Springfield sex offender back in court facing a new felony charge with a different child
WHITE RIVER JUNCTION - Another child has come forward with an allegation against a convicted sex offender from Springfield, telling investigators that she began having nightmares this summer which led her to recall having been raped when she was just five years old.
As a result of the now-teenaged girl’s allegations, George Simonds, 49, who is currently in the midst of serving a 4-to-5 year sentence at the correctional facility up in Newport, Vermont, was brought back to the courtroom in White River Junction earlier this week.
Simonds pleaded innocent to a single felony count of sexual assault upon a victim under the age of thirteen, a charge which carries a mandatory ten year minimum and potential maximum of clear up to life in prison if Simonds were to be convicted.
Back in August of 2014, Simonds was convicted of lewd & lascivious conduct with a girl who testified that she was 11-years-old when Simonds showed her an adult video and then molested her.
Simonds at the time of his arrest in 2013 on a lewd & lascivious conduct charge which he was convicted of the next year
Springfield Police Detective Sergeant Patrick Call detailed the new allegations in an affidavit filed with the court that included a graphic account of what happened when the girl said Simonds was able to slip into a bedroom where she was sleeping at the time in an apartment house on Elm Hill in Springfield.
Call wrote that despite the fact that it was a series of increasingly upsetting dreams which began the sequence of events that brought the teen’s allegations to the attention of investigators, the girl was clear with her interviewers that “there was no doubt in her mind that this happened to her” and that Simonds was her attacker.
Call said that when he went to the prison in July to get Simonds’ side of the story and explained the new allegations that had surfaced, Simonds “instantly stated that her father had put her up to this.”
Call wrote that he explained to Simonds that investigators had gone over the details of the girl’s account and found her story to be credible but he said Simonds “cut me off and said that I was wrong and he was being judged because he was a sex offender.”
“Simonds claimed again that this allegation was fabricated…,” Detective Call wrote, concluding “Simonds advised that he was done, wanted to take this to trial and did not wish to speak further.”
Simonds appeared in court on Tuesday and denied the new felony charge against him
Vermont News can be contacted at firstname.lastname@example.org