GARNER, IOWA – A Mason City man has been sent to prison after a guilty verdict on charges of child sex abuse in Hancock county, and his fiancé is battling to prove his innocence, saying the case is the result of a nasty divorce and “no actual evidence was presented”.
A convicted felon, 39-year-old Charles Pennington of Mason City, was been found guilty by a jury of two counts of C felony third-degree sexual abuse of a child and aggravated misdemeanor indecent contact with a child back in October of 2024. These crimes were committed in Hancock county, Iowa, authorities say.
Pennington (pictured at top) was sentenced on January 17, 2025, to consecutive prison sentences of up to 10 years, 10 years and 2 years, respectively, for the above crimes, and must pay $4,422.25 to Iowa courts. He has filed for appeal, records show.
Pennington was guilty in Hancock county in 2018 of felony child endangerment and violating probation in a theft case and sent to prison, but released not long after. According to documents, Pennington’s relationship with his wife deteriorated further following his release from prison. In 2022, a petition for relief from domestic abuse was filed against him in Cerro Gordo county, and a few months later, divorce proceedings were filed. Later in 2023, allegations of child sex crimes against him were brought to authorities in Hancock county, leading to the three charges in this case.
According to Mason City resident Sarah Mehmen, the fiancé of Charles Pennington, the child sex crimes case against him are all a product of his former marriage, with no evidence. She sent the following statement to NIT for publication with this story:
Thank you so much. The defendant was Charles Pennington the charges were 2 counts of 3rd degree sex abuse and indecent contact with a child. The offenses allegedly occurred between 2017-2019. And were reported in early 2023. The case#is FECR013660. The trial took place in Hancock county. Charles went in for a voluntary interview with DCI and spoke to agent Ryan Herman regarding the situation. Charles’ side of the story is none of this ever happened. He had no inappropriate contact with the alleged victim. This incident was reported shortly after divorce proceedings began between Charles and the victim’s mother. Charles did mention this to the agent and also said the divorce was very tumultuous and that his ex wife has threatened to report him for false allegations before. These incidents have always happened during a period of separation. I have attached a copy of his statement to the agent and this was not addressed at his trial. It was also reported the victim and her sister previously reported false allegations against the biological father, this was barely addressed, and when it was asked about in court both the chief of police in Garner and the DCI agent testified that they didn’t look into these allegations as part of their investigation.
This was the first trial I’ve ever attended so I wasn’t aware that jury selection would take place with Charles in the same room. There were people in there that were already whispering he was guilty even before anything took place. One of the questions the prosecuting attorney asked was what kind of evidence would the jury need to convict.
During the trial itself. No actual evidence was presented. There was no physical evidence, no DNA, no photos, no outcry witness, just testimony from the victim who even though showed emotion, it didn’t seem genuine. The officers that testified had mentioned they have had previous history with the family in the past even prior to Charles being involved with the family.
One thing I did notice from the defense side is that his attorney was banking on the fact they had no evidence besides testimony and didn’t really do much to cross examine.
Charles was also told that DCI didn’t do an actual investigation into anything he reported to the agent. When agent Herman was asked about the interview with Charles he simply said he talked a lot about his ex wife but didn’t elaborate when in the actual statement I attached what was said was actually relevant. The expert witness didn’t actually do the interview with the victim merely reported on grooming behavior. I would also like to point out there are no specific dates reported for the incidents. However, he had regained custody of his 3 biological children and an additional child in 2017-2018, he was also incarcerated on a different charge from 11/1/2018-11/4/2019 not to mention for a few days on and off through out 2017 as well. The jury I believe was aware of his incarceration because the victim mentioned visiting him in jail but nothing further was discussed on that. I realize that he does have a record but all were non violent offenses except 1 and his time was served on that. Charles repeatedly said he was afraid of his ex wife because she threatened him multiple times that she would make him sorry if he ever left her and would try and ruin his life.
The jury came back in under 2 hours with the verdict and at the sentencing hearing the motion for the arrest of judgement and new trial wasn’t considered at all. Up on leaving the courtroom the victim smiled at him as he was being taken back.
I know this is a lot and I apologize but to summarize everything. Charles was arrested, tried, and convicted, based on nothing but testimony only. At the conclusion of the trial the message I got from it is that if you’re pissed at your stepdad all you need to do is cry rape because an accusation is all you need.
If you want to know how I know this, I am Charles Pennington’s fiancé, I’ve known him since high school, I’ve been through this with him since he told me about the situation last year and I also have known his ex wife for a long time as well and she has a reputation for being conniving and scheming and playing the victim. So this is something that she is definitely capable of. I have attached a copy of the interviews with the DCI agent. I have plenty of other documentation of the case from the Iowa courts website as well if you need anything else.
I would like to add that throughout this entire process Charles has not changed his story at all and maintained his innocence. Also his case is pending an appeal right now.