CLINTON — A Clinton man is seeking more than $300,000 in compensation from the state of Iowa after a judge ruled he was wrongfully imprisoned for a crime he did not commit. But David DeSimone says the money won’t make up for five years in prison that he called “a living hell.”

“I’m having a hard time getting over this,” DeSimone said Wednesday. “What they did to me was rotten to the core.”

DeSimone, 53, has filed a claim with the State Appeal Board seeking $309,000 in compensation for the more than five years he spent in prison after being convicted by a Clinton County jury in 2005 of third-degree sexual abuse, according to his attorney, Michael McCarthy of Davenport.

During the trial, the prosecution alleged that DeSimone sexually abused a 17-year-old girl who had attended a party at his residence in October 2004.

The alleged victim called 911 from the Clinton Hy-Vee store at 3:06 a.m. Oct. 17.

During the trial, a witness testified that she had been driving in that area of Clinton that night and had seen a girl crossing the street from the area of DeSimone’s residence and heading toward the Hy-Vee store.

After DeSimone’s conviction, it was revealed that the witness’s timecard from her job at a Clinton Burger King showed she had been working until 3:30 a.m. Oct. 17, after the alleged victim had already called 911 from the Hy-Vee store.

DeSimone was released from prison a year ago after the Iowa Supreme Court threw out his conviction, ruling that Assistant Clinton County Attorney Ross Barlow failed to disclose the timecard evidence that would have discredited the witness’s testimony.

DeSimone received a second trial on the charge in March and was found not guilty by a Clinton County jury.

Last month, Clinton County District Judge Marlita Greve ruled that DeSimone had been wrongfully imprisoned because he was innocent of the crime.

In her ruling, Greve cited the Iowa Attorney General’s Office’s failure to present any witnesses during a hearing on the issue of DeSimone’s claim of wrongful imprisonment. She also cited the police investigation that turned up no evidence that the alleged victim had been assaulted.

“David (DeSimone) did not rape (the alleged victim),” Greve wrote in her ruling. “David did not commit any sexual abuse or any assault on (the alleged victim). The court finds by clear and convincing evidence that David is factually innocent of this charge. The court further finds by clear and convincing evidence that there was no sexual abuse crime committed against (the alleged victim) by anyone on October 16 or 17 of 2004. There is absolutely no evidence of any kind that substantiates (the alleged victim) was sexually assaulted.”

The state has filed an appeal of Greve’s ruling. Assistant Iowa Attorney General William Hill could not be reached for comment. Barlow said Wednesday he could not comment on the case because the outcome is still pending.

Greve’s ruling makes DeSimone eligible for compensation from the state. According to state code, people who are determined to have been wrongfully imprisoned are entitled to $50 per day of their imprisonment, as well as compensation for lost wages and attorney fees.

Because the attorney general’s office would have to approve a compensation payment to DeSimone and already has filed an appeal of the ruling, McCarthy said he doesn’t expect DeSimone to receive any compensation until after the Iowa Supreme Court has ruled on the appeal, which could take another year.

McCarthy said he doesn’t believe the state has much of a case for an appeal of Greve’s ruling.

“Their appeal has no appeal, if you ask me,” he said.

DeSimone also was tried and acquitted of charges of second-degree sexual abuse and third-degree sexual abuse in 2002. The cases were based on the allegations of two separate victims.

DeSimone said the alleged victims in all three sexual abuse cases against him were connected to estranged family members.

DeSimone said he believes the state didn’t call the alleged victim to testify during the hearing to determine if he was wrongfully imprisoned because she wasn’t credible.

“They knew her story would differ again because she can’t keep anything straight,” he said.

DeSimone said he has had trouble keeping a job since his release from prison last year.

He said while the money would be helpful, he doesn’t feel it would make up for what he believes the legal system, including Barlow and several judges, did to him.

“I’d trade it all to see Barlow do seven years in prison,” he said.

(11) comments

Bottlecap
Bottlecap

That's Clinton Iowa police for you a bunch of crooked make their own justice cowboys in my opinion and i'm sure you can find thousands more to agree. I think Clinton Iowa would be so much better off if Detective Pohl and Russ Barlow themselves was behind bars. But there are some really nice officers there in Clinton as well. I hope they pay for putting that poor innocent man in prison. I think Clinton Iowa is all about money and don't care about people i lived in that garbage whole town for fifteen years and the only thing good that i got out of that town was my two beautiful daughters who unforturnally are still there. Everytime they got a chance they stalked and arrested me.I was even beat up and assaulted an officer in early 2010 at farm and fleet parking lot after a drunk driving accident i was in but the arresting officer used excessive force who i will only idnetify as W.S or B.S . Signed By: Steven R Velaasquez.Jr

Acts25_16

You Tube: Lawless America. There are too many people in Iowa, and the US, that are being done this way by a system of predatory frauds. In Scott Co. Dist Court, Paul Macek, Hobart Darbyshire & James Kelley refused to hear the truth unless we paid money to one of their officers of the court. They allowed a known child molester to file a frivolous suit, without having to produce one iota of evidence and harass us for years. Shame on this good ol boy culture of corruption (see Craig Pantzlaff's LACE 112272 case)

Friartuck

and everyone has trouble keeping a job when they dont want to come to work, be on time, or perform duties as assigned. its simple. go to work do as you are told and keep your mouth shut. THE PARTY IS OVER

Friartuck

Nobody was lying. Except him now. . Nothing like getting caught after being a perv for years and years. Take him into your home and put him around your kids. Then see if your kids are lying.

Alice in Wonderland

Maybe the TSA is hiring. Try them.

Alice in Wonderland

Let it out and it will do it again.

Alice in Wonderland

Maybe the TSA will hire you.

ExQC911

I know you sue Clinton because they are the ones with the money but I would like to see the suit also name the assistant county attorney, the witness, and the 17 year old who all lied about the whole thing. These three are the ones who lied or covered up the truth and they should be punished for what they did more so then the city. It would make some one think twice before they lied to the police or in court it these 3 faced some type of punishment.

Lumpart

Nothing like a wrongful 5 year term in prison to sharpen the senses.

iowalittledog

First of all who was his original defense attorney? Oh i found it William Vilmont. No more needs to be said. Okay the state should have to pay more than what is requested. $50.00 per day what is that in exchanged for being sent to prison on a sex charge. Shame on Clinton, They knew or should have know that this man was innocent. What is wrong with people? What about the girl? How come no charges were ever filed against her? This defendant is a much better person that me, cause I would have to take action and money would not solve my anger issues. No DNA, and Clinton gets a conviction. How does Clinton even got an arrest warrant with no DNA? You wanna know why? It's simple. When people see a person ACCUSED or ARRESTED for a sex crime people assume that the person is guilty and they hate that person. People act on emotions. Several State prosecutors will convict someone knowing the case is going to get sent back on appeal, knowing that by the time the case comes back to the courts the defendant by then has served time in prison. I hope the defendant gets paid real real good and use some of the money to buy the so called victim a heart cause she is heartless for sending a man to prison for something he didn't do. Also I am not a fan of this judge, but at least she had the guts to do the right thing. The rest of the people involved need to put some pants on and be an man and admit they messed up! REAL TALK. Last of all the defendant should sue the girl & her family.

notguilty
notguilty

I am the guy who did six and a half years in prison and another four and a half months on leg monitoring before being found not guilty.

I would like to thank the people who understand.

Some of the question being asked are what about the alleged victim? Don't worry, I plan to file a civil suit against her and the woman who lied by saying she saw the alleged victim run from my home yelling and screaming.

I would like to give some insight on the alleged witness. It was eight months after the alleged rape that I was arrested. the testimony given at the 2005 trial by the alleged witness was that she was at a gas station when a friend introduced her to the alleged victim. After talking they went to Clinton, Iowa and passes by the place I was living when the alleged victim said "I was raped at that house in November" and the alleged witness said "really, I saw a girl run out of that house". So they went to the police station. While in prison reading the trial transcript in December 2005 I was bothered by her testimony. What are the odds of the alleged victim meeting the only witness driving by my house at 2:30 a.m. eight months after the alleged rape? so I wrote to Burger King (the place the alleged witness worked at) and asked for a copy of her time card on the night of the alleged rape. I received a copy of the time card and a letter saying "I am sending you a copy of the same information I sent to the police in August 2005". this was about 30 days before my trial. The time card showed she was at work until 3:30 a.m. and since the 911 call was made at 3:07a.m. that means she was still at work and could not have witnessed anything. My trial was in September 2005. Which means the police knew she was lying. After my appeal attorney questioned Burger King it was learned that Detective Pohl of the Clinton police department received the time card and he said he sent it to the Assistant County Attorney's computer the morning of September 7, 2005, 5 days before my 2005 trial. When confronted with this information Assistant County Attorney, Ross Barlow, admitted the time card "WAS" on his computer. Not only did Ross Barlow know this woman lied to police about seeing a girl run from my house he allowed her to testify the lie to the jury. The Supreme Court ruled that Ross Barlow "DID" knowingly withhold evidence and ordered a new trial. The only reason for this woman to testify her story of seeing the alleged victim run from my home is if she was asked to by the alleged victim.

I filed a complaint with the Iowa Supreme Disciplinary Board against Ross Barlow for withholding evidence but all they did was warn him not to do it again. Avoiding an even bigger law suit.

If anyone has any questions please ask and I will be more then happy to answer them.

Signed: NOT GUILTY

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.