Seeking dismissal of child molestation charge, Aaron Thomas' lawyers argue fat tests not criminal

SOUTH KINGSTOWN – A defense lawyer for former North Kingstown coach Aaron Thomas on Monday called the child molestation charges against his client nothing more than “rank speculation,” which is why he said prosecutors initially didn’t pursue them for lack of probable cause.

Speaking at a court hearing on Thomas’s motion to dismiss two sexual charges, lawyer John E. MacDonald said Thomas performed “fat tests” on student athletes for decades, not for his own sexual gratification, but for athletes' individual improvement performances.

State prosecutors charged Thomas in 2022 with one count of second-degree child molestation and one count of sexual assault after controversy erupted over his decades-long practice of having male student-athletes strip, sometimes naked, for body-composition testing.

Lawyer: Thomas's judgment was questionable, but not criminal

MacDonald said prosecutors have represented the tests – which he emphasized also included body measurements and flexibility evaluations − as “nothing more than a ruse to sexually assault students. Nothing could be further from the truth.”

But MacDonald conceded that Thomas lied to North Kingstown police when he told investigators that he never tested the athletes who were naked and alone with him in confined quarters.

MacDonald said Thomas’s “less than truthful statement,” was more an attempt to “keep his job in the face of bad optics” as opposed to something felonious.

MacDonald said of the 600 athletes who were tested by the former high school basketball coach, the state’s entire case hinges on one former student alleging Thomas was “breathing heavily” as the coach touched his upper thighs near his genitals and another incident of Thomas allegedly being visibly aroused after touching around a naked student's exposed genitals as the student sat on the floor with his legs spread.

And that second incident, MacDonald argued, was outside the statute of limitations for when a charge could be brought.

Speaking before Superior Court Judge Melanie Wilk Thunberg, MacDonald said that some of Thomas’s judgments were “clearly questionable. But criminal? It’s just not there.”

Prosecutor: Case rests on Thomas's intent with fat tests

State prosecutor Timothy G. Healy told the judge that much of the case comes down to “what was the defendant’s intent.” And while there is no way to read his mind, Healy said there was ample inference of criminal wrongdoing.

Healy said Thomas conducted his naked fat testing for decades without ever divulging to students’ parents, faculty or school administrators that underage students were naked and alone with him.

Not only did Thomas lie to the police about performing naked testing, said Healy, but he also lied about the common refrain he used with students prior to conducting the test: were they “shy or not shy?”

Some 30 former students told police that if they answered not shy, the expectation was they would get naked. But Healy said Thomas told police the question pertained to them taking off only their undershirts.

“What’s his reason for lying?” asked Healy. “He’s trying to mask his intentions.”

Healy said the two complainants in the case also describe Thomas inexplicably performing a so-called hernia test and, repeatedly on one of them, "a puberty test" where he touched around their genitals.

More: As former students sue over naked 'fat tests' at the hands of Aaron Thomas, judge tapped to preside

At least one medical expert has said there is “no medical reason for doing such a [puberty] test,” Healy said.

And Healy said Thomas continued to perform the tests after 2018 after one student complained and the high school purchased a body composition testing machine to eliminate any further manual testing.

Noting how Thomas’s own lawyer said the former coach was not a medical professional, Healy asked: “If he doesn’t hold himself out as a medical professional, why is he doing this hernia test, fat tests, puberty tests? Why is he touching these young men?”

“When the court looks at all the circumstances as a whole, the defendant’s intentions become clear,” said Healy.

More: As former students sue over naked 'fat tests' at the hands of Aaron Thomas, judge tapped to preside

Fallout from the Aaron Thomas scandal

Thomas resigned in 2021 as he was about to be fired by the North Kingstown School Committee.

The scandal led to the departure of several school department officials, two independent town investigations that found Thomas had acted inappropriately, and a civil rights investigation by the U.S. Attorney’s office.

In announcing the completion of that investigation in January U.S. Attorney U.S. Attorney Zachary Cunha said: “Our investigation revealed that the district’s deficient responses to Thomas’s conduct were endemic of a broader failure to ensure that its schools implement the district’s harassment and reporting policies and procedures with fidelity.”

And particularly with the athletic department, Cunha said “the district failed to implement sufficient policies, procedures, training, and oversight to protect students, particularly student-athletes, from sex-based harassment by faculty and coaches.” 

The town has since addressed those shortcomings, Cunha said.

Judge Wilk Thunberg said she would consider the arguments she heard and make a decision on the motion to dismiss next month.

Contact Tom Mooney at: tmooney@providencejournal.com

This article originally appeared on The Providence Journal: Former NK coach Aaron Thomas in court to argue against child molestation charge