On the morning of September 29, 1995, in Yakima, Washington, a 24-year-old woman, identified as K.S., was in her living room feeding her 1-month-old infant son when she heard an unfamiliar noise in the hallway. The woman saw a man approaching her wearing a white nylon-stocking mask. She said that at first she thought the man was her brother-in-law based on his stature, but discarded that because the man appeared to be taller than her brother-in-law.
K.S. tried to flee with her baby, but the man grabbed her from behind and tackled her. The baby fell face first onto the floor. The man demanded that K.S. not look at him, but allowed her to pick up the baby and put him in his crib. He then forced K.S. into the basement where he handcuffed her hands behind her back, and put a black masquerade-style mask over her face. Adhesive tape had been placed over the mask’s eyeholes.
He then pushed her to the floor and raped her. Afterward, the man dragged K.S. up the stairs and took her into the infant’s bedroom, where the baby had been screaming throughout the attack. The attacker attached K.S. to the crib using a coat hanger and the belt loops in her pants. The man rifled K.S.’s purse and complained when there was only $2. He then fled.
K.S. freed herself and called the police. She said the man was wearing black jeans with a dull red-and-blue checkered flannel jacket and white gloves. Despite the stocking covering his face, K.S. said the man was either Caucasian or light-skinned Hispanic, stocky, with dark hair or dark blond hair. She described the man as about 6 feet tall or “half a head” taller than her husband. He “was a giant to me,” she told police.
In October 1995, a detective reported that a female neighbor of the victim had “flushed” a Peeping Tom from her back yard in April, five months before the rape. The neighbor said she and a female friend regularly walked in the neighborhood in the mornings, and that they had seen a small white car cruising the neighborhood on several occasions. One of the women came to the police station and helped a police artist create a composite sketch of the man driving the car.
In March 1996, the police were investigating incidents of lewd behavior and indecent exposure in the neighborhood. One of the victims wrote down the license plate number of the car driven by a man who had exposed himself. The license plate was registered to 22-year-old Ted Bradford.
On March 11, 1996, the police questioned Bradford at his place of employment and then took him to the police station. He admitted to having exposed himself but denied committing the rape. Bradford then was released.
On March 31, 1996, Bradford was arrested on the lewd conduct charges and held in the Yakima County Jail. On April 1, detectives began interrogating Bradford about the rape. An attorney sent by Bradford’s wife was denied access to Bradford because police said Bradford could only speak with him if he requested an attorney.
After nearly 9 hours of interrogation, the police said Bradford confessed to raping K.S.
His confession contained numerous inconsistent details concerning the crime. In addition, K.S. was unable to identify Bradford as her attacker. And although she said her attacker was over 6 feet tall, Bradford was 5 feet 7 inches tall. On April 5, 1996, Bradford was charged with first-degree rape and first-degree burglary.
In June 1996, Bradford went to trial in Yakima County Circuit Court. K.S. described the attack but did not identify Bradford as her attacker.
A neighbor testified that Bradford was the man she had seen cruising the neighborhood in his white Toyota Tercel.
During his interrogation, Bradford had said he was at work on the morning of the attack. The prosecution called his supervisor, who testified that Bradford was off that day.
Bradford’s wife testified for the defense that she had picked Bradford up from work for a scheduled vasectomy. A co-worker also testified that he had teased Bradford about the operation. Despite his supervisor’s testimony, Bradford’s timecard indicated he was at work and he was paid for that day.
Bradford testified and denied that he committed the crime. Asked by his attorney, Christopher Tait, why he confessed, Bradford said, “I am not the type of person who puts up a fight, my wife will tell you that. Facing a situation like that [the interrogation], I would always be the one to give in … After nine hours of repeatedly being told that I was the one that did this, and that they had the proof and the DNA evidence that would convict me on this, I did give in and agree to make the taped statement.”
On June 13, 1996, the jury convicted Bradford of first-degree rape and first-degree burglary. In September 1996, Bradford was sentenced to 10 years in prison.
In December 1996, a judge ruled in favor of K.S. and her husband in a lawsuit they had filed against Bradford the day after he was convicted. The judge assessed $600,000 in damages against Bradford.
In June 1999, the Washington Court of Appeals upheld Bradford’s conviction. The court ruled that Bradford’s confession had not been coerced and that the detectives’ refusal to allow Bradford’s attorney to speak with his client during the interrogation did not violate his constitutional rights.
In 2002, the Innocence Project Northwest (IPNW), based at the University of Washington School of Law, began working on Bradford’s case. On August 26, 2005, Bradford was released on parole and required to register as a sex offender..
In 2006, after IPNW successfully obtained DNA testing on Bradford’s behalf, analysts from the Washington state crime lab tested samples from the adhesive tape used on the mask. The tests returned two profiles. One was consistent with K.S. and the other was an unknown male. Bradford was excluded as the source of DNA on both sides of the tape.
Moreover, another distinct male profile was found on the backside of the victim’s jeans.
On September 14, 2006, Bradford’s convictions were vacated and he was granted a new trial. The prosecution appealed and in 2007, the Washington Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s ruling granted a new trial.
The court said: “Since male DNA was present, and it was not Mr. Bradford’s, the inference is that the unidentified male devised the mask. And, the victim’s testimony that the assailant kept pushing the mask back over her eyes supports an inference that Mr. Bradford was not the perpetrator; otherwise, his DNA would have been present.”
Bradford went to trial a second time in February 2010. The defense presented the DNA results and on February 11, 2011, the jury acquitted him.
In 2017, the previously unidentified DNA profile was matched to the victim’s brother-in-law, the person she had first thought was her attacker.
In 2013, Bradford filed a federal civil rights lawsuit seeking damages for wrongful imprisonment. A private investigator surreptitiously rifled through the garbage of K.S’s brother-in-law, the man K.S. said she first suspected when she saw her attacker. The investigator found some chewed tobacco and it was sent to Bode Cellmark, a DNA laboratory in Lorton, Virginia. In July 2017, Bode reported that the DNA extracted from the chewed tobacco belonged to K.S.’s brother-in-law and that the DNA profile was the same as the unidentified DNA profile from the rape.
Bradford was awarded $608,416 in compensation from the state of Washington. His federal lawsuit was dismissed in 2016. The brother-in-law was not charged with the crime.
– Maurice Possley
Posting Date: 08-29-2011
Last Update Date: 03-30-2026
