CEDAR CITY — A 71-year-old Parowan man has been found guilty of sexually abusing a 10-year-old girl who had visited his home.

An eight-member jury returned their unanimous verdict Friday afternoon, finding Darcy F. Anderson guilty on all three counts, namely one count of aggravated sexual abuse of a child, a first-degree felony, and two second-degree felony counts of child sex abuse.

The jury deliberated for over two hours before reaching their verdict on the third and final day of the trial, which took place in a 5th District Court courtroom in Cedar City before Judge Ann Marie McIff Allen.

The accusations stemmed from an incident that reportedly took place nearly two years ago at Anderson’s home in Parowan, where a group of young neighborhood girls occasionally would show up to receive treats and small gifts from Anderson.

On or about the afternoon of May 28, 2020, a few of the girls had gone inside Anderson’s home to watch a video and eat cookies, according to the charging documents. During that visit, prosecutors alleged that Anderson inappropriately touched or molested one of the girls on two separate occasions and had also placed the girl’s hand on his genital area over his clothing.

The aggravated sexual abuse charge involved Anderson penetrating the girl with his fingers while they watched the movie together on the couch, prosecutors stated during the trial.

On the trial’s first day, that girl, who is now 12, and her mother both testified, with additional testimony being given on Day 2 by another one of the girls. That second girl, who was 9 at the time and is now 11, had testified that Anderson had also attempted to kiss her. 

Other witnesses who testified during the trial included Jody Miller, the nurse practitioner who had examined and interviewed both girls within a day or two following the reported incident, and Lt. Addison Adams, the Parowan Police officer who had interviewed Anderson at his house shortly after that.

Various excerpts from body camera video footage of Adams’ interview with Anderson outside his home on June 1, 2020 were also played for the jury.

Anderson himself also took the stand in his own defense Thursday afternoon, adamantly denying the allegations and claiming he had been manipulated into admitting things he said he hadn’t done.

During his closing arguments Friday morning, prosecutor Shane Klenk likened Anderson to a “wolf in sheep’s clothing” and said although he had seemed harmless on the surface, “Inside, he was hungry. His appetite was deviant and he was a predator. In fact, actual wolves hunt in much the same way Darcy Anderson does. They single out the weak, the vulnerable. They try to isolate their prey.

“Anderson saw these girls; he knew their mother was going through a difficult time. As he gave them more and more enticements, they came to his home more and more often. Finally, he was ready to strike.”

Klenk also played back excerpts from the body cam video for the jurors to hear Anderson’s own responses to the officer’s questions.

Klenk then went through the legal descriptions of all three counts and outlined specifically what actions Anderson was accused of doing to violate the law in each instance.

Klenk cited the accuser’s bravery in coming forward.

“I know I don’t have to tell you that (she) demonstrated an awful lot of power when she came before you and testified in this courtroom,” Klenk said as he finished his closing argument. “You heard that testimony. It was innocent. It was raw. And it was credible. It is time for this wolf’s facade to come down. See him for what he is. Find him guilty on all three counts.”

During his closing argument that followed, defense attorney Troy Sundquist challenged the girls’ version of the events, citing inconsistencies in their testimony regarding the timeline of what had happened.

Sundquist displayed two pieces of posterboard that he said highlighted the discrepancies between the girls’ stories, which he said were “riddled with inconsistencies.”

For example, some of the questions raised by Sundquist included the following:

• Did the purported kissing attempt happen on the same day as the alleged molestation of the other girl, or the day before?
• To whom did the distraught girl first report the incident, her mother or someone else?
• Exactly how many other girls were present in the home at the time and why weren’t the others also interviewed?

Some of the inconsistencies are harmless and of no real consequence, Sundquist conceded. 

However, on the vitally important details of the case, Sundquist said the girls’ stories should have more closely matched each other.

“The other child’s story should mirror that as much as possible because they were both there,” he said. “They were both involved in the same situations.”

Sundquist also challenged the interviews conducted by both the nurse practitioner and the police detective, while also calling into question their expertise and qualifications.

He suggested both girls had received some coaching during the course of their initial interviews with the Children’s Justice Center.

“What was said in the CJC interviews, which again, I’ll reiterate, is the core lie,” Sundquist said. “And if you take time and have been coached to keep that core lie intact, those things will remain fairly similar. The details, again, will be lost in translation.”

Sundquist did agree with the prosecutors that the foundation of the case relied almost entirely on the accuser’s testimony.

“Remember, the only question in this case, and everything hinges on it, is whether or not you believe in a story,” he said as he addressed the question of reasonable doubt.

“With the girls, there was so much inconsistency, so many contradictions, that we can have zero confidence in any part of the story,” Sundquist added.

In the state’s final rebuttal after the defense’s closing argument, Klenk pointed out several inconsistencies in Anderson’s own testimony, as had been highlighted on the video.

“Everything that has been talked about by defense rings hollow next to some of Mr. Anderson’s statements,” he said. 

He then quoted Anderson’s own words from the video interview.

“Mr. Anderson said, ‘I was trying to be good. I was trying to be careful,’” Klenk said. “He should have tried a lot harder. Find him guilty on all counts.”

Just over a couple hours later, the eight-member jury did just that, returning a verdict that indicated they believed the accuser at her word. 

Right after the verdict was read, Judge Allen again thanked the jury for their service. The panel consisted of six women and two men, plus two additional female alternates who were dismissed right before deliberations began.

The court ordered Anderson to remain incarcerated in Iron County Jail until his sentencing, which was scheduled for April 19 at 1:45 p.m. 

Anderson faces a potential sentence of 15 years to life on the first count of aggravated sexual abuse of a child, plus a possible sentence of 1-to-15 years for each of the two second-degree felony counts.

“Our criminal justice system, with all of its checks and balances and constitutional guarantees, served justice today,” Iron County Attorney Chad Dotson told Cedar City News after the verdict was handed down.

“I am inspired by a 12-year-old’s courage to testify about the abuse she endured at the hands of the defendant, and I am pleased that the jury unanimously agreed that this defendant is guilty,” Dotson said.

“Sexual abuse against children cannot be tolerated, and the Iron County Attorney’s Office will continue to work diligently to hold perpetrators accountable and to protect the most vulnerable among us,” he added.

Copyright St. George News, SaintGeorgeUtah.com LLC, 2022, all rights reserved.