By SYDNEY KENT
In a two-day trial this week, Zachary Archbold, 30, Bluffton, was unanimously found guilty of sexual misconduct with a minor, a Level 4 felony that carries up to 12 years in prison.
The jury of eight women and four men deliberated for less than an hour Wednesday afternoon. Archbold closed his eyes firmly as the final jury member announced the verdict.
At this time, the jury was notified they would be making a second choice determining Archbold as a habitual sexual offender. Archbold had been previously convicted of the same crime in 2012. Information regarding Archbold’s previous convictions had not been disclosed during the trial under Indiana law. The jury was unanimous — guilty.
As a third vote, and final surprise, the jury was asked to find Archbold guilty of being a habitual offender. Archbold has prior convictions for resisting law enforcement causing bodily injury, a Level 6 felony, two separate cases of failure to register as a sexual offender, each a Level 5 felony, and intimidation and battery, both Class D felonies. The jury’s vote again was again unanimous — guilty.
Archbold faces up to a combined 42 years in prison under the habitual offender, sexual habitual offender, and sexual misconduct charges. A date has not yet been scheduled for sentencing.
The state’s case was handled by Wells County Deputy Prosecutor Timothy Sipe. Archbold hired lawyer James Hansen for his defense.
According to the probable cause affidavit, the victim, 15 -years-old at the time, reported the assault to a trusted member of the staff at Parkview Behavioral Health in August of 2021. The girl reported Archbold had sexual intercourse with her while she was under the influence of marijuana in her home. She allegedly advised the two would smoke together with some of her teen friends. He was 29-years-old at the time.
According to court documents, an additional minor accused Archbold of the same crime in March, however, charges were dropped when the victim moved states.
The Department of Child Services and Bluffton Police Department Detective Cliff Thomas approached Archbold at his work to investigate the accusations. When Archbold was informed a rape allegation had been made against him, he replied that he “never forced himself on anyone.”
Thomas reportedly asked Archbold about several minors and if he had sexual intercourse with them, which Archbold denied and stated he did not know the victim’s name. However, toward the end of the conversation, Archbold said they had intercourse “just that one time.”
During the trial, Hansen argued that Archbold had misunderstood who Thomas was referring to in his question. Archbold detailed a previous relationship he had with a 17-year-old minor during his testimony. He also stated he did not know the victim’s name until he was “harassed at work” and assumed she was 17-years-old. The age of consent in Indiana is 16 years old.
To this, Sipe played the audio file of the interview for the jury. During a portion of the interview, Thomas said the victim’s name for the first time and Archbold immediately responded with her nickname, unintentionally incriminating himself by proving he knew who was being referenced during his admission before charges were formally filed.
“(The detective) said the victim’s name,” Sipe argued. “You then said the victim’s nickname. Why did you believe this was the same person if you claimed not to know her name?”
Archbold stated he knew what Sipe was saying, however, he said he could not answer the question. Sipe also questioned why Archbold was hanging out with teenagers at 29-years-old, to which Archbold replied his “love affair with marijuana” was the reason.
The state called multiple family case managers from the Department of Child Services, Thomas, and Detective Mari Heckel with the Bluffton Police Department, to testify about the initial interview with Archbold. Two men who were inmates with Archbold after he was initially arrested also testified.
Carlos Slater, an inmate with pending charges in the Wells Circuit Court, testified to nearly every accusation, claiming Archbold admitted to the charges and sought his advice during their shared incarceration. Hansen emphasized that nearly every one of Slater’s claims was found in the probable cause affidavit. This, as well as Slater’s potential motives, drew Hansen’s suspicions of the testimony.
“Was it true you were in the belief that Zachary Archbold snitched on you?” Hansen asked. “He never snitched on me but he told his attorney,” the man responded.
In a last-minute decision, the state called Chief Deputy Prosecutor Jeffrey Stineburg to the stand. Stineburg, the prosecutor assigned to Slater’s case, testified that he has not received any additional benefits for his testimony against Archbold.
“Is it possible sometimes people are motivated to cooperate in hopes they would receive a benefit?” Hansen asked Stineburg before commencing questioning. Stineburg confirmed.
The second former inmate to testify, James McElroy, said that Archbold told him that Archbold had led the victim to believe he was only 19 years old — the victim also testified to this during her time on the stand.
During her testimony, Sipe asked the victim to “set the scene” for the jury and recount the event where she and Archbold engaged in sexual intercourse. The incident began with the pair smoking a strain of marijuana called Pineapple Express. The victim stated she felt “weird” after smoking it, and though she had smoked it before, she had never felt the way that she did that evening. She broke down in tears and asked for a moment alone to collect herself. The judge issued a brief recess. After she returned, she detailed the sexual encounter with Archbold. She stated she told Archbold she did not want to participate, however, “one thing led to another” and sexual intercourse occurred.
Hansen recalled the victim to the stand on the second day of the trial. He asked her about an incident where Archbold assaulted another individual at the victim’s request. The victim confirmed the incident. Hansen then asked the victim if she ever asked Archbold to “get rid of” her grandparents.
“The last time you had an encounter with Zachary Archbold,” Hansen chose his words carefully. “Did you or did you not ask for his assistance again in respect to your grandparents?”
“I did not ask him directly,” The victim replied. “I didn’t want him to do anything to my grandparents.”
Archbold testified that the victim made him uncomfortable asking her to “get rid of” her grandparents and offered to bribe him with opiates in the house.
Hansen asked him how was the request made. Archbold responded that the victim’s friend suggested it, and the victim brought the conversation to what she would offer Archbold and asked how she could avoid trouble with law enforcement.
“What did you understand that to mean?” Hansen prompted.
“To kill them,” Archbold answered. “I felt very uncomfortable and left shortly after. That was the last time I was there.”
Sipe asked the victim if this was true during his cross-examination on the second day of the trial. She denied the allegations.
Also during the trial, a juror realized he knew one of the minors in the case, as he had served as her youth pastor several years prior, and reported it to Judge Kenton Kiracofe. Kiracofe questioned if he had any knowledge of the case or Archbold. He also asked if it would affect his ability to remain impartial. The juror denied both questions and the trial continued.
Jury selection for the trial began at 8:30 a.m. and the trial began later the same afternoon shortly after 1 p.m. Initially scheduled through Thursday, the trial came to an end after 5 p.m. on Wednesday. The News-Banner will continue to follow Archbold’s case and sentencing.
sydney@news-banner.com
