Termination under §§ 19b(3)(b)(i), (g), (j), & (k)(ii); Children’s best interests; Ineffective assistance of counsel; Failure to attempt to admit the video of a child’s forensic interviews, or statements from these interviews; Failure to cross-examine the child about alleged inconsistencies between her trial testimony & forensic interviews

The court held that §§ (b)(i), (g), (j), and (k)(ii) existed, termination of respondent-father’s parental rights was in the children’s (A and M) best interests, and he was not denied the effective assistance of counsel. A “testified that respondent committed multiple acts of sexual abuse involving oral penetration against her over the course of several years.” She also testified that he “held a gun to her head, threatened to kill her, and physically beat her when she refused his orders to engage in sexual acts.” Based on the court’s review of the record, it discerned “no clear error in the trial court’s factual findings that respondent sexually abused” A and that both A and M “would be at significant risk of being sexually abused if returned to respondent’s care.” Affirmed.