968€S.W.€2d€280,€287„88€(Tenn.€1998).€€With€regard€to€prior€criminalŠ č 8  Šbehavior,€the€trial€court€noted€the€absence€of€a€criminal€record,€ņņperóó€ņņseóó,€and€stated€that€it€was€notŠ Ō$  Šlimited€to€convictions€of€record.€€The€court€then€found€this€factor€applicable€based€on€theŠ Ą  Šš šsubstantial€amount€of€informationšš€presented€at€trial€concerning€the€criminal€conduct€of€DefendantŠ ¬ü  Šwhich€was€not€the€subject€of€formal€charges.Š ˜č  ŠĢą  ąDefendant€also€argues€that€factor€(2),€requiring€the€court€to€find€that€the€defendant€was€aŠ pĄ Šleader€in€the€commission€of€the€offense,€cannot€be€used€to€enhance€his€sentences€because€it€isŠ \¬ Šš šillogical.šš€€Specifically,€Defendant€asserts€that€both€he€and€his€wife€cannot€simultaneously€beŠ H˜ Šš šleaders.šš€€This€argument€concerns€only€the€sentence€for€especially€aggravated€kidnapping,€theŠ 4„ Šoffense€for€which€both€Defendants€were€convicted€and€the€only€sentence€to€which€this€factor€wasŠ  p Šapplied.€€Because€this€crime€is€a€continuing€offense,€and€the€proof€indicates€that€each€DefendantŠ  \ Šalternately€and€substantially€contributed€to€the€commission€of€the€crime€during€the€seven€plus€yearsŠ ųH Šthe€victim€was€confined,€we€believe€both€Defendants€could€be€logically€construed€a€š šleader€in€theŠ ä4 Šcommission€of€the€offense.šš€€As€the€State€points€out€in€its€brief,€the€statutory€language€for€thisŠ Š  Šenhancement€factor€requires€that€the€defendant€be€ņņaóó€leader,€not€ņņtheóó€leader,€where€the€offense€involvesŠ ¼  Štwo€or€more€criminal€actors.€€ņņSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€40„35„114(2)€(1997).€€Š Øų ŠĢą  ąRegarding€the€trial€courtššs€use€of€enhancement€factor€(4),€which€requires€a€finding€that€theŠ €Š Švictim€was€particularly€vulnerable€due€to€age,€Defendant€contends€that€it€was€inappropriately€appliedŠ l¼ Šunder€ņņState€v.€Adamsóó,€864€S.W.2d€31€(Tenn.€1993).€€In€ņņAdamsóó,€our€supreme€court€stated€that€theŠ X Ø Šrelevant€inquiry€is€not€simply€whether€the€victim€is€under€a€specific€age,€but€š šwhether€the€victim€wasŠ D!” Šņņparticularly€vulnerableóó€because€of€age€or€physical€or€mental€disability.šš€€ņņId.óó€at€35€(emphasis€inŠ 0"€  Šoriginal).€€The€State€has€the€burden€of€establishing€the€limitations€that€render€the€victim€š šparticularlyŠ #l! Švulnerable,šš€ņņid.óó,€as€well€as€the€burden€of€proving€that€š šthe€condition€which€rendered€the€victimŠ $X" Šššparticularly€vulnerablešš€was€a€factor€in€the€commission€of€the€offense.šš€€ņņState€v.€Butleróó,€900€S.W.2dŠ ō$D # Š305,€313€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994).€€We€believe€that€the€State€satisfied€its€burden€here.€€The€recordŠ ą%0!$ Šestablished€that€the€victim€was€taken€into€the€Combs€household€at€the€age€of€approximately€fiveŠ Ģ&"% Šmonths€old.€€Thus,€she€grew€up€believing€the€Defendants€to€be€her€parents,€and€she€had€no€otherŠ ø'#& Šexperiences€upon€which€to€base€an€opinion€about€what€is€proper€behavior€in€a€family€or€about€theŠ ¤(ō#' Šdifferences€between€right€and€wrong.€€This€ignorance€effectively€impaired€her€ability€to€summonŠ )ą$( Šassistance€or€to€even€know€that€she€required€it.€€Put€another€way,€if€the€Combs€had€not€abscondedŠ |*Ģ%) Šwith€Esther€at€such€a€young€age,€their€subsequent€confinement€and€abuse€of€her€might€not€have€beenŠ h+ø&* Špossible.€€Hence,€we€find€her€vulnerability,€cultivated€almost€from€birth€and€endured€throughout€herŠ ° Šlife,€was€a€factor€in€the€commission€of€the€offense.€€ņņSee€alsoóó€ņņState€v.€Lewisóó,€44€S.W.3d€501,€505Š œģ Š(Tenn.€2001)€(use€of€enhancement€factor€(4)€is€appropriate€if€the€facts€show€that€š šthe€vulnerabilitiesŠ ˆŲ Šof€the€victims€.€.€.€had€some€bearing€on,€or€some€logical€connection€to,€ššan€inability€to€resist€theŠ tÄ Šcrime,€summon€help,€or€testify€at€a€later€date.šššš€(citations€omitted)).Š `° ŠĢą  ąDefendant€further€argues€that€the€trial€court€did€not€give€the€proper€weight€due€the€mitigationŠ 8 ˆ Šfactors€presented€in€his€case.€€Defendant€contends€that€his€criminal€record,€which€contains€no€priorŠ $ t Šconvictions,€his€š šgood€work€history,šš€and€the€contributions€he€has€made€to€š šsociety€at€large€as€aŠ  ` Šteacher€and€minister,šš€effectively€offset€the€enhancement€factors€deemed€appropriate€by€the€court.€Š ü L  ŠWe€disagree,€noting€that€the€weight€given€to€each€factor€is€left€to€the€discretion€of€the€trial€court€asŠ č 8  Šlong€as€the€trial€court€complies€with€the€purposes€and€principles€of€the€sentencing€act€and€its€findingsŠ Ō$  Šare€supported€by€the€record,€as€occurred€in€this€case.€€ņņState€v.€Mossóó,€727€S.W.2d€229,€238€(Tenn.Š Ą  Š1986).€€This€argument€is€without€merit.Š ¬ü  ŠĢą  ąTurning€to€Defendant€Evangeline€Combs,€the€record€reflects€that€the€trial€court€applied€theŠ „Ō  Šfollowing€enhancement€factors€to€her€sentence€for€especially€aggravated€kidnapping:€(1)€š š[t]heŠ pĄ Šdefendant€has€a€previous€history€of€criminal€convictions€or€criminal€behavior€in€addition€to€thoseŠ \¬ Šnecessary€to€establish€the€appropriate€rangešš;€(2)€š š[t]he€defendant€was€a€leader€in€the€commissionŠ H˜ Šof€an€offense€involving€two€(2)€or€more€criminal€actorsšš;€(4)€š š[a]€victim€of€the€offense€wasŠ 4„ Šparticularly€vulnerable€because€of€age€or€physical€or€mental€disabilityšš;€and€(15)€š š[t]he€defendantŠ  p Šabused€a€position€of€public€or€private€trust.šš€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€40„35„114(1),€(2),€(4),€and€(15)Š  \ Š(1997).€€The€trial€court€then€separately€considered€the€sentences€for€the€four€aggravated€child€abuseŠ ųH Šconvictions€(counts€7€through€10).€€As€to€count€7,€the€trial€court€applied€enhancement€factors€(1)€andŠ ä4 Š(15),€ņņsee€supraóó,€in€addition€to€enhancement€factor€(18),€appropriate€where€š š[a]€victim€[of€aggravatedŠ Š  Šchild€abuse]€suffered€permanent€impairment€of€either€physical€or€mental€functions€as€a€result€of€theŠ ¼  Šabuse€inflicted.šš€€ņņId.ó󀚚€40„35„114(18).€€For€counts€8€and€9,€the€trial€court€utilized€enhancementŠ Øų Šfactors€(1)€and€(15),€and,€with€regard€to€count€10,€the€trial€court€applied€enhancement€factors€(1),Š ”ä Š(15),€and€(2),€ņņsee€supraóó.€€As€mitigating€circumstances,€the€trial€court€considered€but€gave€š šlittleššŠ €Š Šweight€to€Defendantššs€lack€of€a€prior€criminal€record€and€the€fact€that€she€was€š šintelligentšš€andŠ l¼ Špossessed€some€skills€which€could€assist€with€rehabilitation.€€ņņSee€id.ó󀚚€40„35„113(13).Š X Ø ŠĢą  ąDefendant€Evangeline€Combs€contends€that€enhancement€factors€(1),€(2),€(4),€(5),€(15)€andŠ 0"€  Š(18)€do€not€apply€in€her€case.€€Her€arguments€concerning€the€application€of€factors€(1),€(2),€and€(4)Š #l! Što€her€sentence€for€especially€aggravated€kidnapping€are€essentially€identical€to€those€presented€byŠ $X" Šthe€co„defendant,€Joseph€Combs.€€Pursuant€to€his€arguments,€we€found€that€a€trial€court€may€utilizeŠ ō$D # Šprevious€criminal€behavior,€which€did€not€result€in€a€conviction,€to€enhance€a€defendantššs€sentence;Š ą%0!$ Šboth€Defendants€in€this€case€could€be€logically€construed€a€š šleaderšš€in€the€commission€of€theŠ Ģ&"% Škidnapping€offense;€and€the€victim€was€particularly€vulnerable€due€to€age,€respectively.€€TheseŠ ø'#& Šfindings€apply€equally€to€the€issues€raised€by€Evangeline€Combs.€€The€trial€court€used€factor€(2)€toŠ ¤(ō#' Šalso€enhance€Evangelineššs€sentence€for€the€aggravated€child€abuse€conviction€in€count€10,€based€onŠ )ą$( Šproof€that€Defendant€enlisted€the€assistance€of€James€and€David€Combs€to€hold€Esther€in€place€whileŠ |*Ģ%) Šshe€beat€her€with€a€baseball€bat.€€We€find€nothing€improper€in€this€application.€Š h+ø&* Š‡ą  ąRegarding€enhancement€factor€(15),€applicable€where€the€defendant€abused€a€position€ofŠ ° Šprivate€trust,€we€find€use€of€the€factor€appropriate€where€the€defendant€occupies€the€position€ofŠ œģ Šparent,€even€if€the€position€was€attained€by€fraud€as€demonstrated€here.€€ņņSeeóó€ņņState€v.€Kissingeróó,€922Š ˆŲ ŠS.W.2d€482,€488€(Tenn.€1996)€(application€of€the€factor€requires€finding€that€defendant€occupied€aŠ tÄ Šposition€of€trust,€either€public€or€private,€e.g.,€the€position€of€parent,€step-parent,€babysitter,€teacher,Š `° Šcoach).€€Ostensibly,€Defendant€was€one€of€Estherššs€adoptive€parents€(and€she€has€even€argued€asŠ L œ Šmuch€in€other€issues€in€this€appeal).€Š 8 ˆ ŠĢą  ąEnhancement€factor€(18),€applicable€where€š š[a]€victim,€under€šš€39„15„402€[aggravated€childŠ  ` Šabuse€and€neglect],€suffered€permanent€impairment€of€either€physical€or€mental€functions€as€a€resultŠ ü L  Šof€the€abuse€inflicted,šš€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€40„35„114(18),€is€also€appropriate.€€The€trial€court€usedŠ č 8  Šthis€factor€to€enhance€Defendantššs€sentence€for€count€7,€an€offense€which€clearly€resulted€in€theŠ Ō$  Špermanent€impairment€and€disfigurement€of€Estherššs€left€elbow€and€arm.€€Defendant€contends€thatŠ Ą  Šapplication€of€this€factor€constitutes€double€enhancement,€prohibited€under€ņņState€v.€Binghamóó,€910Š ¬ü  ŠS.W.2d€448€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).€€We€find€nothing€in€ņņBinghamóó€to€support€DefendantššsŠ ˜č  Šargument€against€application€of€this€factor.€€Moreover,€a€plain€reading€of€the€language€in€factor€(18)Š „Ō  Šindicates€that€the€legislature€ņņpurposefullyóó€designed€factor€ņņóó(18)€to€enhance€this€offense.Š pĄ ŠĢą  ąDefendantššs€argument€that€the€trial€court€failed€to€give€proper€weight€to€the€mitigation€factorsŠ H˜ Špresented€in€her€case€is€likewise€without€merit.€€Defendant€contends€that€her€character,€habits,Š 4„ Šmentality,€propensities€and€activities€indicate€she€is€unlikely€to€commit€another€crime,€and€that€theŠ  p Štrial€court€erred€by€finding€that€her€lack€of€criminal€record,€devotion€to€family,€and€potential€forŠ  \ Šrehabilitation€did€not€outweigh€the€enhancement€factors.€€We€disagree.€€Since€the€weight€given€toŠ ųH Šeach€factor€is€left€to€the€discretion€of€the€trial€court,€as€long€as€the€trial€court€complies€with€theŠ ä4 Špurposes€and€principles€of€the€sentencing€act€and€its€findings€are€supported€by€the€record,€as€occurredŠ Š  Šhere,€we€will€not€modify€the€sentences.€€Š ¼  ŠĢą  ąņ ņB.€€Consecutive€Sentencingó óŠ ”ä ŠĢą  ąAt€the€conclusion€of€the€sentencing€hearing,€the€trial€court€imposed€the€following€sentencesŠ l¼ Šon€Defendant€Joseph€Combs:€twenty„two€years€for€count€1,€the€especially€aggravated€kidnappingŠ X Ø Šconviction;€five€years€for€count€2,€the€aggravated€assault€conviction;€two€years€for€count€11,€theŠ D!” Šaggravated€perjury€conviction;€twelve€years€for€count€12,€the€aggravated€rape€conviction;€and€tenŠ 0"€  Šyears€each€for€counts€13€through€19,€Defendantššs€seven€rape€convictions.€€The€trial€court€then€foundŠ #l! Šthat€consecutive€sentencing€was€appropriate€based€on€its€finding€that€(1)€Defendant€was€š ša€dangerousŠ $X" Šoffender€whose€behavior€indicates€little€or€no€regard€for€human€life€and€no€hesitation€aboutŠ ō$D # Šcommitting€a€crime€in€which€the€risk€to€human€life€is€high,šš€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€40„35„114(4);€andŠ ą%0!$ Š(2)€Defendant€was€convicted€of€two€or€more€statutory€offenses€involving€sexual€abuse€of€a€minor,Š Ģ&"% ŠTenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€40„35„114(5).€€The€latter€factor€requires€the€court€to€also€consider€the€aggravatingŠ ø'#& Šcircumstances€arising€from€other€factors,€including€the€relationship€between€Defendant€and€theŠ ¤(ō#' Švictim,€the€span€of€undetected€sexual€activity,€the€nature€and€scope€of€the€sexual€acts,€and€the€extentŠ )ą$( Šof€residual,€physical€and€mental€damage€to€the€victim.€€ņņSee€id.óó€€The€trial€court€ordered€DefendantššsŠ |*Ģ%) Šsentences€for€counts€1€and€12€through€19€to€be€served€consecutively€to€each€other,€with€the€sentencesŠ h+ø&* Šfor€counts€2€and€11€to€be€served€concurrently€with€the€sentence€for€count€1,€for€an€effective€sentenceŠ ° Šof€114€years.€€Š œģ ŠĢą  ąFor€Defendant€Evangeline€Combs,€the€trial€court€imposed€a€sentence€of€twenty„two€years€forŠ tÄ Šcount€1,€the€especially€aggravated€kidnapping€conviction;€eleven€years€each€for€counts€7,€9€and€10,Š `° Šthree€of€the€four€aggravated€child€abuse€convictions;€and€ten€years€for€count€8,€the€remainingŠ L œ Šaggravated€child€abuse€conviction.€€The€trial€court€then€ordered€all€sentences€to€run€consecutivelyŠ 8 ˆ Šfor€a€sentence€of€sixty„five€years€based€on€its€finding€that€Defendant€was€a€š šdangerous€offender.šš€Š $ t ŠSee€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€40„35„114(4)€(1997).Š  ` ŠĢą  ąBoth€Defendants€contend€that€consecutive€sentences€were€not€proper€because€the€DefendantsŠ č 8  Šwere€not€š šthe€kind€of€offender€envisioned€in€ņņState€v.€Wilkersonóó,€905€S.W.2d€933€(Tenn.€1995).šš€Š Ō$  ŠWe€disagree.Š Ą  ŠĢą  ąIn€ņņWilkersonóó,€our€supreme€court€stated€that€š š[p]roof€that€an€offenderššs€behavior€indicatedŠ ˜č  Šlittle€or€no€regard€for€human€life€and€no€hesitation€about€committing€a€crime€in€which€the€risk€toŠ „Ō  Šhuman€life€was€high,€is€proof€that€the€offender€is€a€dangerous€offender,€but€it€may€not€be€sufficientŠ pĄ Što€sustain€consecutive€sentences.šš€€ņņWilkersonóó,€905€S.W.2d€at€938.€€The€supreme€court€stated€that,Š \¬ Šprior€to€imposing€consecutive€sentences,€š šthe€proof€must€also€establish€that€the€terms€imposed€areŠ H˜ Šreasonably€related€to€the€severity€of€the€offenses€committed€and€are€necessary€in€order€to€protect€theŠ 4„ Špublic€from€further€criminal€acts€by€the€offender.šš€€ņņId.ó󀀀€Š  p ŠĢą  ąThe€limits€of€the€holding€in€ņņWilkersonóó€were€later€clarified€in€ņņState€v.€Laneóó,€3€S.W.3d€456,Š ųH Š460€(Tenn.€1999),€wherein€the€supreme€court€stated€that,€before€consecutive€sentencing€may€beŠ ä4 Šimposed€based€on€dangerous€offender€status,€the€Sentencing€Act€requires€that€š šparticular€factsšš€exist,Š Š  Šš šwhich€show€that€consecutive€sentencing€is€ššreasonably€related€to€the€severity€of€the€offensesšš€andŠ ¼  Šserves€to€protect€society€ššfrom€further€.€.€.€aggravated€criminal€conduct.šššš€€ņņId.óó€at€461€(quotingŠ Øų ŠņņWilkersonóó,€905€S.W.2d€at€938.€€Then,€š š[i]n€order€to€limit€the€use€of€the€ššdangerous€offenderššŠ ”ä Šcategory€to€cases€where€such€ššparticular€factsšš€exist,€.€.€.€sentencing€courts€must€make€specificŠ €Š Šfindings€regarding€the€severity€of€the€offenses€and€the€necessity€to€protect€society€before€orderingŠ l¼ Šconsecutive€sentencing€under€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€40-35-115(b)(4).šš€€ņņId.ó󀀀€Š X Ø ŠĢą  ąAccording€to€the€record,€when€considering€consecutive€sentencing€for€Joseph€Combs,€theŠ 0"€  Štrial€court€noted€the€mandates€set€forth€in€ņņWilkersonóó€and€specifically€concluded€that€the€proof€wasŠ #l! Šcertainly€sufficient€to€find€that€(1)€Joseph€Combs€was€a€š šdangerous€offender,šš€(2)€a€consecutiveŠ $X" Šsentence€in€his€case€would€be€reasonably€related€to€the€crimes€committed,€and€(3)€that€a€consecutiveŠ ō$D # Šsentence€was€necessary€to€protect€the€public.€€The€trial€court€elaborated€further€in€its€discussion€ofŠ ą%0!$ Šconsecutive€sentencing€for€Evangeline€Combs,€finding€that€the€serious€nature€of€the€offenses,€theŠ Ģ&"% Šnumber€of€offenses€committed,€and€the€fact€that€the€victim€was€unable€to€š šget€awayšš€constituted€aŠ ø'#& Šš šdangerous€mixšš€which€the€court€found€sufficient€to€classify€her€as€a€dangerous€offender.€€We€agreeŠ ¤(ō#' Šthat€the€proof€established€the€Defendantsšš€behavior€indicated€little€or€no€regard€for€human€life,€thatŠ )ą$( Šthe€sentences€imposed€are€reasonably€related€to€the€severity€of€the€crimes€committed€in€this€case,€andŠ |*Ģ%) Šthat€they€are€necessary€to€protect€the€public.€€Consequently,€consecutive€sentences€are€proper€underŠ h+ø&* Šthe€statutory€proviso€for€dangerous€offender€and€under€the€mandates€set€forth€in€ņņWilkersonóó€and€ņņLaneóó.Š ° Šš šSentencing€is€inescapably€a€human€process€that€neither€can€nor€should€be€reduced€to€a€set€of€fixedŠ œģ Šand€mechanical€rules.šš€€ņņWilkersonóó,€905€S.W.2d€at€938ņņóó€(citation€omitted).€€Here,€the€trial€courtŠ ˆŲ Šfollowed€the€statutory€sentencing€procedure,€imposed€a€lawful€sentence€after€giving€dueŠ tÄ Šconsideration€and€proper€weight€to€the€factors€and€principles€set€out€under€sentencing€law,€and€madeŠ `° Šfindings€of€fact€which€we€consider€adequately€supported€by€the€record.€€Thus,€we€find€no€abuse€ofŠ L œ Šdiscretion€in€this€matter€and€shall€not€modify€the€sentence.€€Š 8 ˆ ŠĢą  ąWe€concur€with€the€trial€court€that€consecutive€sentencing€is€further€proper€in€the€case€ofŠ  ` ŠJoseph€Combs€based€on€the€fact€that€Defendant€was€convicted€of€two€or€more€statutory€offensesŠ ü L  Šinvolving€sexual€abuse€of€a€minor,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€40„35„114(5).€€This€factor€allows€the€courtŠ č 8  Što€also€consider€the€aggravating€circumstances€arising€from€various€factors,€including€theŠ Ō$  Šrelationship€between€Defendant€and€the€victim,€the€span€of€undetected€sexual€activity,€the€nature€andŠ Ą  Šscope€of€the€sexual€acts,€and€the€extent€of€residual,€physical€and€mental€damage€to€the€victim.€€TheŠ ¬ü  Šstatement€given€by€Esther€during€the€sentencing€hearing€and€the€record€amply€support€consecutiveŠ ˜č  Šsentences€based€on€these€circumstances.€€In€particular,€we€note€as€especially€egregious€the€span€ofŠ „Ō  Šundetected€criminal€sexual€activity€and€the€residual,€physical,€and€mental€damage€inflicted€uponŠ pĄ ŠEsther€by€Defendantššs€actions.Š \¬ ŠĢą  ąIn€his€brief,€Joseph€Combs€also€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€when€it€sentenced€himŠ 4„ Šwithout€benefit€of€the€evaluation€required€by€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€39„13„705(b).€Š  p ŠDefendant€asserts€that€this€evaluation€may€have€impacted€the€trial€courtššs€decisions€regarding€term,Š  \ Šprobation,€alternative€sentences,€and/or€split€confinement,€an€š šadvantagešš€to€which€he€was€entitledŠ ųH Šas€a€matter€of€law.€€The€1998€amendment€to€this€statute€demonstrates€the€legislatureššs€intent€to€limitŠ ä4 Šthis€provision€to€those€sentencing€decisions€where€the€defendant€is€seeking€probation€or€some€otherŠ Š  Šform€of€alternative€sentence.€€ņņSee€id.ó󀚚€39„13„705(a)€(Supp.€2001).€€Defendant€is€not€presumed€toŠ ¼  Šbe€a€favorable€candidate€for€alternative€sentencing,€based€upon€his€seven€Class€B€and€two€Class€AŠ Øų Šfelony€convictions.€€ņņSee€id.ó󀚚€40„35„102(6)€(1997).€€Thus,€evidence€to€rebut€the€presumption€was€notŠ ”ä Šnecessary.€€Neither€is€he€a€candidate€for€probation,€since€seven€of€the€nine€sentences€imposed€wereŠ €Š Šfor€terms€more€than€eight€years.€€ņņSee€id.ó󀚚€40„35„303(a).€€(The€two€sentences€less€than€eight€yearsŠ l¼ Šare€to€be€served€concurrently€to€the€twenty„two€year€sentence€for€the€kidnapping€charge.)€€Finally,Š X Ø Šas€the€State€pointed€out€in€its€brief,€where€a€sex€offender€is€destined€to€be€incarcerated€regardless€ofŠ D!” Šthe€contents€of€the€report,€a€trial€courtššs€failure€to€consider€it€at€the€time€of€sentencing€is€immaterialŠ 0"€  Šand€a€waste€of€resources.€€ņņSeeóó€ņņState€v.€Daniel€Lovell€Brownóó,€No.€03C01„9709„CC„00410,€1998€WLŠ #l! Š798922,€Jefferson€County€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Knoxville,€Nov.€12,€1998),€ņņperm.€to€app.€deniedóóŠ $X" Š(Tenn.€1999)€(š šBecause€a€sex€offender€sentenced€to€the€Department€of€Correction€will€be€evaluatedŠ ō$D # Šonce€in€its€custody,€any€evaluation€at€the€trial€level€of€an€offender€ineligible€for€probation€or€anyŠ ą%0!$ Šother€alternative€sentence€would€constitute€a€duplication€of€professional€and€financial€resources.šš).Š Ģ&"% ŠĢą  ąIn€conclusion,€our€ņņdeóó€ņņnovoóó€review€of€the€record€concerning€the€Defendantsšš€sentencingŠ ¤(ō#' Šreveals€that€the€trial€court€did€not€err€in€its€utilization€of€sentencing€factors.€€Thus,€we€find€the€lengthŠ )ą$( Šof€both€Defendantsšš€sentences€appropriate.€€We€also€conclude€that€the€trial€court€did€not€err€inŠ |*Ģ%) Šordering€consecutive€sentences.€€The€resultant€length€of€confinement€is€justified€in€this€case€toŠ h+ø&* Šprotect€the€public€from€future€criminal€conduct.€€Further,€because€of€the€egregious€nature€of€theŠ ° Šoffenses€committed€by€the€Defendants,€the€inestimable€harm€to€the€victim,€and€the€significant€spanŠ œģ Šof€time€involved,€we€believe€that€consecutive€sentences€are€reasonably€related€to€the€severity€of€theŠ ˆŲ Šcrimes.€€Since€the€Defendants€have€failed€to€carry€their€burden€to€show€that€the€trial€courtššs€sentencesŠ tÄ Šwere€improper,€no€relief€will€be€forthcoming€on€this€issue.Š `° ŠĢņ ņą@““ģąX.€€Statute€of€Limitationsó óˆŠ 8 ˆ ŠĢą  ąDefendant€Joseph€Combs€contends€that€his€convictions€for€aggravated€rape€and€six€of€theŠ  ` Šseven€counts€of€rape€should€be€reversed€as€barred€by€the€applicable€statute€of€limitations.€€DefendantŠ ü L  Šargues€that€the€facts€alleged€in€the€presentment€were€insufficient€to€meet€the€strict€tollingŠ č 8  Šrequirements€set€forth€in€ņņState€v.€Davidsonóó,€816€S.W.2d€316€(Tenn.€1991),€and€that€the€State€alsoŠ Ō$  Šfailed€to€prove€the€allegations€at€trial.€€Consequently,€Defendant€maintains€that€the€statute€ofŠ Ą  Šlimitations€was€not€properly€tolled€and,€thus,€the€convictions€in€issue€violate€his€constitutional€rights.€Š ¬ü  ŠThe€State€asserts€that€the€statute€of€limitations€concerning€these€offenses€was€effectively€tolled€byŠ ˜č  Šthe€allegations€of€concealment€contained€in€the€presentment,€when€viewed€as€a€whole,€and€that€theŠ „Ō  Šallegations€were€adequately€proven€at€trial,€as€demonstrated€by€Defendantššs€conviction€for€especiallyŠ pĄ Šaggravated€kidnapping.€€In€his€reply€brief,€Defendant€further€asserts€that€the€issue€whetherŠ \¬ Šconcealment€was€proven€is€a€question€of€fact€for€the€jury,€and€the€trial€courtššs€failure€to€submit€thisŠ H˜ Šissue€to€the€jury€through€proper€instructions€constituted€plain€error€under€Rule€52(b)€of€TennesseeššsŠ 4„ ŠRules€of€Criminal€Procedure.€Š  p ŠĢą  ąņ ņA.€€Tolling€of€the€Statute€of€Limitations€ó óŠ ųH ŠĢą  ąCounts€12€through€19€are€the€subject€of€this€issue.€€Count€12€alleges€that€Defendant€JosephŠ Š  ŠCombs€committed€the€offense€of€aggravated€rape€of€Esther,€a€child€under€the€age€of€thirteen,€on€orŠ ¼  Šabout€April€1989,€a€violation€of€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€39„13„503.€€Counts€13€through€19€allege€thatŠ Øų ŠDefendant€committed€the€offense€of€rape,€by€means€of€force€or€coercion,€and€that€thereafter,Š ”ä ŠDefendant€š šdid€conceal€the€existence€of€the€crime€by€confining€Esther€A.€Combs€within€hisŠ €Š Šresidence,€contrary€to€Section€39„13„503,€a€Class€B€felony,€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€.€.€.€.šš€€TheŠ l¼ Šrape€counts€allege€the€following€dates,€in€order,€beginning€with€count€13:€November€16,€1990;Š X Ø Šsummer€months€of€1995;€June€16,€1991;€November€25,€1993;€November€16,€1993;€February€14,Š D!” Š1991;€and€February€4,€1992,€all€of€which€occurred€on€or€after€Estherššs€thirteenth€birthday€and€priorŠ 0"€  Što€her€eighteenth€birthday.€€In€Tennessee,€a€prosecution€may€be€commenced€in€one€of€many€waysŠ #l! Šincluding,€as€here,€the€finding€of€an€indictment€or€presentment.€€ņņSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€40„2„104Š $X" Š(1997).€€The€presentment€in€this€case€is€dated€November€4,€1998,€and€the€applicable€statute€ofŠ ō$D # Šlimitations€for€the€rape€counts€13€through€19€is€four€years.€€ņņSee€id.ó󀚚€40„2„101(d).€€As€a€result,€theŠ ą%0!$ Šrape€alleged€to€have€been€committed€during€the€š šsummer€months€of€1995"€(count€14)€is€the€onlyŠ Ģ&"% Šcrime€that€occurred€within€four€years€of€the€date€of€the€presentment.€€In€his€brief,€DefendantŠ ø'#& Šconcedes€that€count€14€is€not€time„barred.Š ¤(ō#' ŠĢą  ąThe€purpose€of€a€statute€of€limitations€is€to€protect€a€defendant€against€delay€and€the€use€ofŠ |*Ģ%) Šstale€evidence€and€to€provide€an€incentive€for€efficient€prosecutorial€action€in€criminal€cases.€€ņņSeeóóŠ h+ø&* ŠņņState€v.€Pearsonóó,€858€S.W.2d€879,€886€(Tenn.1993).€€The€applicable€statute€of€limitations€for€chargesŠ ° Šof€rape€and€aggravated€rape,€where€the€victim€has€not€reached€the€age€of€majority,€is€contained€inŠ œģ ŠTennessee€Code€Annotated€section€40„2„101€and€provides€as€follows:Š ˆŲ ŠĢą8  ąą ` ąProsecutions€for€any€offense€committed€against€a€child€prior€to€July€1,€1997,Š `° Šthat€constitutes€a€criminal€offense€under€the€provisions€of€šššš€39-2-601€[repealed],Š L œ Š39-2-603€[repealed],€39-2-604€[repealed],€39-2-606€[repealed],€39-2-607€[repealed],Š 8 ˆ Š39-2-608€[repealed],€39-2-612€[repealed],€39-4-306€[repealed],€39-4-307€[repealed],Š $ t Š39-6-1137€[repealed],€or€šš€39-6-1138€[repealed],€or€under€the€provisions€of€ššššŠ  ` Š39-13-502--39-13-505,€šš€39-15-302€oršš€39-17-902€shall€commence€no€later€than€theŠ ü L  Šdate€the€child€attains€the€age€of€majority€or€within€four€(4)€years€next€after€theŠ č 8  Šcommission€of€the€offense,€whichever€occurs€later;€provided,€that€pursuant€toŠ Ō$  Šsubsection€(a),€ņņan€offense€punishable€by€life€imprisonment€may€be€prosecuted€at€anyŠ Ą  Štime€after€the€offense€shall€have€been€committed.óóŠ¬ü Š Š  ŠĢTenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€40„2„101(d)(1997)€(emphasis€added).Š „Ō  ŠĢą  ąFirst,€we€note€that€the€crime€of€aggravated€rape€was€codified€as€Tennessee€Code€AnnotatedŠ \¬ Šsection€39„2„603€in€April€1989€and€that€it€was€š ša€felony€punishable€by€imprisonment€in€theŠ H˜ Špenitentiary€for€life€or€a€period€of€not€less€than€twenty€(20)€years.šš€€ņņSee€id.ó󀚚€39„2„603(b)€(Supp.Š 4„ Š1988).€€Consequently,€the€applicable€statute€of€limitations€does€not€bar€prosecution€of€Defendant€forŠ  p Šthat€offense.€€ņņSee€id.ó󀚚€40„2„101(d)€(1997);€ņņLoy€Monroe€Harris€v.€Stateóó,€No.€02C01-9304-CC-00069,Š  \ Š1994€WL€29835€at€*1,€Madison€County€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Jackson,€Feb.€2,€1994),€ņņno€perm.€to€app.Š ųH Šfiledóó€(where€the€punishment€for€the€convicted€offense€provided€imprisonment€from€ten€years€to€life,Š ä4 Šprosecution€was€not€time„barred€because€a€crime€that€authorizes€life€imprisonment€has€no€limitationŠ Š  Šperiod€under€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€Section€40-2-101).€Š ¼  ŠĢą  ąAs€for€the€remaining€rape€convictions,€the€State€does€not€dispute€that€more€than€four€yearsŠ ”ä Šhad€elapsed€between€the€dates€of€the€offenses€and€the€filing€of€the€presentment€in€this€case€(with€theŠ €Š Šexception€of€count€14€as€noted€above).€€The€record€reflects€that€Defendant€raised€the€issue€whetherŠ l¼ Šthe€rape€charges€were€time„barred€prior€to€trial.€€Therefore,€the€issue€presented€here€is€whether€theŠ X Ø Šstatute€was€effectively€tolled€for€a€sufficient€period€of€time€to€allow€lawful€prosecution€for€theseŠ D!” Šcrimes.€€Š 0"€  ŠĢą  ąTennessee€Code€Annotated€section€40„2„103€provides€that€š š[n]o€period,€ņņduring€which€theŠ $X" Šparty€charged€conceals€the€fact€of€the€crimeóó,€or€during€which€the€party€charged€was€not€usually€andŠ ō$D # Špublicly€resident€within€the€state,€is€included€in€the€period€of€limitation.šš€€(Emphasis€added.)€€InŠ ą%0!$ ŠņņState€v.€Davidsonóó,€816€S.W.2d€316€(Tenn.€1991),€the€state€alleged€that€the€defendantššs€threats€andŠ Ģ&"% Šcoercion€directed€toward€the€child€victim€constituted€concealment€under€the€tolling€provision.€€ņņId.óóŠ ø'#& Šat€318.€€On€appeal,€our€supreme€court€considered€the€issue€of€what€allegations€of€specific€facts€mustŠ ¤(ō#' Šbe€contained€in€the€indictment€or€presentment€to€properly€toll€the€applicable€statute€of€limitationsŠ )ą$( Što€render€the€prosecution€timely€where€the€indictment€or€presentment€shows€on€its€face€that€theŠ |*Ģ%) Šstatutory€limitation€period€has€since€expired.€€ņņId.óó€at€318.€€The€presentment€at€issue€in€ņņDavidsonóóŠ h+ø&* Šalleged€that€the€defendant€had€concealed€his€criminal€activities€by€discouraging€the€victim€to€tellŠ ° Šanyone€through€use€of€threats€and€parental€influence,€which€was€additionally€intimidating€becauseŠ œģ Šthe€victim€was€particularly€dependent€on€her€family€since€she€was€legally€blind.€€ņņSee€id.óó€€In€itsŠ ˆŲ Šconclusion,€the€court€stated€that€it€was€unable€to€š šread€the€language€in€the€amendments€to€theŠ tÄ Špresentments€and€say€that€for€a€certain€period€of€time€sufficient€to€render€the€presentments€timelyŠ `° Šthat€the€fact€of€the€alleged€crimes€was€concealed€by€the€defendant.šš€€ņņId.óó€at€321.€€Specifically,€theŠ L œ Šcourt€noted€that€the€state€failed€to€allege€when€the€coercion€occurred,€when€and€if€it€ceased,€whenŠ 8 ˆ Šthe€alleged€crimes€were€first€reported€to€the€authorities,€or€why€the€alleged€victim€did€not€report€theŠ $ t Šabuse€upon€attaining€the€age€of€majority.€€ņņId.óó€Š  ` ŠĢą  ąWe€must€first€determine€whether€the€presentment€contained€sufficient€allegations€of€specificŠ č 8  Šfacts€to€effectively€toll€the€applicable€statute€of€limitations.€€In€addition€to€alleging€the€specific€factsŠ Ō$  Šwhich€toll€the€statute,€the€state€must€prove€the€facts€at€trial€or€the€accused€cannot€be€convicted€of€theŠ Ą  Šoffense.€€ņņId.óó€at€318;€ņņMorgan€v.€Stateóó,€847€S.W.2d€538,€542€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1992).€€DefendantŠ ¬ü  ŠJoseph€Combs€contends€that€the€facts€alleged€by€the€State€in€the€presentment€concerning€the€rapeŠ ˜č  Šoffenses€were€inadequate€to€properly€toll€the€statute€of€limitations€under€the€strict€requirements€setŠ „Ō  Šforth€for€such€purpose€in€ņņDavidsonóó€and,€further,€that€the€State€failed€to€prove€the€tolling€facts€at€trial.€Š pĄ ŠWe€disagree.Š \¬ ŠĢą  ąThe€circumstances€presented€in€ņņDavidsonóó€are€distinguishable€from€those€presented€in€the€caseŠ 4„ Šņņsubóó€ņņjudiceóó.€€The€ņņDavidsonóó€court€noted€that€the€state€failed€to€allege€when€the€coercion€occurred.€Š  p ŠHere,€the€commencement€of€the€concealment€by€confinement,€as€well€as€the€date€it€terminated,€wasŠ  \ Šspecified€in€the€presentment.€€Count€1€alleged€that€Defendant€ņņcontinually€confinedóó€the€victim€fromŠ ųH ŠApril€30,€1990€until€October€3,€1997.€€€Counts€13€through€19€alleged€that€Defendant€š šdid€ņņconcealóóŠ ä4 Šthe€existence€of€the€crime€ņņby€confining€Esther€A.€Combsóó€within€his€residence.šš€€Under€certainŠ Š  Šcircumstances,€it€is€proper€that€š šall€counts€of€a€multiple„count€indictment€should€be€read€as€a€whole,Š ¼  Šand€element€missing€from€one€count€can€be€supplied€by€another.šš€€ņņState€v.€Curetonóó,€38€S.W.3d€64,Š Øų Š82€(Tenn.€2000)€(citation€omitted)€(where€all€of€counts€in€an€indictment€referred€to€the€same€victim,Š ”ä Šset€out€the€same€date,€and€were€related€to€each€other,€the€court€found€they€may€be€read€together€forŠ €Š Špurposes€of€providing€notice€to€the€defendant);€ņņseeóó€ņņState€v.€Youngbloodóó,€287€S.W.2d€89,€91€(Tenn.Š l¼ Š1956)€(š šdifferent€counts€may,€within€themselves,€not€support€an€indictment€but€if€they€are€properlyŠ X Ø Šconnected€with€preceding€counts€then€the€two€may€be€taken€together€and€support€an€indictmentšš);Š D!” ŠņņHayes€v.€Stateóó,€513€S.W.2d€144,€146€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1974)€(where€second€count€of€an€indictmentŠ 0"€  Šcharging€drug€possession€stated€only€š šthe€aforesaid€controlled€substancešš€and€failed€to€specify€theŠ #l! Šdrug,€the€indictment€was€not€defective).€€Although€these€cases€concern€the€stateššs€failure€toŠ $X" Šcompletely€allege€all€of€the€ņņelementsóó€in€an€offense,€we€see€no€reason€that€the€principle€should€notŠ ō$D # Šapply€also€to€allegations€concerning€tolling€facts€under€circumstances€similar€to€those€presented€here.€Š ą%0!$ ŠĢą  ąThe€court€in€ņņDavidsonóó€also€expressed€concern€about€the€fact€that€the€presentments€did€notŠ ø'#& Šreveal€when€the€alleged€crimes€were€first€reported€to€the€authorities,€or€why€the€alleged€victim€didŠ ¤(ō#' Šnot€report€the€abuse€upon€attaining€the€age€of€majority.€€ņņId.óó€at€321.€€In€ņņDavidsonóó,€the€latest€offenseŠ )ą$( Šcharged€allegedly€occurred€in€June€1981.€€The€presentments€were€returned€in€November€1987,€moreŠ |*Ģ%) Šthan€six€years€after€the€most€recent€crime€and€approximately€four€years€and€five€months€after€theŠ h+ø&* Šalleged€victim€reached€adulthood€(which€occurred€in€June€1983).€€In€the€case€ņņsubóó€ņņjudiceóó,€the€victimŠ ° Šreached€adulthood€on€November€16,€1995,€ņņduringóó€her€unlawful€confinement.€€The€presentment€wasŠ œģ Šreturned€on€November€4,€1998,€one€year€and€one€day€after€her€confinement€terminated.€€These€factsŠ ˆŲ Šwere€not€alleged€in€the€presentment€but,€in€contrast€to€ņņDavidsonóó,€the€period€of€time€was€notŠ tÄ Šunreasonable€or€so€lengthy€as€to€raise€logical€suspicions€about€what€could€have€caused€such€a€delay.€Š `° ŠConsequently,€information€concerning€exactly€when€the€crimes€were€first€reported€to€the€authoritiesŠ L œ Šand€why€the€victim€did€not€report€the€crime€at€the€age€of€majority€was€not€necessary€here.Š 8 ˆ ŠĢą  ąWe€are€mindful€that€statutes€of€limitations€should€be€liberally€construed€in€favor€of€theŠ  ` Šcriminally€accused,€and€provisions€tolling€the€statute€during€periods€of€concealment€are€strictlyŠ ü L  Šconstrued€against€the€state.€€ņņState€v.€Henryóó,€834€S.W.2d€273,€276€(Tenn.€1992).€€Even€so,€weŠ č 8  Šconclude€that€the€allegations€contained€in€the€presentment,€as€a€whole,€provided€sufficient€specificŠ Ō$  Šfacts€to€properly€plead€concealment€and€thus€toll€the€statute€for€the€rape€offenses€for€a€sufficientŠ Ą  Šperiod€of€time€to€render€the€presentments€timely.€€Moreover,€we€find€that€the€jury,€by€its€verdictŠ ¬ü  Šagainst€Joseph€Combs€on€the€especially€aggravated€kidnapping€charge,€necessarily€found€beyond€aŠ ˜č  Šreasonable€doubt€that€the€State€proved€at€trial€that€Defendant€concealed€the€fact€of€the€rape€crimes.Š „Ō  ŠĢą  ąņ ņB.€€Failure€to€Instruct€Juryó óŠ \¬ ŠĢą  ąIn€his€reply€brief,€Defendant€further€submits€that€the€issue€whether€concealment€was€provenŠ 4„ Šis€a€question€of€fact€for€the€jury,€and€the€trial€courtššs€failure€to€instruct€the€jury€on€how€they€shouldŠ  p Šconsider€the€tolling€facts€constitutes€plain€error€under€Rule€52(b)€of€Tennesseeššs€Rules€of€CriminalŠ  \ ŠProcedure.€€Although€the€record€reflects€that€Defendant€Joseph€Combs€was€given€an€opportunity€toŠ ųH Šrequest€special€instructions€and€to€review€the€jury€charge€for€the€purpose€of€raising€objections€priorŠ ä4 Što€the€trial€courtššs€instructing€the€jury,€Defendant€failed€to€do€so.€€Defendant€also€failed€to€includeŠ Š  Šthis€issue€in€his€motion€for€new€trial.€€It€is€well„settled€that€a€trial€court€has€a€duty€to€give€a€completeŠ ¼  Šcharge€of€the€law€applicable€to€the€facts€of€the€case€and€the€defendant€has€a€right€to€have€each€issueŠ Øų Šof€fact€raised€by€the€evidence€and€material€to€his€defense€submitted€to€the€jury€upon€properŠ ”ä Šinstructions€by€the€judge.€ņņState€v.€Thompsonóó,€519€S.W.2d€789,€792€(Tenn.€1975);€ņņPoe€v.€Stateóó,€370Š €Š ŠS.W.2d€488,€489€(Tenn.€1963).€€The€trial€court€is€obligated€to€give€the€jury€instructions€concerningŠ l¼ Šissues€fundamental€to€the€defense€and€essential€to€a€fair€trial,€even€where€a€special€request€was€notŠ X Ø Šmade€at€trial€concerning€the€issue.€€ņņState€v.€Andersonóó,€985€S.W.2d€9,€17€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1997).€Š D!” ŠOur€supreme€court€has€intimated€that€the€protection€against€prosecution€provided€by€a€statute€ofŠ 0"€  Šlimitations€does€not€rise€to€the€level€of€a€fundamental€right.€€ņņSeeóó€ņņState€v.€Pearsonóó,€858€S.W.2d€879,Š #l! Š887€(Tenn.€1993).€€In€the€absence€of€a€special€request€concerning€non„fundamental€issues,€the€trialŠ $X" Šcourt€does€not€err€by€failing€to€instruct€the€jury,€even€if€the€circumstances€of€the€case€warrant€suchŠ ō$D # Šan€instruction.€€ņņAndersonóó,€985€S.W.2d€at€17.€€In€the€instant€case,€it€became€DefendantššsŠ ą%0!$ Šresponsibility€to€submit€a€special€request€for€the€trial€court€to€instruct€the€jury€on€tolling€facts€whenŠ Ģ&"% Šthe€trial€courtššs€failure€to€do€so€became€apparent.€€His€failure€to€submit€such€request,€or€to€raise€theŠ ø'#& Šissue€in€a€motion€for€new€trial,€would€therefore€result€in€waiver€of€this€issue€on€appeal.€€ņņSee€id.ó󀀩 ¤(ō#' ŠĢą  ąNotwithstanding€waiver,€in€certain€circumstances€a€reviewing€court€is€allowed€to€take€noticeŠ |*Ģ%) Šof€š šplain€errorsšš€that€were€not€raised€in€the€proceedings€below.€€ņņSeeóó€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€36(b);€Tenn.Š h+ø&* ŠR.€Evid.€103(d);€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€52(b).€€Specific€guidance€is€not€provided€in€any€of€these€rules€asŠ ° Što€when€an€error€will€rise€to€the€level€of€plain€error.€€In€general,€the€error€must€have€affected€theŠ œģ Šsubstantial€rights€of€an€accused,€and€more€probably€than€not€either€affected€the€judgment€or€resultedŠ ˆŲ Šin€prejudice€to€the€judicial€process.€€ņņóóš šWhether€or€not€an€appellate€court€should€recognize€the€errorŠ tÄ Šand€grant€relief€in€the€absence€of€an€objection€in€the€trial€court€must€depend€upon€the€facts€andŠ `° Šcircumstances€of€the€particular€case.šš€€ņņState€v.€Ogleóó,€666€S.W.2d€58,€61€(Tenn.€1984).Š L œ ŠĢą  ąIn€ņņState€v.€Smithóó,€24€S.W.3d€274€(Tenn.€2000),€our€supreme€court€adopted€the€following€fiveŠ $ t Šfactors,€previously€developed€by€a€panel€of€this€Court,€for€the€purpose€of€deciding€whether€an€errorŠ  ` Šconstitutes€š šplain€erroršš€in€the€absence€of€an€objection€at€trial:€š š(a)€the€record€must€clearly€establishŠ ü L  Šwhat€occurred€in€the€trial€court;€(b)€a€clear€and€unequivocal€rule€of€law€must€have€been€breached;Š č 8  Š(c)€a€substantial€right€of€the€accused€must€have€been€adversely€affected;€(d)€the€accused€did€notŠ Ō$  Šwaive€the€issue€for€tactical€reasons;€and€(e)€consideration€of€the€error€is€ššnecessary€to€do€substantialŠ Ą  Šjustice.šššš€ņņId.óó€at€282„83€(quoting€ņņState€v.€Adkissonóó,€899€S.W.2d€626,€641-42€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Š ¬ü  Š1994)).€€The€presence€of€all€five€factors€must€be€established€by€the€record€before€the€reviewing€courtŠ ˜č  Šmay€recognize€the€existence€of€plain€error,€and€complete€consideration€of€all€the€factors€is€notŠ „Ō  Šnecessary€when€it€is€clear€from€the€record€that€at€least€one€of€the€factors€cannot€be€established.€€ņņId.óóŠ pĄ Šat€283.€€In€addition,€the€š šššplain€erroršš€must€[have€been]€of€such€a€great€magnitude€that€it€probablyŠ \¬ Šchanged€the€outcome€of€the€trial.šš€€ņņId.óó€(quoting€ņņAdkissonóó,€899€S.W.2d€at€642).Š H˜ ŠĢą  ąA€thorough€review€of€the€record€reveals€that€the€plain€error€doctrine€can€afford€no€relief€forŠ  p ŠDefendant€in€this€case.€€The€third€and€fifth€factors,€requiring€that€a€substantial€right€of€the€accusedŠ  \ Šmust€have€been€adversely€affected€and€that€consideration€of€the€error€is€necessary€to€do€substantialŠ ųH Šjustice,€respectively,€preclude€a€finding€of€plain€error.€€We€do€not€decide€now€whether€DefendantŠ ä4 Šwas€entitled€to€a€jury€instruction€concerning€whether€the€statute€of€limitations€was€tolled€byŠ Š  Šconcealment.€€However,€even€if€this€were€decidedly€so,€and€the€jury€received€such€an€instruction,€itŠ ¼  Šwould€not€have€affected€the€result€of€the€trial€on€Defendantššs€rape€charges.€€We€previously€concludedŠ Øų Šthat€the€juryššs€verdict€on€the€especially€aggravated€kidnapping€charge€effectively€decided€this€issueŠ ”ä Šin€favor€of€the€State.€€Specifically,€we€concluded€that€by€finding€Defendant€guilty€of€this€offense,€theŠ €Š Šjury€necessarily€determined€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt€that€Defendant€concealed€the€fact€of€the€rapeŠ l¼ Šcrimes,€and,€thus,€the€statute€for€the€rape€offenses€was€tolled€for€a€sufficient€period€of€time€to€renderŠ X Ø Šthe€presentments€timely.€€Consequently,€neither€is€consideration€of€the€error€€necessary€š što€doŠ D!” Šsubstantial€justice.šš€€Defendantššs€constitutional€rights€to€a€fair€trial€and€to€jury€instructionsŠ 0"€  Šconcerning€issues€fundamental€to€his€defense€have€not€been€violated.€€Š #l! ŠĢą  ąIn€conclusion,€we€find€that€the€statute€of€limitations€concerning€the€rape€offenses€wasŠ ō$D # Šeffectively€tolled€by€the€allegations€of€confinement€contained€in€the€presentment,€as€a€whole,€and€thatŠ ą%0!$ Šthe€allegations€were€proven€at€trial.€€Consequently,€Defendantššs€six€convictions€for€rape€do€notŠ Ģ&"% Šviolate€his€constitutional€rights€prohibiting€conviction€for€a€time„barred€crime.€€Because€we€also€findŠ ø'#& Šthat€the€failure€to€instruct€the€jury€on€the€tolling€issue€did€not€constitute€plain€error,€Defendant€is€notŠ ¤(ō#' Šentitled€to€relief€on€this€issue.Š )ą$( ŠĢŠ h+ø&* Šņ ņą@ŚŚģąXI.€€Modification€of€Judgmentó óˆŠ ° ŠĢą  ąOur€review€has€revealed€a€number€of€clerical€errors€in€the€judgments€for€both€Evangeline€andŠ ˆŲ ŠJoseph€Combs.€€With€regard€to€the€especially€aggravated€kidnapping€convictions,€the€judgmentŠ tÄ Šforms€reflect€that€the€Defendants€were€convicted€of€the€offense€in€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€Š `° Š39„13„301.€€The€correct€statute€section€number€for€this€offense€is€39„13„305.€€In€addition,€theŠ L œ Šjudgment€form€for€the€aggravated€rape€conviction€of€Joseph€Combs€cites€the€current€statute€sectionŠ 8 ˆ Šnumber€for€this€offense.€€The€judgment€form€should€reflect€the€statute€section€number€in€effect€atŠ $ t Šthe€time€the€offense€was€committed:€39„2„603.€€We€order€that€the€judgments€be€modified€to€reflectŠ  ` Šthe€changes€noted€herein.Š ü L  ŠĢņ ņą@FF%ģąCONCLUSIONó óˆŠ Ō$  ŠĢą  ąFor€the€foregoing€reasons,€we€reverse€Defendant€Joseph€Combsšš€conviction€for€aggravatedŠ ¬ü  Šperjury€and€remand€the€matter€for€a€new€trial€on€that€charge.€€In€addition,€we€modify€the€judgmentsŠ ˜č  Šas€stated€in€this€opinion.€€In€all€other€respects,€we€AFFIRM€the€judgments€of€the€trial€court.Š „Ō  ŠĢĢą  ąą ` ąą ø ąą  ąą h ąą Ą ąą  ą____________________________________Š H˜ Šą  ąą ` ąą ø ąą  ąą h ąą Ą ąą  ąTHOMAS€T.€WOODALL,€JUDGE