Editor’s Note: This story contains court testimonies and language regarding allegations of sexual assault and rape. If you or someone you may know has experienced an assault or rape and would like help, please call the National Sexual Assault Hotline at (800) 656-4673 or contact SASO Durango, the Sexual Assault Services Organization offers a 24-hour, confidential support line at 970-247-5400.
The focus Friday in Durango’s courtroom centered on one woman’s account of sexual abuse.
The defense team for Lyndreth Wall spent hours comparing the original details she gave the FBI with her narrative on the witness stand. Prosecutors countered by playing the original 52-minute FBI interview for the jury.
Together, the exchanges highlight a major theme in the federal sex-abuse trial against Wall: When the evidence relies heavily on firsthand accounts, whose does the jury ultimately believe?
“You told the prosecutors and Agent (Scott) Crowley last Friday — seven days ago — that he tried to touch your pelvic area with a feather,” Summer Woods asked during the woman’s cross-examination.
She pressed on: “I am going to harp on this, because it is a significant detail. Here, Oct. 24 — seven days ago — you said he tried, and now your testimony in front of this jury is he did. And it’s just a linguistic slip?”
“Yes,” the woman replied.
“And when you testified with Mr. Player, he didn’t remind you that you said tried?” Woods asked. “You know, they have to show the jury that Mr. Wall intentionally touched an intimate part of you?”
During the back-and-forth, the defense focused on inconsistencies between the woman’s Thursday testimony and her March 2025 FBI interview.
She is one of an expected six women testifying about sexual abuse as the prosecution builds its case against Wall. Prosecutors allege he exploited his standing as a medicine man and leader in the tight-knit Towaoc community to lead women into non-consensual sexual acts under a guise of healing.
The defense argues each of the witnesses fabricated the allegations for multiple purposes: consensual affairs turned “messy,” a person later came forward to tell “an honorable lie,” or the allegations were politically motivated to drive the former leader off the tribal council.
Day 5 concluded the first week of Wall’s trial in U.S. District Court, where he faces 20 felonies. The trial is expected to continue into next week or beyond.
Court began at 8:30 a.m. Friday with Woods resuming the cross-examination of the prosecution’s fourth witness. The woman testified that in 2016 she arrived at Wall’s residence to receive a blessing just after dusk.
Based on a family referral, she scheduled the appointment with Wall, a man she said she didn’t know, because the medicine man she usually saw was unavailable.
Inside the trailer, she said he began speaking in Ute and using a feather, paint, crystals and a medicine bag. She said he moved the feather down her body, then touched her breast after she refused to remove her clothing.
Woods questioned the woman about whether her account changed over time, accusing her of tailoring the courtroom version to fit the prosecution’s. Woods asked if prosecutors explained what elements of sexual contact they needed to prove, implying that the woman’s statements changed to align with those.
Woods played excerpts of the original FBI interview, at times probing the witness on points the defense said had evolved, including who she recalled being in the trailer.
“Did Agent Crowley ask you ‘Had he been there the whole time?” Woods asked.
“I would have to say ‘no,’ because it was just so dim,” the witness replied.
“If we could please play it again … I am going to have you listen again,” Woods stated.
After the clip played, Woods asked the witness: “Agent Crowley said, ‘Had he been there the whole time?’ Do you need it played again?”
Woods said after it played once more: “‘When we first got there, ‘No, he wasn’t there... Is that your response?”
Assistant U.S. Attorney Josh Player began redirect examination in the early afternoon, just after the lunch recess. He moved to admit the full audio into evidence and play it for the jury. The defense did not object after parties conferenced privately with the judge.
So far in the trial, jurors were selected from a panel of more than 70 people from around Southwest Colorado. Questioning of potential jurors focused on their assumptions about sexual assault accusations, some conversations being held within the backdrop of today’s social climate.
Questions were raised like: “(Do) you have a tendency to believe what a woman would say?” (Defense Attorney Summer Woods), “Would you expect a victim of sexual assault to explain the assault the same way every time?” (Assistant U.S. Attorney Josh Player) and finally, instructions from the court asked jurors to presume innocence and weigh counts separately.
Later in the week, prosecutors presented testimonies from four different women, some of whom grew emotional while testifying.
During cross-examinations, the defense probed memory lapses, saying stories shifted from initial statements given to police.
The trial will pick up Monday when jurors hear the rest of Friday’s audio clip. Next week, the prosecution will continue presenting its case, followed by the defense.
Prosecutors are expected to present testimony from experts in the behavior of sexual assault victims, two more women, and the special agent who investigated the case.
