By Erin Smith
Boston Herald
SUFFOLK, Mass. — Serial rapist Essie L. Billingslea — now accused of brutally raping an Arlington woman in her home — convinced a Suffolk jury to free him last year thanks in part to three taxpayer-funded experts who testified, among other things, that the Level 3 sex offender was a changed man who was too old and sick to be a threat to public safety, according to court records.
“I think he struggles in treatment, sometimes pushing the envelope, if you will. But, nonetheless, I think there’s been change in the man, and I think it’s been sufficient so that we don’t any longer need the strict security of Bridgewater,” Frederick Winsmann, a Boston psychologist hired by Billingslea’s lawyer at taxpayer expense, testified at the March 2013 trial.
Billingslea is due back in court later this month on charges he broke into an Arlington woman’s home and brutally raped her in June. He had been freed in March 2013 after Winsmann and other experts hired by Billingslea’s publicly funded attorney testified at a trial where a jury overturned a 2006 court ruling that had civilly committed Billingslea indefinitely as a sexually dangerous person.
“I think he can use coping mechanisms as specific as going for a walk or exercising and as complex as calling his therapist, instead of acting out,” Winsmann said, according to a transcript obtained by the Herald. “I think treatment has done a lot for him and has taught him a lot and he has now psychic resources that he can rely on.”
Billingslea’s prior rap sheet included convictions for a 1993 assault on an 11-year-old girl, his part in a 1988 gang rape, and the 1986 rape of a 14-year-old girl at knifepoint he committed at age 16.
At his March 2013 trial, the jury heard how Billingslea planned his attack on the 11-year-old girl just weeks after he had been released from prison, luring her to his house with the promise of pizza and subs and staying up late.
Yet Joseph J. Plaud, another clinical psychologist hired by Billingslea’s lawyer, testified that he was too old and infirm to harm people any more.
“Given his current age, given his participation in treatment, given the change in his entire ?social milieu, given the fact that he has a number of significant medical issues — I mean, he is 43 years old and he has a number of medical issues, as well, to deal with,” Plaud said, citing Billingslea’s ?recovery from testicular cancer.
“When you look at all these factors in 2013, it is my judgment he can understand and control his sexual behavior; he is not likely to re-offend at this point.”
Manju Vachher, who works for Department of Correction contractor Forensic Health Services, also testified on Billingslea’s ?behalf, and assessed him as only a “medium-high” risk — short of the bar necessary to keep him civilly committed.
Vachher acknowledged she was aware that Billingslea has said he preferred sex with young girls because they were easier to control. But Vachher still didn’t think that was enough to keep him locked up.
“The likelihood of him re-offending will always be there of any crime,” Vachher testified. “But within the criteria of ‘sexually dangerous person,’ he did not meet that. So that’s how I concluded it.”
At the same March 2013 trial,?experts called by the state ?Department of Correction warned that Billingslea should remain locked up.
“My opinion is that he remains a sexually dangerous person as of today,” forensic psychologist Robert H. Joss told the court.
Joss, who diagnosed Billingslea with an antisocial personality disorder and noted he had problems with impulse control, recalled Billingslea’s previous convictions, saying, “He gets released and within about a month offends again. ... So there’s clear evidence that he hasn’t learned by his ?experience. And also concerning is the declining age of the victims. We go from 14, to 13, to 11.”
Katrin Rouse-Weir, a forensic psychologist on the Community Access Board, which evaluates sexually dangerous inmates, also said Billingslea still posed a threat to society.
“In our opinion he would be reasonably expected or likely to commit a future sexual offense if released from a secure facility at this time,” Rouse-Weir testified.
Plaud was paid more than $147,000, and Winsmann $126,000, in taxpayer money last fiscal year for evaluating and testifying on behalf of sex offenders, records show.
Plaud declined to speak about the Billingslea case and would only briefly address his six-figure pay.
“I don’t know that that’s a lot of money,” Plaud said. “I’m a forensic psychologist and I charge what the state rate is. I work very hard and it’s a very difficult area of treatment and the law and that’s all I’m going to say to you.”
Rouse-Weir and Vaccher ?declined comment when reached by phone, while Joss and Winsmann have not returned calls seeking comment. Massachusetts officials at Forensic Health Services also did not return a call seeking comment.