Dayton child psychologist questions search warrants in child porn case

Attorney for Dr. Greg Ramey speaks
Attorney for Dr. Greg Ramey speaks

A Dayton child psychologist charged with more than 140 counts related to child pornography is asking a judge to suppress potential evidence against him.

Gregory Ramey, 70, filed a motion through his attorney that says investigators with the Internet Crimes Against Children task force searched data in regards to an AOL account in August 2019 and the Beavercreek Police Department searched a residence that same month and then searched a cellphone in June 2020.

ExploreDayton psychologist accused in child porn case withdraws bond change request

The attorney, Jon Paul Rion, is asking that everything seized from those searches be suppressed. The attorney requested a hearing on the motion.

Ramey is facing charges of Illegal use of a minor in nudity-oriented material, pandering obscenity involving a minor, attempted pandering sexually oriented matter involving a minor and tampering with evidence. He has pleaded not guilty to the charges.

Prosecutors, in court filings, have accused Ramey of searching a Russian website known as a repository for child pornography hundreds of times over several years. Rion has told the Dayton Daily News that the images in the case are not pornographic and that his client is innocent.

Ramey was a longtime employee of Dayton Children’s Hospital and served as executive director for pediatric mental health resources there. He no longer works for the hospital.

In the motion filed this week in Greene County Common Pleas Court, Rion argues that affidavits in which search warrants were executed lacked probable cause and were too general.

ExploreJury trial date set in Dayton Children’s doctor child pornography case

“So far we have seen that the affidavit herein failed by not alleging present criminal activity at a particular place. That the warrants failed to specifically describe that which was authorized to be seized, and, that the allegations in the affidavit fail to assert when they are alleged to have occurred,” the motion says.

The motion also says the affidavit lacks factual basis to support an issuance of a warrant.

A response from the Ohio Attorney General’s Office, who’s prosecuting the case, has not been filed, and a date for the hearing on the motion has not been set, according to court records.