Rittgers Rittgers & Nakajima
Rittgers Rittgers & Nakajima


The professional team at Rittgers Rittgers & Nakajima
  1. Home
  2.  | 
  3. Criminal Defense
  4.  | Sparks’ Case Shows Importance of ‘Innocent Until Proven Guilty’

Sparks’ Case Shows Importance of ‘Innocent Until Proven Guilty’

The Cincinnati Enquirer recently published a closer look at the circumstances surrounding the death of Mason resident Susan Sparks. You can read the details in the lengthy article, which discusses Susan’s long battle with mental illness, her relationships with family members, and details about the firearm that caused her fatal injuries.

The article is an excellent read because it helps put the reader in the shoes of Susan’s husband, Timothy, who was represented by Charles H. Rittgers and cleared of murder charges in a Warren County grand jury proceeding. The piece does not simulate the extent of evidence presented to grand jury members at the indictment proceeding. However, it provides insight into how jurors must refrain from rushing to judgment and carefully examine the full body of evidence in reaching a decision.

Innocent Until Proven Guilty


The phrase, “innocent until proven guilty” is well-known, but rarely do members of the general public have to put it to task. Whenever a criminal case arises, most people in the community are permitted rush to judgment – and form opinions and beliefs without significant ramifications for the accused. It is the role of the criminal justice system to investigate matters fully and objectively before determining guilt.

Timothy Sparks was undoubtedly presumed guilty by some people in his community. While grieving the incredibly profound and traumatic loss of his wife, he also had to work with attorney Charles H. Rittgers to defend his freedom. There are not many people who can truly understand what Mr. Sparks went through and continues to deal with, but he preserved his freedom and opportunity to continue living in his community, supported by family and friends.