Ex-juvenile worker acquitted in sex case

There are 58 comments on the The Indianapolis Star story from Apr 18, 2007, titled Ex-juvenile worker acquitted in sex case. In it, The Indianapolis Star reports that:

A jury acquitted a former Marion County Juvenile Detention Center employee Tuesday of charges he molested a detainee in 2000.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The Indianapolis Star.

First Prev
of 3
Next Last
mark

San Francisco, CA

#1 Apr 18, 2007
It looks to me that the prosecutors are on a witch hunt and will hurt anybody to get win. Boy, it would be nice to see the tax money going to a more fruitful cause.
sex

Indianapolis, IN

#2 Apr 18, 2007
The only one who wont get off (pardon me) this time will be the director.

“So I've got that going for me.”

Since: Dec 06

Former Zionsvillager

#3 Apr 18, 2007
mark wrote:
It looks to me that the prosecutors are on a witch hunt and will hurt anybody to get win. Boy, it would be nice to see the tax money going to a more fruitful cause.
Investigating when a child speaks up about being sexually abused, and bringing the accused to trial is not a witch hunt. Trying to protect girls from subhuman predators is more than a "fruitful cause". It's hard to worry about tax money going to other things when you still have savages destroying our youth.
WhoNeedsGod

Carmel, IN

#4 Apr 18, 2007
Just the message the world needs to see. Molest a girl who is incarcerated and get no punishment whatsoever. "Oh but it was consensual..." BS. Even if the girl willingly participated he was way too old, should have known better and the prosecutors need to get off their asses and do a better job collecting evidence and prosecuting the case. Our justice system is so weak it is not funny. Too many plea bargains, reduced sentences and does anyone see a relation to the lax sentencing and prosecution and the growing crime rate? "Oh, let's just give him a slap on the wrist. He promised he would never do it again." That's okay, the Lord knows the truth and he will be accountable for his actions of the day of final judgment.
Dave Eddleman

Carmel, IN

#5 Apr 18, 2007
Ripple Girl wrote:
<quoted text>
Investigating when a child speaks up about being sexually abused, and bringing the accused to trial is not a witch hunt. Trying to protect girls from subhuman predators is more than a "fruitful cause". It's hard to worry about tax money going to other things when you still have savages destroying our youth.
The man had his name drug through the mud and was acquitted.
When a person is acquitted, that means that the prosecutor did not have enough evidence to really even charge him with a crime.
This Prosecutor (witchhunter) just cost this poor man his livelihood, over $5000 in attorneys fees, possibly his family. I hope he can sue the state silly and get this prosecutor fired.
Wait a Minute

Indianapolis, IN

#6 Apr 18, 2007
So quickly we forget the Duke LaCross players who were wrongfully charged. Lets see if I remember this correctly -
1. Charged with rape
2. Investigation found not true
3. Charges dropped
4. Public apology
5. Prosecuter Disbarred
6. Appears on Good Morning America

This man was found not guilty by a group of his peers, after an internal investigation into this incident over a year ago found the same verdict. Will he get numbers 4-6 done on his behalf. Doubts.
WTF

Indianapolis, IN

#7 Apr 18, 2007
Dave Eddleman wrote:
<quoted text>
The man had his name drug through the mud and was acquitted.
When a person is acquitted, that means that the prosecutor did not have enough evidence to really even charge him with a crime.
This Prosecutor (witchhunter) just cost this poor man his livelihood, over $5000 in attorneys fees, possibly his family. I hope he can sue the state silly and get this prosecutor fired.
Exactly!

The sad thing is that all these people who did a job many wouldn't do, for way too little money were drug through the mud as you said and judged by the media before they were ever near a courtroom. They lost their jobs, their reputations and as you said, quite possibly thier families.

These are VERY streetwise kids in this facility. The shame, to me, is that there isn't constant recorded video surveillance in every square inch of the place to safeguard those working there against unfounded accusations like this.
Cold Water

Indianapolis, IN

#8 Apr 18, 2007
Dave Eddleman wrote:
<quoted text>
The man had his name drug through the mud and was acquitted.
When a person is acquitted, that means that the prosecutor did not have enough evidence to really even charge him with a crime.
This Prosecutor (witchhunter) just cost this poor man his livelihood, over $5000 in attorneys fees, possibly his family. I hope he can sue the state silly and get this prosecutor fired.
When a person is aquitted, it means that he/she was found not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. It certainly doesn't mean that the prosecutor didn't have enough evidence to charge him/her with a crime. The level of charging someone with a criminal charge is probable cause. Remember this old and wise reference: if you are innocent, go before a judge- if you are guilty, go before a jury. With a lot of valuable firsthand experience, this is indeed true. People are generally very gullible and stupid. A good act will sway someone's opinion and a good jury foreman can easily sway others minds. The O.J. Simpson jury is an excellent example of this.
JAccuse

United States

#9 Apr 18, 2007
It is so sad that all it takes is an accusation by anyone that someone else is a "molester" or an "abuser" and that makes it so, whether it's true or not. Even sadder is that once a false accusation is made, the stigma stains the accuser for life. Instead of being aggressive in going after "alleged" molesters and abusers, prosecutors and others in the judicial system need to be aggressive in going after the truth while remembering that a person is innocent until proven guilty. An accusation is not proof of anything.
BX-NY

Indianapolis, IN

#10 Apr 18, 2007
You dump F, there is a audio tape accounting for the "RAPE". This is why they feel they could get away with murder.
Dave Eddleman wrote:
<quoted text>
The man had his name drug through the mud and was acquitted.
When a person is acquitted, that means that the prosecutor did not have enough evidence to really even charge him with a crime.
This Prosecutor (witchhunter) just cost this poor man his livelihood, over $5000 in attorneys fees, possibly his family. I hope he can sue the state silly and get this prosecutor fired.
TMD

Lafayette, IN

#11 Apr 18, 2007
WhoNeedsGod wrote:
Just the message the world needs to see. Molest a girl who is incarcerated and get no punishment whatsoever. "Oh but it was consensual..." BS. Even if the girl willingly participated he was way too old, should have known better and the prosecutors need to get off their asses and do a better job collecting evidence and prosecuting the case. Our justice system is so weak it is not funny. Too many plea bargains, reduced sentences and does anyone see a relation to the lax sentencing and prosecution and the growing crime rate? "Oh, let's just give him a slap on the wrist. He promised he would never do it again." That's okay, the Lord knows the truth and he will be accountable for his actions of the day of final judgment.
OK, I'm a little confused. At what point was it ever proven that he had molested this girl? When did anyone ever say these two had consensual sex? This has been investigated twice now with the same findings. Not guilty.

The girls that have accused the DOC personnel of molestation are not your little angels. They were sent to these facilities because they were found to be uncontrollable, untrustworthy, and a danger to others. Something may or may not have happened, but it's much more difficult to believe one of the girls, based on their current circumstances, than the guards.

As far as the diatribe about the prosecutors is concerned, it's hard to win a case when the accuser is unbelievable and there is no physical evidence. Besides, the facility where the accuser alledged these incidents occured are commonly targeted for these type of allegations. The adversarial nature of detention centers/prisons spawns all kinds of allegations, some real, most, not.

“So I've got that going for me.”

Since: Dec 06

Former Zionsvillager

#12 Apr 18, 2007
JAccuse wrote:
It is so sad that all it takes is an accusation by anyone that someone else is a "molester" or an "abuser" and that makes it so, whether it's true or not. Even sadder is that once a false accusation is made, the stigma stains the accuser for life. Instead of being aggressive in going after "alleged" molesters and abusers, prosecutors and others in the judicial system need to be aggressive in going after the truth while remembering that a person is innocent until proven guilty. An accusation is not proof of anything.
Of course an accusation isn't proof, that's why these things are investigated and evidence is collected. Just because someone went through the system and was acquitted doesn't make them a victim of a witch hunt. There was enough evidence to warrant a trial, that's all. And sorry if it bothers you, but yes, all it SHOULD take is an accusation for an investigation to take place. Some warrant an arrest, some don't, but ALL should be taken very seriously. Otherwise, we're no better than savages who force rape victims to produce three witness to the crime before any "justice" is meted out.

“So I've got that going for me.”

Since: Dec 06

Former Zionsvillager

#13 Apr 18, 2007
Dave Eddleman wrote:
<quoted text>
The man had his name drug through the mud and was acquitted.
When a person is acquitted, that means that the prosecutor did not have enough evidence to really even charge him with a crime.
This Prosecutor (witchhunter) just cost this poor man his livelihood, over $5000 in attorneys fees, possibly his family. I hope he can sue the state silly and get this prosecutor fired.
Hey, too bad. I really don't care what happens to "this poor man". He's an adult and can take care of himself, and doesn't need to take up our time in the courts with some stupid lawsuit. I'd rather see an exonerated man move on than have it never brought to trial because the victim doesn't speak up or no one thinks her accusation is worth investigating.
PT parent

Indianapolis, IN

#14 Apr 18, 2007
WhoNeedsGod wrote:
Just the message the world needs to see. Molest a girl who is incarcerated and get no punishment whatsoever. "Oh but it was consensual..." BS. Even if the girl willingly participated he was way too old, should have known better and the prosecutors need to get off their asses and do a better job collecting evidence and prosecuting the case. Our justice system is so weak it is not funny. Too many plea bargains, reduced sentences and does anyone see a relation to the lax sentencing and prosecution and the growing crime rate? "Oh, let's just give him a slap on the wrist. He promised he would never do it again." That's okay, the Lord knows the truth and he will be accountable for his actions of the day of final judgment.
In the dictionary it states that anyone AQUITED means NOT GUILTY.In this case the jury of his peers said he was not guilty of the charges the prosecutor's office filed against him. Usually I would agree with you on the prosecutor's office needs to quit with the plea bargains and reduced sentences but in a case such as this--well--they didn't have evidence to support the charges and from what I have read about the other defendants this may blow up in the prosecutor's face. If they have a "recording" of the interview why was this peoson and all others involved found guilty? Sounds to me like someone "fabricated" a story--how about you? Or are you so worried about the trees you can't see the forest?
joe lawyer

Indianapolis, IN

#15 Apr 18, 2007
Dave Eddleman wrote:
<quoted text>
The man had his name drug through the mud and was acquitted.
When a person is acquitted, that means that the prosecutor did not have enough evidence to really even charge him with a crime.
This Prosecutor (witchhunter) just cost this poor man his livelihood, over $5000 in attorneys fees, possibly his family. I hope he can sue the state silly and get this prosecutor fired.
Why must you display you complete and utter ignorance of the law in broad daylight. An acquittal does NOT mean that the prosecutor did not have enough evidence to charge a crime. It merely means that 12 members from the community bought the defense attorney's BS story. Thanks to people like you and those 12 jurors, we have another (guaranteed) rapist free. Stop blaming people who are trying to do the best they can with a populace that has come to expect CSI and Law and Order type results.
Scott

Indianapolis, IN

#16 Apr 18, 2007
It sounds like the jury got bought off.
thank goodness

Indianapolis, IN

#17 Apr 18, 2007
Could it be that some women/girls were jumping on the "victim" bandwagon looking for a lawsuit payday? The Duke gal lied. Maybe these gals are telling whoppers too.
PT parent

Indianapolis, IN

#19 Apr 18, 2007
joe lawyer wrote:
<quoted text>
Why must you display you complete and utter ignorance of the law in broad daylight. An acquittal does NOT mean that the prosecutor did not have enough evidence to charge a crime. It merely means that 12 members from the community bought the defense attorney's BS story. Thanks to people like you and those 12 jurors, we have another (guaranteed) rapist free. Stop blaming people who are trying to do the best they can with a populace that has come to expect CSI and Law and Order type results.
Sounds like sour grapes from your side. Sounds to me like the prosecutor's office mis-handled the evidence or just had circumstancial evidence to get the grand jury indictment. YOU cannot say for sure if the man was guilty especially when a jury of his peers said his defense council was able to rebuke all the prosecutor's "evidence" so convincingly that they only took 2 hours to return a not guilty ruling. quit saying we have another (guaranteed) rapist free. The people responsible for prosecuting couldn't prove it and neither can you.
Westside

Indianapolis, IN

#20 Apr 18, 2007
This is to the DUMB F.. SO Call Joe Lawyer .Are you ignorant NOT GUILTY MEAN NOT GUILTY DUMD F...
A Couple of Issues

Indianapolis, IN

#21 Apr 18, 2007
It is so hard to determine who is being honest and who's seeking attention. RAPE can't continue to go on unmentioned and swept under a secret place. The reason so many women don't come forward is because they are afraid that no one will believe them or think low of them because of them coming forward. True story coming on Lifetime in a couple of weeks, there are so many girl files that are never even touched and the cycle needs to be stopped. Yes, this man was aquitted because the jury was CONVINCED that he was innocent, but one thing is almost FACTUAL if he indeed committed this crime, he will do it again. Perverts are just that-PERVERTED. Sad thing is, as someone already stated these little girls aren't angels, but that doesn't give anyone to violate their body.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Clayton Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Danville woman held in boyfriend's shooting (Mar '07) May 14 Danville satanist 118
News When The KKK Was Mainstream May 5 Savant 11
Terry Lee Honda Service dept. sucks! Apr '15 MrBraunstone 3
lord have mercy Apr '15 MrBraunstone 1
News SWAT teams shot suspect with 68 bullets (Oct '06) Apr '15 Lobo1 375
Steve Wagner (Mar '14) Apr '15 stp81 5
News Injured man found in a ditch along I-70 (Feb '13) Feb '13 kz kraze 1
More from around the web

Clayton People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]