Teacher Cleared of Criminal Charges
Teacher Cleared of Criminal Charges
Pleads ‘no contest’ to misdemeanor.
By Bonnie Hobbs
Thursday, January 15, 2009
Last May, Fairfax County police charged a Chantilly Academy teacher with possession of methamphetamine. But in the middle of a jury trial for this felony, last week, the jury was dismissed and Rachel Smith was instead permitted to plead "no contest" to a misdemeanor.
"This has been a very emotional experience for a teacher who’s thrilled with the outcome," said her attorney, Tom Plofchan, afterward. "There was no finding that she possessed drugs or that there were drugs in the car, and she feels it vindicates her assertion of innocence throughout the entire process."
Smith, 32, of Sterling, worked off and on for Fairfax County Public Schools since 1999 and, at the time of her arrest, taught Early-Childhood Careers and Gourmet Cooking at The Chantilly Academy. She was then placed on unpaid leave.
Her jury trial began last Monday, Jan. 5, in Circuit Court before a jury of six men and six women. At the outset, Assistant Commonwealth’s Attorney Mark Sullivan said that, on May 8, 2008, an undercover narcotics detective was serving a search warrant on Smith’s boyfriend, Edelberto Fernandez, and police allegedly found crystal meth in his Springfield home.
"The detective took this opportunity to see if Smith would purchase crystal meth from Fernandez," said Miller. "So Fernandez had her drive over, and she got in the back seat of [the detective’s unmarked] car. The detective held out a couple baggies of crystal meth to her and asked, ‘What do you want?’ She said, ‘200,’ and he placed two bags in the center console, and she reached for them."
Miller said the detective held out a smoking pipe to her and she asked him, "Are you crazy?" At that point, she was arrested. Miller said the two bags later tested positive for methamphetamine, and that Smith’s purse also contained the drug.
But Plofchan said, not only didn’t his client possess any drugs, but the whole incident was entrapment. "Rachel was home, in her pajamas, and [the detective] suggested that Edelberto have her come over and do a buy."
"But Rachel didn’t buy drugs, never mentioned methamphetamine and didn’t bring or give money to anyone to buy it," continued Plofchan. "Edelberto said he needed $200, so Rachel said she’d come over to take him to an ATM so he could borrow $200."
The attorney also said Smith never touched the baggies and, when the detective pulled out the pipe, she said, "Are you crazy? I’m not smoking anything with you."
"Rachel Smith was set up by the cops," said Plofchan. "There was no intent on her part to buy anything." He also said Fernandez had a "bias to testify for the police" in this case because of the drug charges hanging over his own head.
The detective testified in court and presented his version of the events, saying that Smith did, indeed, take the "crystal-like substance" he offered her. But he was prevented from identifying it as crystal meth because of a question about the authenticity of the certificate from the state forensics lab that identified it as methamphetamine.
Then when the case resumed, after a day’s recess, the jury was gone and Smith pleaded "no contest" to possession of paraphernalia. The attorneys agreed on a sentence, and Judge Jonathan Thacher imposed it: 60 days in jail, all suspended.
Outside the courtroom, afterward, both Plofchan and Smith were relieved and happy. "The evidence was indicative that there was no possession of drugs," said Plofchan. "And it appeared there was reasonable doubt whether she intended to be there or was encouraged to be there by the officer."
To resolve the case, without having to face a jury decision, explained the attorney, his client pleaded "no contest" to possession of paraphernalia "because her purse contained items, such as a lipstick case, that could be used to contain drugs." Compared to a felony charge, said Plofchan, a "non-drug-related misdemeanor" conviction was "an acceptable outcome."
Furthermore, he said Smith’s conviction "doesn’t affect her employment with the school system" because, under state statute 22.1-315, "she’s entitled to be immediately reinstated and receive her back pay."
Plofchan said she was torn between going forward with the trial and entering a plea because "she wanted to have her day in court to further clear her name and let the public know she wasn’t doing drugs. But this brings immediate closure and achieves those goals."
Sullivan declined to comment regarding why he was willing to agree to a plea, instead of continuing with the trial.
As for school system spokesman Paul Regnier, while he couldn’t discuss Smith’s case specifically, he did say, "We obey Virginia law and, however the code applies to us, in any given case, we will obey it." He also noted that the school system does its own, internal investigation, as well.
http://www.connectionnewspapers.com/article.asp?article=324402&paper=82&cat=104
