By Madison Hart
InkFreeNews

WARSAW — The first day of testimony began in the jury trial of a Leesburg man accused of multiple counts of stalking.

Scotty Lee Van Hawk

Scotty Lee Van Hawk, 52, 2906 E. Armstrong Road, Leesburg, faces three charges of stalking, all Level 5 felonies. The trial, which is taking place in Kosciusko Circuit Court, is expected to last two days.

Van Hawk is representing himself, and the state’s case is being presented by Prosecutor Brad Voelz. The charges stem from a series of alleged violations of protective orders filed by the victim.

In Indiana, a Level 5 felony is punishable by one to six years in prison, with an advisory sentence of three years.

Affidavit of Probable Cause

According to the affidavit, Van Hawk had six previous pending criminal cases against the victim including stalking, intimidation and violation of privacy. On Feb. 9, 2023, Van Hawk was released from custody for the aforementioned causes and, since release, allegedly had multiple new incidents of violating the victim’s protective order. Van Hawk is accused of contacting the victim multiple times with “a fraudulent number” despite being ordered to cease all communication.

In addition to the alleged phone harassment, Van Hawk was observed driving past the victim’s house and her parents’ house. Surveillance videos recorded Van Hawk entering the victim’s parents’ property and tying two large dogs to the railing of the front porch.

On March 16, 2023, a warrant was issued for Van Hawk. On March 17, 2023, the victim reported she had received emails from a known alias of Van Hawk, “Fabio Monteiro,” with the subject line, “Forward: several photos from Scotty Hawk.”

On March 20, 2023, Van Hawk was arrested on a warrant for violation of the protective order. Van Hawk had “absconded from Indiana” and claimed to be unaware of the protective order.

While in the custody of the Kosciusko County Sheriff, Van Hawk called a relative and verified that the relative was in possession of his cellular phone. Officers went to retrieve the phone from the relative for forensic examination but later realized it was not the phone in question.

On March 21, 2023, officers received a warrant to search the relative’s house and found Van Hawk’s phone behind the relative’s bed, as well as a 9mm pistol in the bedroom.

On March 22, 2023, officers received a search warrant to search a second phone of Van Hawk’s. On this phone, a detective found the following searches:

1. March 5: searched “what charges apply in Indiana to someone pulling a gun on someone threatening them” and “can you point a gun on someone in Indiana.”
2. March 15: searched the names of the victim and her father, along with the name of her father and the word “obituary.” Investigators note the father is alive.
3. March 18: searched “how must a protective order be served in Indiana,’ “Indiana protection order service,” “no service of the protective order,” and “what if a protective order can’t be served.”

Trial Proceedings

Two men and 11 women were seated on the jury in Kosciusko Circuit Court around 11:37 a.m. on Tuesday, Oct. 8, with Judge Michael Reed presiding.

In his opening statement, Voelz outlined the state’s case, providing the definition of stalking and the parameters of the protective order in place. He described that stalking took place during three distinct time periods: March to September of 2020; February to March of 2021; and February to March of 2023. He asked the jury to return three verdicts of guilty.

In Van Hawk’s opening statement, he said, “I am a good man. I have never in my life done anything I wouldn’t be proud for my children to see.”

He stated that he has never threatened anyone, and he claimed that the victim is “very violent” and that she is involved with covering up “sexual molestation.” He also claimed that he was denied a lawyer, denied disability accommodations, and denied due process.

Van Hawk said, “The county imprisoned me, changed property ownership, sold my house, my children’s home. Two SWAT teams with hand grenades and tear gas broke into my house. I was in a cast. They re-broke my leg and tore my ACL. Now they try to imprison me for 16 years for alleged texts which didn’t happen.” He also said they “stole $40,000, gold and silver.” Van Hawk claimed the court will suppress his evidence and admit inadmissible evidence from the prosecutor. He also said the victim disregarded the protective order and was in his house and bed, which he has “multiple videos of.”

After Van Hawk’s opening statement, the state asked the judge to correct some of the statements to the jury. The judge corrected that Van Hawk dismissed the council he was provided and elected to represent himself. He also clarified that Van Hawk’s disability accommodations had already been ruled on and implemented. Reed also stated that the prosecutor and attorneys involved were not under any evaluation for improper behavior, and that Van Hawk is allowed to call what witnesses he chooses.

The state called three witnesses to testify during the first day of the trial. Voelz called Kosciusko County Sheriff’s Office Sgt. Kreg Kuhn as the first witness of the day. Kuhn testified that he personally served the protective order to Van Hawk on Jan. 7, 2020. He described the victim as looking “shaken” when he visited her residence to deliver the order.

During cross-examination, Van Hawk asked Kuhn about the location of the victim’s vehicle during their visit. Kuhn stated it was in the garage. Van Hawk said the victim looked “shaken and stirred” from having “fun” with him inside, and he commented that his hair was probably messed up too.

On redirect, Voelz asked if Kuhn could have been mistaken about the victim’s demeanor. Kuhn emphasized that, after 14 years in law enforcement, he could read people well and was certain the victim’s face showed fear and she “wanted out.” He stated she wanted the officer present while she took her children and left.

The second witness, KCSO Deputy Elizabeth Johnson, took the stand to testify about her experience serving Van Hawk with a no-contact order in March 2021. Johnson testified that she read the order aloud, word for word, to ensure Van Hawk understood its contents. Johnson was not cross-examined by the defense, and her testimony concluded with a brief five-minute recess.

The third witness, the victim, provided a brief account of her history with Van Hawk. She described how their relationship started “nice” but soon became “abusive.” She explained that Van Hawk did not respect the court-issued parenting time guidelines, causing her to file for a protective order. The victim testified that Van Hawk seemed to be following the protective order, until she observed him watching her and her children through a window at the YMCA. She stated that she never informed him about their YMCA membership, and he had never gone to the YMCA before. In fact, he had previously called the YMCA a “cesspool.” She testified that this encounter made her feel scared and unsafe, so she reported it to the police.

The victim testified about custody exchanges with Van Hawk, which were court-ordered to occur at the police department for “safety” reasons.

She recounted that in April of 2020, Van Hawk did not exchange the children, causing Indiana State Police and Michigan Police to get involved.

The victim also affirmed that after the incident of not exchanging the children, Van Hawk’s parenting time was restricted.

But in July of 2020, Van Hawk’s parenting time was reinstated. Parenting guidelines state that parents split summer vacation, so since it was July, Van Hawk took the children for the rest of the summer. When it was time to switch back, the day before school started, the victim stated she “had a feeling” she should go to the exchange spot early. When she arrived two hours early, she observed Van Hawk there, without the children, taking photos to claim that she hadn’t shown up. Then the victim said Van Hawk told her he could keep the children until Labor Day.

Text message evidence was presented, with Voelz asking if the texts were “civil” as required by the protective order. One text allegedly from Van Hawk read, “You’re a special kind of evil, I hope you’re proud of yourself,” while others mentioned her “evil reign.” Van Hawk objected to admitting this evidence on the basis of chain of possession and authentication of the texts, but Reed overruled the objections.

The jurors were presented with printed copies of the text, which were not on display to the courtroom. This was due to the courtroom screens being used for voice-to-text displays to accommodate Van Hawk’s hearing impairment.

The trial is set to resume at 8:30 a.m. Wednesday, Oct. 9, continuing with the testimony of the victim.