Chris Simcox should not be questioning his accusers

Today, a Maricopa County Superior Court judge will hold a hearing on whether to allow an accused child molester to personally grill the little children who say he touched them inappropriately.

No, really.

In fact, Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Jose Padilla has previously ruled that Chris Simcox has every right to cross examine 7- and 8-year-old girls about the times they have told police that he touched them and put his (allegedly) nasty fingers where they didn't belong.

Even the Arizona Court of Appeals has condoned it, ruling that there was no evidence that being cross examined by the big man who is accused of putting his hands onto or even under your panties would be at all traumatizing to little children.

"Because the state did not present such evidence—and in fact eschewed the opportunity to present evidence when invited—the trial court had no basis to restrict Simcox from cross-examining the child witnesses," the appellate court said.

How about the rule of common sense?

Or common decency?

Simcox, a leader in the now-defunct minuteman movement, was arrested in 2013 after a five-year-old told police that the father of her friend rubbed her genitals over her clothing while in the kitchen of his Scottsdale home. She said he also showed her pornographic movies, which gave her nightmares.

A second girl, then 6, said that Simcox repeatedly touched her when she was in the shower. A third, also 6, said Simcox asked to see her underwear and gave her candy for showing him her private parts.

Simcox, who is charged with two counts of child molestation, three counts of sexual conduct with a minor and one count of furnishing obscene or harmful items to minors, is representing himself.

So naturally, he wants to question the little girls.

"Trial's not necessarily about who's telling the truth, it's about who's lying," he told The Republic's Megan Cassidy. "Someone in that courtroom is going to be lying, And as to present your best defense, it's imperative that you have ability to directly cross examine, if necessary, your alleged victims."

I have no doubt that he'll be able to grind them right into the ground.

Shockingly, the courts are thus far going along with that. Thus far.

Padilla's granted a new hearing today, to give prosecutors a chance to explain why it would be a bad idea for an accused child molester to directly question the babies who put him in jail.

If Simcox wants to represent himself, fine. He has every right.

But he can face his accusers from across the room rather than in their baby faces. A go-between should be used to question the little girls.

They have rights, too, and at the ripe old ages of 7 and 8, they deserve the court's protection.