Woodstock man denied new trial in child sexual assault case; judge sets sentencing for Friday

A McHenry County judge last week denied a motion for what would have led to a third trial for a Woodstock man convicted twice of sexually assaulting a child he knew.

Nathan H. Rigg, 36, twice this year was found guilty of two counts of predatory criminal sexual assault, a Class X felony, that could send him to prison for up to 60 years when sentenced Friday.

Prosecutors alleged that Rigg sexually assaulted a child younger than 13 who he knew between September and December 2019.

Rigg was first convicted in February after a bench trial before Judge Michael Coppedge. In May, Coppedge overturned this conviction after a hearing in which Rigg’s new attorney, Patrick M. Campanelli, argued errors were made by Rigg’s previous attorney.

Rigg then had his case argued before a jury in September and again was found guilty.

Last week, Rigg, who is in custody at the McHenry County Jail, presented pro se a 28-point motion in what is called a Krankel hearing. The hearing was set to argue that he again had ineffective assistance of counsel.

He argued that Campanelli, who sat beside him at the defense table during the hearing and who was his defense attorney for the jury trial, erred several times and provided ineffective counsel, violating his rights to a fair trial.

Among the various issues Rigg argued, he said Campanelli erred by not initially filing a motion for dismissal due to speedy trial violations and by not objecting to statements made by prosecutors that he deemed as “prosecutorial misconduct.”

He also said his attorney erred in not calling on another man, who at one point was considered a suspect in the case, to testify.

Rigg said Campanelli erred in not objecting to testimony provided by an “expert witness,” who Rigg did not think was qualified to be considered an expert.

Coppedge asked Campanelli why he did not object to the witness, and Campanelli said it was his belief that the witness “had sufficient background to offer an expert opinion.”

Rigg also raised concerns with Campanelli not asking particular questions when cross-examining the child, who testified for the state during the trial. He said Campanelli should have questioned the child about allegedly lying during an interview at a child advocacy center.

When the judge questioned Campanelli on this point, the attorney said it was a “strategic decision.”

Coppedge questioned Campanelli on each concern Rigg raised in his motion. Many of the responses the attorney provided were that his decisions were based on his experienced career and knowledge retained in trying such cases and trial strategy.

Rigg also said the indictment the jury considered in its verdict included months that he was not with the child. The indictment, he said, presented such a “wide range of dates” it “prejudiced me in preparing a defense.” With such a wide range, he was not able to provide an alibi for the time of the alleged assaults.

One point Campanelli said he did err was in clarifying jury instructions.

After about three hours, Coppedge ruled that Rigg was not deprived of effective legal counsel, denied his motion for a new trial and set a sentencing date.

“A defendant is not entitled to a perfect representation. That is impossible,” Coppedge said. “A defendant is entitled to an effective representation.”

The judge said that Rigg would have to prove his case was “neglected” in order to prove he received ineffective representation of legal counsel.

“If [the] defense did not convince a jury in closings, if a jury doesn’t rule in [a] defendant’s way, that doesn’t mean the defendant had ineffective counsel,” Coppedge said. “If that were the case, everyone found guilty would get a new trial.”