SPRINGFIELD, Ore. — A Springfield man accused of videotaping his 10-year-old neighbor was back in court Tuesday. Dana Bishop faces several charges of invasion of privacy. During the hearing, the judge took up some motions presented by the defense.
There are three motions the judge is considering. One has to do with statements made by the defendant before and after he was read his rights. The other is challenging the consent of search warrant along with one challenging the search warrant itself.
Dana Bishop was at Tuesday’s hearing as well as the alleged victim’s family.
Emotions were limited as Dana Bishop walked into the courtroom and sat down. The matter at hand, deciding whether his rights were read at the correct time, and whether the consent of search warrant was valid.
The first to testify was Chyrstal Stutesman, the alleged victim’s mother. Stutesman recounted the day she says Bishop came to her home with concerns about her 10-year-old daughter.
“Your daughter has no curtains and I have security cameras that I put up on the side of the house because I was hearing things out there and I can see in her room,” Stutesman said
Stutesman then became visibly emotional when asked what she did after Bishop left her home.
“I ran to the other side of the house and called my brother in law who is a police officer and I said someone says they can see my daughter next door with a security camera and that they said a bunch of bizarre things,” Stutesman said.
Two officers testified to coming out to the home to question Bishop that night.
“I was hysterically crying and I said my neighbor came over. He said he has videotaped my daughter that he has had these conversations with her that are strange,” Stutesman said.
The officers were asked about when they read him his rights and asked to search some property in his home.
“He said he had seen her naked and dressing. I asked if the video cameras recorded anything or if they just streamed live on some sort of television. He said they can record, but he deletes them. At that point I stopped and advised Mr. Bishop of Miranda rights,” said Officer Elizabeth Bartlett, Springfield Police.
“Well I remember Officer Bartlett read Bishop his Miranda rights and he had described where these cameras were,” said Officer Brian Antone, Springfield Police.
Since the hearing was not the trial, the testimony laid out was abbreviated and focused on the time around when Bishop’s rights were read. The judge will ultimately decide what will be admissible in the trial.
The prosecution says the judge will likely rule on the motions within the next week. The trial was supposed to start this week, but has been delayed, likely until October.