EXCLUSIVE: Hanover doctor acquitted of sexual assault hopes ‘to get back with life’

This is an archived article and the information in the article may be outdated. Please look at the time stamp on the story to see when it was last updated.

HANOVER COUNTY, Va. -- The trial for a family physician accused of improperly touching a woman at a party began Monday and concluded Tuesday.

A jury, who deliberated just 80 minutes, found Dr. Brent Logie not guilty of  the two sex crime charges he faced. He was charged with two counts of object sexual penetration by force and faced five to years to life.

A former patient accused Dr. Logie of putting his hands down the front of the 23-year-old woman’s pants during a Christmas party at his home in 2013.

No DNA evidence, that the prosecutor said they originally had, was presented during the trial.

In court Tuesday, Dr. Brent Logie took the stand and explained in detail what he remembered about the accuser last December, when she showed up to his holiday party.

The prosecutor played for the jury a recorded phone call the alleged victim and a detective made to Dr. Logie where she confronted him.

Logie told the jury when he realized he was speaking to a patient with a history of anxiety, depression, emotional problems--even hallucinations -- and that he knew he had to handle the conversation in a sensitive way. He testified he gave the accuser neutral answers and did not admit to the assault or flat out tell her she was wrong.

In the recording the jury heard the doctor saying “I don’t recall doing that but if it did happen the way you say I totally apologize. Where was everybody else? I’m mortified. Whether I had too much alcohol it’s inexcusable.”

The defense contended her story was untrue and grilled her about why she didn’t scream, push the doctor, or make a scene at the party. The alleged victim was also questioned about whether she might have had more than the three to four glasses of wine she testified about having.

He says she drank close to eight glasses of wine the night she accused him of putting his hands down her pants twice and touching her private area.

The defense team called a nurse to the stand to testify, who explained that a forensic exam did not find the accuser’s private area had an indication of an assault.

Logie, speaking exclusively with CBS 6 Tuesday night, said hopes to rebuild his character and continue his practice, and learn to trust.

"When your character and honor are totally destroyed like that and people in the community hear you are accused of something horrible, there’s still going to be people out there thinking bad about me," he said. "I’m still going to see my patients."

"Frankly I’m scared to go—this is something that supposedly happened in a room with lots of people in it and I’m supposed to now go into patient rooms and interact with my patients one on one where anybody would say anything," Logie added.  "We saw that with this case."

"I’m just going to try to trust in people again and get back with my life,” he said.



  • Rosa Johnson

    if the alcohol and the medicine made her hallucinate that a man put his hands on her twice that’s crazy. maybe she saw the money he and his wife made and decided to get some of it. or maybe, it really did happen. hmm.

    • Janet Ticklebottom

      I REALLY HOPE THEY get back together, go to disney world, rent a boat, and eat some mash potatoes….. that would be a romantic after story : )

  • bob

    she wants money. there will be civil lawsuits.
    and no, it didn’t happen. she lied and the cops lied. and there was no DNA.

  • Ron Peterson

    The jury found him not guilty. The jury looked at the evidence presented and made a decision. It’s really sad how so many people get accused falesly and many even get convicted. It’s very unfair to get crucified in the media before due proccess. Virginia seems to have a habit of convicting innocent people, especilly those who do not have the means to hire an attorney and are left with a court appointed representative. Police should thoroughly investigate, get evidence if it exist. But if it does not exist, DO NOT convict an innocence person based on , “Oh I think he did it” with nothing that supports the conviction. DNA has proved that a many innocent person has been put to death for crimes they DID NOT commit. False accusations ruins lives not only for the accused but for the accused family as well. If a person is GUILTY by all means let them receive due penalty, but don’t destroy a persons life if the evidence does NOT support the claim.

  • bob

    I would encourage everyone to start attending trials. Something has changed in our legal system. You used to be able to trust cops the way you trust firefighters, teachers, doctors. But no more. You need to see a cop on the witness stand proudly stating that he lies to suspects about “having DNA evidence” in order to coerce some form of self-incrimination or false confession. It didn’t used to be this way,and you need to see it to believe it, because on TV they are still portrayed as honest and heroic. In reality the minute someone accuses you of a crime the cops are out to get you, there is no innocent until proven guilty, and they will use any legal means available to nail you. (or if there is no accuser, the minute they decide that they might be able to pin a charge on you, they’re out for blood) . It is not illegal for them to lie, therefore they do it. A lot. They tell you they have your DNA and you will go to prison for life if you don’t “come clean” with them right now about something that you didn’t do. So you say “well, I don’t remember doing that, but if you have my DNA, that doesn’t make any sense”. Then they try to get you to speculate “how could your DNA have ended up here” or “if you had killed her how would you have done it”. . If that doesn’t work they say “I know you’re a really good person and I can see how a little thing like this could happen to anyone, so it’s no big deal, just confess now thanks”

    It’s not about the truth anymore. It is about having a high caseload at the courthouse (generates increased funding), and having cases prosecutors can win (helps them stay in office).

    The initial news items on this case from this channel also stated that the prosecutors had DNA evidence. In the trial it emerged that there was no physical evidence of any kind, only a very bizarre accusation. I think this channel owes the defendant an apology. When the government/cops are allowed to lie shamelessly to a suspect to manipulate them into making incriminating statements (it’s legal for me to lie and therefore OK! and I’m not lying at this moment while I’m testifying, trust me! the cop said at trial) and the media reports whatever the government/cops tell them to report, well, the world is getting to be rather dangerous for us all.

    so go to the trials. read about a case in the paper, write down the defendants name, and then look on the courthouse website to find the trial date. see for yourselves. this is why false confessions abound, and partly why the US incarcerates more people per capita than any other country in the world (rwanda and russia are distant second and third).

    educate yourselves. When a friend is accused of something, don’t assume that if the cops/media (same thing pretty much) say “there’s DNA!!!” it is true. Go to their trial. Yes it will cost you one or two vacation days. It’s worth it.

  • J. Wilson

    Bob’s right. This case was based on no evidence and as the defense counsel stated was a “she said, they said” trial. No one (and I mean no one) corroborated her testimony. No forensic evidence; no one witnessed anything; no logic to the prosecution’s case or presentation. The officer was pursuing “the truth” with fictitious information under the guise of watching the accused individual’s reaction. So beware: even though there is no evidence to support an accusation it is legal in Virginia for an officer to present misinformation as fact; i.e. No DNA and tell the accused you have been on the case for days when in actuality it’s been hours. I guess an officer will continue to interrogate with more and more lies until they get the answer they want. Truly scary stuff. The only redeemable event of this case was watching the prosecuting attorney emasculated by the defense attorney.

  • Major Eppiglotus

    I knew she was lying. Women make false allegations all the time and destroy men’s lives and they sleep well at night.

  • Epiglotus MccFadden

    Looks like she’ll have to go after him in civil court to get some of that doctor money. Women lie all the time to extort money out of men, especially in divorce court.

    • athynz

      Timmay your wife left you for another man because you were not up to the task. As you’ve said to others get over it.

      Just because this girl lied does not mean all women are liars out for your money.

      • Epiglotus MccFadden

        Pam I am sure you and athynz are both obese, hairy legged man-haters who live with 40 cats. You know as well as I do that women lie all the time

      • Morning Dew

        Timmy, I ‘m sure you are a fat slob with a belly that hangs way over his belt, unshaven and bald. You know as well as I do that men let themselves go when they have a woman to abuse.

      • athynz

        Timmay you’ve accused me of being a man hating lesbian before – but it’s just my feminine side that is a lesbian. Maybe if you had put as much effort into your marriage as you do hating women then maybe you’d still be with your ex wife instead of paying alimony. It seems like she’s much better off without you but that’s just based on what I see you post here.

  • athynz

    I have to wonder if the people who accused him and already found him guilty – Ron Melancon and Lisa I’m looking at you – will own up to their mistakes.

    There is a much bigger issue here – one where the police are allowed or even encouraged to lie to extract a confession for a crime that did not happen. Bob very excellently addressed this already but there is a huge need for change not only at that level but in the court of public opinion. There were at least 2 people that raked this man over the coals for something he did not do – so much for the presumption that one is innocent until proven guilty right?

    • John H.

      I read Ron Melancon’s comment yesterday. Ron appears to read the headline of an article, then skips down to the comment section to make a provocative, tough sounding comment. He never relates his comments to any details in the story. He bases everything off his personal experiences and bias. Ron doesn’t know how to analyze and evaluate situations. It’s sad because his family needs him.

      • athynz

        I did not – my apologies! I saw Ron’s idiotic snap judgment comment then your comment and made a snap judgment of my own. Sorry about that.

  • AP

    If it had been the other way around with the man making the accusation against the woman, it wouldn’t have even gone to trial in this sexist legal system

  • John H.

    Dr. Logie is right that SOME people will always feel a particular way about him because he was charged. There are people that get an emotional high to create “bad guys” and have to keep vendettas against people. I feel sorry for them because they can’t live without imagining ways to bring people down. It’s their lost to box themselves into that way of thinking.

  • J. Wilson

    So what have we learned from this case?
    1. Detectives WILL lie about evidence, threaten, intimidate, and record a directly coached conversation between the alleged victim and the accused; twist words and present dissimilar fictitious scenarios – any potential inconsistencies will be regarded as altered testimony.They WILL NOT press the alleged victim – all face value facts.
    2. A lawyer WILL take a case with: no forensic evidence; no witness even remotely corroborating the victim’s testimony; any coerced defendant’s testimony (based upon falsified evidence) and state these are evasive answers; qualify the expertise of a witness then belittle the testimony. He WILL NOT have any regard for the defendant’s: family; lost wages or costs incurred with defense; emotional stressors; current or future career; jeopardy concerning regulatory and licensing boards; defamed character.
    3. A lawyer WILL take a case involving a young women allegedly assaulted by a physician as far as possible through the judicial system for sheer theater. Nothing makes a lawyer happier than ruining a medical career – no better trophy for his legal mantle. He WILL NOT have any regard for the cost to the Commonwealth or the taxpayer.
    4. Maybe it’s time to make counsel the financial victim for frivolous cases.

    • Bob

      Re ruining doctors for sport– i’m betting the prosecutors/cops will produce no evidence to support their initial allegation of elevated blood alcohol level in the case of Dr. Mike Carlson (charged with involuntary manslaughter court date is 12/9)
      At least in that case there was an actual victim. But there was also sensationalism and probably lies. It cant just be a tragic accident and leave it at that can it.

  • bob

    Lol I do believe THEY are trying to bury the internet articles on this innocent man’s acquittal via google search manipulation/optimization. For the past two days the search “Brent Logie” turns up only the initial articles babbling about nonexistent DNA evidence. How cheap, and how unsurprising given what we saw at trial.

Comments are closed.