Mother Portrayed as Victim, Torturer as Case Goes to Jury

The child-abuse case of Charlotte Russo went to the jury Monday--with her lawyer presenting her as the victim of a lying child and the prosecutor calling the Westlake woman a torturer.

Defense attorney James M. Farley said the girl’s story of being locked in a back-yard racquetball court off and on for two years is untrue, and he denied the prosecutor’s suggestion that the girl was treated like Cinderella.

“Cinderella had to sleep by the fire and ashes,” Farley said. “But this isn’t a Cinderella story. It’s a Pinocchio story. And (the girl’s) nose grows every time she comes up with another story.”

But Deputy Dist. Atty. Dee Corona described Russo as mean-spirited, saying she put her daughter’s life in danger by physically abusing her.

“It’s clear the Russo family had a dirty little secret, and the secret was (their daughter) who lived in the racquetball court,” said Corona, telling the jury that “Mrs. Russo is guilty of abusing her child in every possible way.”

During the arguments from both sides, Russo kept a stern look on her face and diligently took notes on a legal pad. She faces up to three years in prison.

From the beginning, Corona acknowledged that the girl presented problems for Russo.

“I’m going to be the first to tell you that (the girl) was no angel and was no saint,” Corona said, adding later, “she was flamboyant. She was stubborn. She liked to dance around in front of company.”

But those were not reasons for her to be mistreated, Corona said.

In deciding the case, jurors must determine which witnesses were the most credible--the prosecution’s or the defense’s, Corona said.

And she said that choice should be clear. Russo and her other children consistently lied during the trial, Corona said. Russo’s husband, Richard, did not testify, but pleaded guilty to misdemeanor child abuse and served 30 days in jail.

Corona pointed out what she saw as the major inconsistencies.

The girl said her mother pinched her. Her mother said that was a lie. The girl said her mother tied a rope around her wrists and dragged her around the family garage, a charge the mother denied.

The girl said her mother scratched her in the face. The mother said she didn’t do it. The girl said she was forced to eat oatmeal mixed with tap water and raw eggs. The mother denied that, too.

The prosecutor also said that defense witnesses had a reason to lie on the stand: They don’t want to see Russo convicted and possibly imprisoned.

“We have some big whoppers in this case,” Corona said.

*

For instance, she said the girl was forced to sleep in the back-yard racquetball court off and on for nearly two years. “But what do we have in court?” she asked. “We have the whole family coming in and saying that’s not true.”

She also said that Russo and other family members fabricated a story about the girl attacking her mother on May 23, 1993--the day before Russo’s arrest on child-abuse charges. According to defense testimony, Russo bit the girl in self-defense that day to stave off the attack.

Corona said the story of the attack was invented because prosecutors proved Russo’s teeth marks were on the girl’s body. “Self-defense. That’s a good story,” Corona remarked, sarcastically.

Corona said Russo actually bit the girl in the family’s garage during an unprovoked attack on her daughter only hours before her arrest.

“Mrs. Russo was completely out of control the night of May 24,” she said. “She tore at (the girl) with her teeth.”

*

But Farley said Russo never struck or bit the girl in the garage.

“You know why there was no bruising on (the girl) in the garage?” asked Farley, showing the jury pictures taking that night. “Because she wasn’t hit. She wasn’t punched. She wasn’t kicked.”

Farley belittled the prosecution’s theory that Russo is a “wicked mother” and her daughter was the family’s “scullery maid.”

He noted that Russo always took the girl to doctor appointments and checked with physicians to make sure it was all right to require the girl to ride her bike to summer school.

He also noted that the girl had her own bedroom and attended private schools. When the girl would run away, Farley said, the family would go out and look for her.

“Did they look for her because they were concerned for this kid, or did they look for her because they loved her?” Farley asked. “Charlotte said she loved her.

“Why was she sent to private schools if she was the black sheep of the family?” Farley asked.

He said the girl’s problems were of her own doing.

He said she didn’t do her homework and threw away her tests instead of bringing them home for her mother to review.

*

He appealed to the jury to empathize with the pain and suffering that Russo has endured.

“You who are parents,” he said to the jury, “you’ve got to understand what it means when a child you’ve done everything for turns on you and accuses you.”

He also defended Richard Russo and the other Russo children for assisting with Charlotte Russo’s defense.

“Charlotte Russo may have been a strict disciplinarian,” he said. “But is she a mean witch? Is she the wicked stepmother from the East? No.”

The entire trial could have been avoided, Farley said, if the girl had followed directions.

“None of this would have happened if (the girl) would have just done her homework, did what the other kids did and looked after herself by watching what she ate,” Farley said.

The jury will begin deliberating Wednesday.