Three mothers unanimously report feeling that the prosecutor in their children’s sex abuse cases lied to them, misled them, and withheld information about their daughter’s cases from them.
In the last 12-months, Independent Press Journal (IPJ) has interviewed the mothers of (3) three child sex abuse victims in Baldwin County, Alabama. The children’s cases were prosecuted by the Baldwin County District Attorney’s (DA’s) Office. The prosecutor assigned to the cases was Matt Simpson, the Assistant District Attorney (ADA) responsible for child sex crimes.
Each of the three mothers interviewed by IPJ shared their experiences with having Matt Simpson as the prosecutor of their children’s cases.
One of the mothers pointed to conflicts of interests, while another described how Simpson treats cases differently if he happened to know the victim’s family.
The mothers used words like: “arrogant,” “rude,” and “liar,” to describe Simpson’s character. The most common term used by these mothers to describe Simpson was the word: “asshole.”
Some of the mothers believed Simpson to be distracted with his candidacy in the upcoming election cycle, saying that he would inexplicably bring up the election during meetings about their children’s cases.
No Follow-up, rude to the mothers:
Earlier this year, Simpson told IPJ: “I put as much time into [cases] as I possibly can. I’m not a 9-5 worker, I don’t believe in, you know, getting off the clock at 5 o’clock, I give it all I can every chance I can.”
According to one of the mothers, after her daughter’s case was initially referred to the Baldwin County DA’s office, nobody called her for almost 6-months. Eventually, the mother contacted the DA’s office to complain that nobody had followed-up. She finally got in-touch with Matt Simpson, the prosecutor who had been assigned to her daughter’s case. When the mother asked questions about her daughter’s case, she described Simpson as “arrogant,” saying that he treated her poorly.
“[Simpson] got angry that I complained [to his boss], angry that I was questioning him, he was an ass to me,” the mother told IPJ.
The second mother who was interviewed described similar experiences of Simpson lashing-out at her when she complained to Simpson’s boss, and keeping her in the dark about her daughter’s case.
The third mother said that she barely had any communication with Simpson at all, and that she did not feel like he kept her in-the-loop either.
Withholding Information from the mothers:
When IPJ spoke with Simpson about the parents of child sex abuse cases, he said, “We don’t do anything without the consent or agreement of parents.”
Simpson further explained that prosecutors cannot always do what the parents want regarding a case, but that their input is taken into consideration, along with the best interest of the child. He explained that child sex abuse cases are prosecuted by the State, and that ultimately, the prosecution is the responsibility of the DA’s office, adding, “We do everything we can to include the parents, and make sure parents are included and involved.”
However, one of the mothers reports having called Simpson on a couple of occasions to ask for updates about her daughter’s case, and that during those calls, Simpson would refer to her daughter’s case as his case and would tell her that she had no business looking at or asking for court records because she was “not an attorney.”
Another mother said that Simpson withheld information, forcing her to circumvent him to find out about her daughter’s case.
A third mother says that after her complaint about Simpson’s handling of her daughter’s case, Simpson did not follow-up with her, effectively shutting her out of the case. The mother told IPJ that she never got to give input to the prosecutor, and isn’t even sure what happened in the case.
Election vs. Cases:
Simpson, who had been the Chair of the Baldwin County Republican Party, ran uncontested in the Republican primary for Alabama House (96) in June. Simpson now faces opposition from both Democratic and Libertarian candidates in the general election on November 6th.
Alabama House (96) is being vacated by Republican Randy Davis, who was recently indicted on bribery charges.
When IPJ spoke with Simpson earlier this year, he told IPJ: “I feel like I’ve gone above and beyond in general, as far as my conditions of work, and keeping politics 100% separate from the work, and [the] politics side of things,” adding, “I never once, with a family I’ve worked with [or] prosecuted, talked about the politics side of things.”
But, according to one mother, Simpson mentioned his election run during at least one of their conversations. The mother says that when he brought up the election, she asked, “What does the election have to do with anything?” and that he replied, ”It doesn’t, I’m just telling you all the stuff in front of us.” The mother said that she felt like Simpson was pushing her daughter’s case up on the calendar in order to finish it by May because of his upcoming primary election in June.
A second mother recalls Simpson mentioning that he was running for office, saying that Simpson was “very braggadocios” about it.
All three mothers expressed concerns that Simpson may have been too preoccupied with his own election to give their daughter’s cases the attention they deserved.
Shortly after the primary in June, IPJ reported that Simpson was reassigned, and no longer working on child sex abuse cases. However, District Attorney Bob Wilters dismissed those claims, saying that he didn’t reassign Simpson.
If Simpson was not reassigned, then it is unclear how he would be able to carry a full case-load while also focusing on his campaign.
True-bill vs. No-bill:
When IPJ asked Simpson why some cases – with seemingly strong evidence – were not being taken to trial, Simpson told IPJ that, unless he felt that there was enough evidence to convict, he did not want the children to have to relive the experiences when they took the stand in their cases, saying, “you don’t want to re-victimize a child to make them have to go back up there.”
“It’s an unbelievably difficult balance, and we do the best that we can,” Simpson told IPJ.
When someone is accused of child sex abuse in Baldwin County, a Grand Jury hears evidence to determine if there is probable cause to believe that the person committed the felony.
The Prosecutor is normally the only attorney that presents evidence to a Grand Jury, and can choose what evidence to present (or withhold). Based on what the prosecutor presents, the Grand Jury is tasked with determining if probable cause exists.
If the Grand Jury believes there is probable cause, then the indictment is “true-billed” and the person is publicly charged with the felony. If the Grand Jury thinks there is not probable cause, then the indictment is “no-billed” and the accused is not charged.
In Baldwin County, for the last few years, when it came to child sex abuse cases, the prosecutor who handled those cases (and their Grand Juries) tended to be Matt Simpson.
“The fullest extent of the law”?
In an interview with IPJ earlier this year, Simpson said that he, “prosecute[s] cases to the fullest extent of the law.”
However, the three mothers who IPJ spoke with, whose children’s cases were prosecuted by Simpson, do not agree that he prosecuted their cases effectively.
Two of the mothers believe that their cases were unnecessarily plead down to harassment when their children were very willing to take the stand, and enough evidence existed to take their children’s cases to trial. In at least one of those cases, a Grand Jury even “true-billed” the felony indictment, but Simpson still did not take it to trial.
A third mother had no idea about her daughter’s case, learning about it being no-billed for the first time from IPJ after investigators spoke to the DA’s office in June, and confirmed that her daughter’s case was no-billed in May, 2018.
Conflicts of Interest:
One mother, whose daughter’s alleged abuser was a teacher in Baldwin County, claims that Simpson was dishonest with her throughout the process, and that he did not prosecute the case effectively due to numerous conflicts of interest with the school system that led to her daughter’s alleged abuser going free.
The mother believes that her daughter’s case was not investigated properly because the lead investigator assigned to her daughter’s case, Detective Jason Vannoy of Daphne PD, is married to a teacher in the same school system that her daughter’s abuser worked.
“It’s the definition of conflict of interest,” the mother told IPJ.
IPJ spoke to Vannoy, who said that he did not believe that his wife’s affiliation with the school system represented a conflict of interest when it comes to him investigating crimes committed by teachers.
The mother also believes that her daughter’s case was not prosecuted effectively due to the fact that the prosecutor’s wife, Marina Simpson, works as the Executive Director of the United Way of Baldwin County (UWBC).
UWBC made headlines recently after IPJ exposed questionable fundraising schemes between UWBC and the local school system, which raised ethics questions from school districts across America – most calling the quid-pro-quo between the charity and the school system “unethical.”
The connections between Simpson’s wife’s charity and the school district also include the Finance Director at UWBC, Lana Mummah, who is married to a former school administrator. Mummah’s daughter recently got a job at CareHouse – the facility in Baldwin County that conducts forensic interviews for children who allege sexual abuse.
The mother told IPJ: “The prosecutor’s wife’s charity takes so much money from the schools, and the investigator’s wife works at the schools. It’s hard to believe that a case against a teacher could be investigated or prosecuted objectively when both the prosecutor and investigator have ties to the school system.”
Treats cases differently, depending on if he knows people involved:
When IPJ spoke with Simpson about child sex abuse prosecutions, he reiterated his belief that the well-being of the child is always his first priority, saying, “everything is evaluated based on the best interest of the child.”
But, after complaining to Simpson’s boss about the handling of her daughter’s case, one of the mothers told IPJ that Simpson lashed-out at her, saying; ”The moment you met with my boss, you were no longer a friend, just like another victim, I wish I had not fought so hard in Grand Jury, I wish I would have let the Grand Jury no-bill it like I do most of these cases.”
The mother says that after Simpson’s outburst, he refused to take the case to trial, eventually agreeing to accept a plea deal which allowed the defendant to be charged with “harassment” instead. She complained that the plea deal was accepted despite her daughter’s willingness (and desire) to take the stand, and even though a Grand Jury issued a “true-bill” for a felony indictment in the case.
The mother told IPJ that since her daughter was willing to testify, and there was also enough evidence for a Grand Jury to indict him on the charges, then she felt that Simpson had an obligation to prosecute the case.
After hearing Simpson’s statement about letting most cases get no-billed, the mother told IPJ that she felt concerned about the well-being of other children, saying, “the defendant has their own defense attorney. The child sex abuse prosecutor should be focused on prosecuting the case to the fullest.”
“If he just lets Juries no-bill most of these cases, like he said he does, then who’s fighting for the kids?!”
IPJ reached back out to Simpson prior to the publication of this article, but he did not respond.
Since you’re here . . .
Independent Press Journal (IPJ) is a 100% volunteer project that relies on the support of our readers to keep going. In today’s world of special interests and big-money influence, it’s getting harder and harder to find truly independent reporting. That’s why it is more important than ever to support independent journalists who will report the stories that major news outlets won’t.
If everyone who reads and appreciates our reporting becomes an IPJ supporter, our team could dive even deeper into investigations, and report on even more stories that matter.
If you enjoy reading our exclusive, investigative stories, then we invite you to become an IPJ supporter!
For as little as $1, you can become an IPJ supporter – and it only takes a minute.
Please show your support! Thank you.
– Team IPJ
