Photographed girls testify at Steven Powell’s voyeurism trial

The voyeurism trial of a missing Utah woman’s father-in-
law took on the tenor of a creepy slideshow Wednesday, as
jurors saw images of young neighbor girls he is accused of
filming _ and then heard testimony from the girls
themselves.

Two girls who were secretly photographed naked when they
lived next door to Steven Powell faced their former
neighbor in court.

The girls’ mother testified, first, about the day last
year when she found out about the photos from a sheriff’s
detective. They were taken five years before, when the
girls were nine and 8-years-old.

The woman identified the photos, saying: “They’re my
children.”

Now teenagers, only one of the girls remembered Powell and
she could not point him out in court.

One girl testified she left the door open when she used
the bathroom because she was afraid to be alone. When
asked what she could see out the window, she answered: “I
guess you could see Mr. Powell’s house.”

The father-in-law of missing Utah woman Susan Powell is
not expected to testify at his voyeurism trial in his own
defense.

Attorney Mark Quigley told jurors during his opening
statement Wednesday that Steven Powell doesn’t have any
burden of proof in the case, and it’s up to prosecutors to
provide enough evidence to convict him of charges that he
secretly filmed two young neighbor girls in their home as
they took baths, used the toilet and got dressed.

A detective described for jurors the sexually graphic
photos of girls seized from the Puyallup home of Steven
Powell.

Much of the trial day was spent identifying the photos,
where they were taken and what they show.

The first witness to take the stand was Pierce County
Gary Sanders said many of the photos seized had a specific
emphasis, “Young females; usually dating ranged from 10 to
late teens. These typically zoomed in on their genital
area, their buttocks, their legs, breasts.”

Sanders described for jurors the sexually graphic photos
of girls seized from the Puyallup home of Steven Powell.
“You can see she’s using the bathroom, underwear down to
mid-thighs,” he told the jurors. “Now another scene, both
victims in the bath. … And another bath scene. … There
she is putting on pajamas ….”

The images also included Steven Powell himself, some
naked.

Susan Powell disappeared from her home in West Valley
City, Utah, in late 2009. In February, her husband, Josh
Powell, attacked the couple’s two sons at a house near
Puyallup, Wash., with a hatchet and then ignited an
explosive fire that claimed the lives of all three. Josh
Powell, Steven’s son, is believed to have been involved in
Susan’s disappearance.

“You know about Josh Powell and Susan Powell, and we all
know that’s not what this case is about,” Quigley told the
jury. “What I want you to focus on is the sufficiency of
the state’s evidence.”

Steven Powell faces 14 counts of voyeurism. Judge Ronald
Culpepper threw out one charge of possession of child
pornography, saying the state’s proffered evidence didn’t
fit the definition of that crime.

In his opening statement, Pierce County deputy prosecutor
Bryce Nelson told the jury that Steven Powell recorded the
images for his sexual gratification.

“This case is about a secret,” Nelson said. The neighbor
girls and her mother “didn’t know Steven Powell had a
secret. But we do.”

Authorities searched Steven Powell’s home last year for
evidence in Susan Powell’s disappearance. On Steven
Powell’s computers, they said, they found thousands of
images of women and girls apparently recorded without
their knowledge _ some as they walked dogs, strolled
through parking lots, or entered their homes in Steven
Powell’s neighborhood.

There were many images of Susan Powell that appeared to
have been filmed without her knowledge. In thousands of
pages of journal entries discovered by detectives, Steven
Powell detailed his obsession with Susan Powell,
prosecutors have said.

Much of that evidence has been barred from the trial as
unduly prejudicial against the defendant. Steven Powell is
not charged with acts of voyeurism involving Susan Powell
because authorities can’t prove she didn’t know about the
filming.

By contrast, detectives were able to identify the neighbor
girls and their mother, and they are expected to testify
that they knew nothing about the filming.

Susan Powell’s father, Chuck Cox, said it was obvious that
Susan was unaware that she was being recorded by her
father-in-law.

“Clearly their strongest evidence on anything is on Susan
being a victim,” Cox said. “I don’t get it. Does she not
count?”

Powell faces a standard sentence of around four years if
convicted, but the state has alleged aggravating factors
that could result in a longer term.

97.3 KIRO FM’s Tim Haeck contributed to this Associated
Press report.