O.C. man convicted of molesting 2 boys he tutored in Anaheim, faces sentence of up to 225 years to life

A 53-year-old man was convicted Thursday of repeatedly sexually assaulting two boys he tutored from when they were 8 and 9 years old until they were 13 and 14 in the Anaheim area.

Zeta “Jimmy” Dhanapanth, who acted as his own attorney during his trial, was convicted of a dozen felony counts of lewd or lascivious acts with a minor younger than 14 and a count of possession of child pornography.

Jurors, who began deliberations Wednesday afternoon and reached verdicts before noon Thursday, also found true sentencing enhancements for multiple victims and substantial sexual conduct.

Dhanapanth faces up to 225 years to life in prison. He is scheduled to be sentenced July 18.

Dhanapanth took off his glasses and rubbed his eyes when the first guilty verdict was read aloud in court Thursday. He asked Orange County Superior Court Judge Larry Yellin about his appellate rights before settling on a sentencing date.

Dhanapanth got rid of his court-appointed attorney just as the trial was about to start. He took the stand in his defense and attempted to portray his accusers as liars with what he characterized as inconsistencies with their
various statements to investigators.

Deputy Dist. Atty. Sarah Rahman said in her closing argument, “Learning is supposed to be fun... Math is supposed to be fun... Math is also about consistency and so was the abuse by this defendant.”

She argued that over the course of four years he would sexually assault the boys.

“Even when he was warned not to be alone with [the victims],” he continued to abuse them, Rahman said.

“Even when [one of the victims] tried to speak up and stop the defendant he continued to violate him,” Rahman said.

“Both victims’ stories were very similar, supported by witnesses,” Rahman said. “Their stories are supported by electronic evidence found on his devices. The defendant admitted to possessing child pornography and having a sexual interest in children ... and that he found those boys to be attractive. ... It all adds up to guilt.”

Rahman argued the defendant also admitted in his testimony that he found sex among children “fascinating.”

But she scoffed at his assertion that he “never acted it out,” adding, “That’s absolutely unreasonable.”

The boys were “manipulated” to keep quiet and continue taking the abuse by Dhanapanth’s gifts and praise.
One of the boys”liked getting good grades. ... He liked that someone appeared to love him and give him gifts,” Rahman said.

The prosecutor said the defendant would “test the waters” initially by sitting close to them or touching their legs and would then move on to “putting his hands in their shorts” and to more explicit sex acts, Rahman
said in her opening statement of the trial.

“Both boys needed help in English and math,” Rahman said.

Dhanapanth taught in an after-school program at Anaheim Indepencia Center from 2012 through 2016. He volunteered for the School on Wheels program, which would bring tutors to the homes of needy students, Rahman said.

In one instance, the defendant sodomized one of the victims with a sex toy in his van, Rahman said.

“Over the years [the boy] would ask ‘Is this normal?’” Rahman said, adding he would also ask, “Do adults do this? Does this make me gay?”

Dhanapanth would show the boys pornographic videos as well as “fan fiction” stories from the web about sex between adults and children, Rahman said.

He did so “to convince [the boys] all of this was normal,” Rahman said.

The defendant would give one of the boys Legos, “which [the victim] loved but the family could no longer afford,” Rahman said.

When the defendant first tried to “test the waters” with the other victim, “he didn’t like it,” Rahman said.

The boy was taken out of the program but returned to it when he was 11, the prosecutor said. Dhanapanth would also give that boy gifts in exchange for sexual acts, Rahman said.

At one point, a teacher walked in on the defendant with one of the boys in a “compromising situation,” Rahman said.

“Both looked shocked and scared,” Rahman said.

The teacher told her supervisor, who called sheriff’s deputies, Rahman said.

Initially that boy denied anything happened, Rahman said.

Psychologist Jody Ward testified about Child Abuse Accommodation Syndrome and how underage sex crime victims often do not immediately report abuse, Rahman said.

“When they do, it is years later,” she said.

When investigators searched Dhanapanth’s home they found “Legos in sexual positions,” sex toys, “cookie cutters in sexual positions,” and a variety of electronic devices that contained 16 “very specifically organized
videos of child pornography,” Rahman said.

Dhanapanth would also search for “pedophilia” online, Rahman said.

Dhanapanth said he noticed during jury selection that some jurors “didn’t understand me because of my accent,” so he asked to read his opening statement as it was placed on a projector for jurors to read along with him.

Dhanapanth said the allegations are “not supported by any witness ...or evidence.’’

The defendant, referring to himself in the third person as Jimmy, said he was “very excited” to get a partial scholarship to Baylor University in 1997 and recounted his emigrating from Thailand.

“So when Jimmy arrived he never spoke English before,” he said. “He did not come from a wealthy family.”

He got a job as a server in the campus cafeteria and would daily get recorded lectures from his professors so he could hear the lessons again and better learn English.

When he started tutoring, he said, most of his clients were from “family referrals” of satisfied customers.

Dhanapanth said he sympathized with one of the accusers because of his difficult emigration from Mexico to the U.S. The defendant said the boy was “abandoned” by his parents and cared for by his grandparents. “He was not able to speak any human language. He was mute,” the defendant said.

The defendant said he helped the boy learn to read and speak from graphic novels and audio books.

“Jimmy was very proud” of the boy, he said.

When the boy’s father pulled him out of tutoring, the defendant said he was “stunned.”

The defendant read the statements from his accusers to police in separate interviews to try to point out what he considered were “inconsistencies.” The statements included explicit and graphic allegations of sexual abuse.

“We all know when people make up a story they try to change it because they can’t remember what they said,” Dhanapanth said. “They want to make the story better.”