New trial ordered for convicted child molester

HARTFORD — A Bridgeport man, convicted of sexually abusing a 5-year-old child, was granted a new trial Friday

The state Appellate Court overturned the conviction against Freddie Trinidad, ruling that the trial court improperly allowed the jury to see portions of a videorecorded interview the child had made with a social worker.

“We are pleased with the appellate court’s decision to reverse Mr. Trinidad’s convictions,” said Trinidad’s public defender, Jared Millbrandt. “I am grateful for the hard work of Attorney Jim Streeto and Virginia Paino at the Public Defender’s Legal Services Unit as well as Attorney Jennifer Smith for her terrific work on the amicus brief. We look forward to a new trial in this case.”

In January 2018, the 54year-old Trinidad was convicted of two counts of risk of injury to a child by sexual contact and sentenced to 12 years in prison followed by 20 years of probation.

Trinidad, a friend of the victim’s family, was accused of repeatedly sexually assaulting the girl while he was babysitting her in October 2015.

Police said at one point

Trinidad told the girl he would marry her if she kept his secret. The girl eventually told her mother, who called police.

Prior to the trial, state prosecutors requested the trial judge court review a video recording of the forensic interview of the child, indicating that it intended to show portions of it during the trial under the medical diagnosis and treatment exception to the hearsay rule. Millbrandt objected on the grounds that the exception did not apply because medical treatment of the child had concluded and that the purpose of the interview was investigative rather than medical.

The judge then agreed to let the jury see the video.

“We recognize the difficulties the state faces in prosecuting cases involving allegations of sexual assaults of young children when there is no physical evidence but conclude that the child’s allegations of sexual abuse by the defendant as revealed in the forensic interview were not admissible under the medical treatment exception to the hearsay rule and played a substantial role in the jury’s decision to find the defendant guilty of the charge of risk of injury to a child,” the Appellate Court ruled.