Mark and Susan Hooper each pleaded no contest to reduced charges against them on Monday in McKean County Court, a week before they were to stand trial on felony charges of withholding food from their three adopted children as punishment.
Susan Hooper, 40, of Anderson Street, Mount Jewett, went first. Standing beside her attorney, Alexander Lindsay, she entered no contest pleas to three counts of endangering the welfare of children, first-degree misdemeanors.
Senior Judge John Cleland asked her several questions to determine if her plea was knowingly and voluntarily given. She responded very quietly, at times with a seemingly nervous giggle. The judge asked her if she understood the charges against her. “Yes, sir,” she replied softly. Lindsay admonished her to speak up.
Cleland asked her if she understood that a no-contest plea was the equivalent of a guilty plea under the law, and that by entering the plea she was acknowledging that should the case be taken to trial, she would be found guilty. “Yes, sir,” she said.
Mark Hooper, 43, of Anderson Street, Mount Jewett, a pastor at a Johnsonburg church, was next. Standing beside his attorney, Joseph Charlton, he pleaded no contest to one count of endangering the welfare of children, a first-degree misdemeanor. He said he had a high school education, and attended a “non-accredited biblical school” as well. He spoke clearly, with a strong voice, replying “yes, sir” when Cleland asked him if he understood the allegations against him.
District Attorney Ray Learn described the actions he was prepared to prove against both Hoopers. He said between May 1, 2011 and Feb. 13, 2013, both “punished (their three adopted children) by withholding of food,” causing medical problems including malnutrition, psychosocial dwarfism and enlargement of livers in each child. The children were between the ages of 10 and 8 when the alleged withholding of food began, he said. Both Hoopers “breached (their) duty of care to these children,” Learn said.
Learn said there was no agreement for sentencing in the matter; it would be left to the discretion of the court.
Cleland asked if Learn would make a statement for the record as to why plea agreements were offered in the case.
Learn complied, “We looked at many factors.” The no-contest plea addresses the culpability of each defendant, and most importantly, will “avoid damaging the children by having to testify at trial.”
At the conclusion of the plea hearing, which lasted about 30 minutes, Cleland ordered a full pre-sentence investigation in the cases. He specifically asked Lindsay if he would like to have a psychological evaluation of Susan Hooper included in the investigation.
“Yes, I would like it,” Lindsay replied, but added, “I haven’t consulted with my client on the matter.”
Lindsay added that Susan Hooper would like to address the court at the time of sentencing, and asked if time could be allotted for her to do so. He said she wanted to “testify as to how and why this whole thing occurred.”
Cleland said he would set the date of sentencing for the week of Feb. 10, and would set a specific time in a subsequent order.
Following the hearing, Learn said the charges are the same as when they were filed, but one step down in grading.
“They are still going to be held accountable,” Learn said. “It’s up to the judge to see what sentence they get.”
The prosecutor also explained why Mark Hooper was permitted to plea to one count, while Susan Hooper pleaded to three counts of endangering the welfare of children.
“The kids’ testimony was the mom was the one” who withheld meals as punishment, Learn explained. “By the kids’ own account, he was less culpable.”
Learn reiterated that the plea will save the children from the trauma of testifying at trial.
“Any time you have kids involved, you can’t ignore what the effects will be on the kids,” he said. “If (the Hoopers) are going to ‘fess up and plead no contest, I’m not going to put the kids through a trial. I made the call based on what I believed to be their best interests.”
A plea of no contest has the same legal weight as a guilty plea, the prosecutor explained.
Learn would not comment on the whereabouts of the child victims in the case, saying only, “They are still in the care of McKean County Children and Youth Services.”
While not commenting specifically on the medical conditions of the victims, Learn said, “I can say the doctors have said they have made remarkable progress. It doesn’t appear they are going to have any long-term physical deficits because of this.”
