Andrew H. Walker, Getty Images Nine days after the deadly tornado that touched…
Ex-Cake Drummer Peter McNeal Child Molestation Trial Begins With Graphic Testimony
- Posted on Apr 25th 2012 1:00PM by Jason MacNeil
LAPD
According to the Los Angeles Daily News, a woman, whose identity has been withheld to not identify the child, testified that her then three-year-old daughter demonstrated what McNeal allegedly did to the girl during a Thanksgiving party in November 2009.
After leaving the party, she said her daughter asked, "Why did that man want to put his penis in my mouth?" When the mother asked which man the daughter replied, "The man who was playing ball with us."
That same evening, the mother testified she got in the bathtub with her daughter and asked her to demonstrate what transpired. The daughter proceeded to take a metal Thermos bottle which she held to her crotch and "pushed it in my mouth."
"She had no emotional value to it yet," the mother said of the demonstration. "It was just something that happened."
When asked why they waited before going to the authorities, the mother explained her and her husband wanted to be "100 percent certain" before accusing McNeal of such actions. The daughter, who is now five and who also testified. The girl was unable to recognize McNeal during a preliminary hearing but had previously identified him in a photo.
McNeal was arrested on one felony count of oral copulation and sexual penetration of a child under the age of 10 in December 2011 and first appeared in court this past January. The parents of the girl reported the molestation to police in Massachusetts.
Prosecutor Elena Camaras has alleged that McNeal also attempted to molest a different young girl two weeks later while volunteering at a school, but no charges were filed in that incident.
McNeal performed with Cake from 2001 to 2004 and has worked with a series of other musicians including Norah Jones and Soul Coughing's Mike Doughty.
- Filed under: News
All the AOL Music info you want to know
Chief Keef Receives Apology From Katy…
The BoomboxFacebook Will Chief Keef accept an apology from one of pop music's biggest stars?…
2 Chainz Prepares Sophomore Album for…
The BoomboxKevin Winter, Getty Images 2 Chainz will be a busy man this summer. The rap titan…
Darius Rucker Felt Compelled to Expose…
The BootRich Polk, Getty Images Darius Rucker says he knew that the person behind the…
Add a Comment
Wndy Wng
Here is latest article on Peter McNeal that highlights the various inconsistencies of his case/trial. Due to the extremely sensitive nature/subject of the charge the obvious uncertainties which make the allegation doubtful can be looked over and/or disregarded, especially with all the media hype. The bottom line is that there is clear doubt. http://supergoodmusic.blogspot.com/2012/10/guilty-until-proven-innocent-fight-for.html
November 09 2012 at 8:12 AM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down Reply
BRIAN
What 3 year old knows the word 'penis'??? IF he is innocent he's an idiot to be alone with any child after pleading guilty to the first case.
Not looking good for him. Cake suck anyways.
emily.p.smith
Hello Sara,
I understand what a scary subject this is and the devastating effects that this kind of abuse can have on a person. However, I'd like you to consider the consequences of putting an innocent man in this situation, and even worse, convicting him of a the most terrible thing a person can do, when he hasn't committed the crime. The other case was filed by a disturbed teenage girl, who had her own motivations and family troubles that lead her to accuse Pete of this horrible crime. If you've never been in a very serious and horrible court case, you may not realize that it costs a lot of money and time, and sometimes a defendant accepts a lesser charge to preserve his life. Pete didn't want to be in court for years and forfeit all of this hard earned money for a false accusation. He accepted the charge to stop the fight and moved on. Later, a family who has no one to blame for the problems that their daughter has, found Pete. They knew him and his past accusation, and he became the perfect scapegoat. Just because someone powerful and wealthy can accuse someone else of something horrible, it doesn't make it true. There are witnesses from the school and beloved teachers who testified that Pete is not a monster and is not capable of something so horrible.
I am not related to Pete, but he is a good friend of mine and I hate to see his life getting ruined by a false charge. One statement by a three year old based on something she probably saw on TV should not mean complete destruction for my friend.
emily.p.smith
1 reply to emily.p.smith's comment
You forgot to mention a few key points, Jason.
The little girl misidentified Pete McNeal 2 times during the testimonies. She also described him as a dark skinned man with curly black hair and a round face, which does not describe Pete's appearance. She said that the man wore a baseball cap, which Pete does not and was not. Just look at any picture of him.
The little girl giggled on the stand, thinking that the whole trial was game, which should give evidence that she was not injured or seriously harmed.
There was also no charge for penetration nor was there a second allegation of molestation at the school, which was completely false and made-up.
Pete McNeal is not a monster, and is actually one of the nicest human beings on the planet. It's quite sad that our culture has to attach itself to misrepresenting an artist to the point of ruining his life. This entire case is based on something that a 3 year old may have said to her mother almost 3 years ago.
sarah_jackson93
1 reply to sarah_jackson93's comment
how do you explain the previous two charges which are public record, then? (look at the LA daily news story which has accurate info. this article is incorrect). i find it pretty hard to believe that two children both made up the same thing independent of each other. it's a known fact that children of that age just don't have the capability to make something like that up. and, frankly, there is absolutely nothing to be gained by these people from a criminal trial--so no motive there.
it seems obvious that you must be related to the perpetrator.
emily.p.smith
Hello Sarah,
I understand the devastation and horrible effects that this kind of abuse can have on a person. However, I would like you to consider the consequences of accusing an innocent man of one of the most horrible things a person can do, and ruining his life with that accusation.
The other charge was made by a disturbed teenage girl who had her own motivations and family problems that contributed to her accusations of Pete. There are witnesses from her school as well as beloved teachers who testified that she had a lot of problems of her own, and was lying about the accusation against Pete.
If you have never been in a horrible and long court case or on trial, you may not realize that it costs a lot of money and time to go through it. At the risk of spending all of your money and life on court cases, sometimes a defendant will accept a lesser charge to preserve his life. Pete did not want to spend the rest of his life in court and spend all of his tour money on a false accusation, so he accepted a lesser charge, stopped the fight, and moved on. Later, another family who knew about Pete's past, and had no one to blame for their daughter's problems, make Pete the perfect scapegoat. Just because someone wealthier and more powerful than you accuses you of something, it doesn't make it true. If this family really thought that their daughter had been molested, would they have waited 3 years to say something? It's disturbing to me that if the mother really was concerned about that happening to her daughter, why didn't she say something right away?
I am not related to Pete, but he is a friend of mine and I hate to see his life ruined by a false accusation. Something that a 3 year old said, based on something she probably saw on TV should not mean total and complete destruction for my friend.
emily.p.smith
You forgot to mention a few key points, Jason.
The little girl misidentified Pete McNeal 2 times during the testimonies. She also described him as a dark skinned man with curly black hair and a round face, which does not describe Pete's appearance. She said that the man wore a baseball cap, which Pete does not and was not. Just look at any picture of him.
The little girl giggled on the stand, thinking that the whole trial was game, which should give evidence that she was not injured or seriously harmed.
There was also no charge for penetration nor was there a second allegation of molestation at the school, which was completely false and made-up.
Pete McNeal is not a monster, and is actually one of the nicest human beings on the planet. It's quite sad that our culture has to attach itself to misrepresenting an artist to the point of ruining his life. This entire case is based on something that a 3 year old may have said to her mother almost 3 years ago.
7 Comments