Colorado man arrested for alleged rape

Colorado man arrested for alleged rape

There are 138 comments on the Ruidoso News story from Aug 9, 2012, titled Colorado man arrested for alleged rape. In it, Ruidoso News reports that:

A Colorado man turned himself in to Ruidoso police Wednesday to face charges he kidnapped and raped a woman Saturday.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Ruidoso News.

Assphincter says what

Ruidoso, NM

#83 Aug 24, 2012
HermanofLC wrote:
<quoted text>
I recall an old article about Hubbard paying for prostitutes. I would look at prostitutes from the area in Colorado he lives and where he travels. Any missing? We've had some rather infamous track prostitutes that have disappeared, no doubt buried on the rez somewhere. "Turned out to pasture", but not until they near 60 and lose that last tooth.

I would look at Creepy Herm! Funny how he disappears only to turn up just as the town is hit by a couple of rapes. Coincidence? Me thinks not!
What facts

Ruidoso, NM

#84 Aug 24, 2012
Just the Facts Maam wrote:
Isn't it just great how all you defenders of our constitution always convict people before they are even tried in court. Can you tell me exactly which article that is in? Yeah, sounds a lot more like Islamic justice to me, get your rocks out.
Why don't you wait and see what the DA or the Grand Jury does before you stone this guy. If he is guilty, he will pay for his crimes but not before he is convicted in a court of law, not on this blog.

I'm just guessing the reason the Police and Media are being careful, unlike the people on this blog, is both sides have rights and they do not what prejudice the case either way. We have only heard from one side of what happened. The police have heard both sides which may have something to do with how this is being handled. We probably won't hear the other side till the case gets to court, many months from now.
The recent blogs are not about convicting this man. They speak about the efforts by the press and the city involved to minimize the story and the publicity associated with it because of who the man is and NOT what he has done. Can you deny the fact that this story is not being managed differently than other rape cases involving other less than influential or wealthy people? Traffic citations get more press than this story has received, especially for a small town.
for example todays paper

Ruidoso, NM

#85 Aug 24, 2012
What facts wrote:
<quoted text>
The recent blogs are not about convicting this man. They speak about the efforts by the press and the city involved to minimize the story and the publicity associated with it because of who the man is and NOT what he has done. Can you deny the fact that this story is not being managed differently than other rape cases involving other less than influential or wealthy people? Traffic citations get more press than this story has received, especially for a small town.
Accused rapist competency questionedBy Harold Oakes [email protected] ews.com
Posted: 08/20/2012 03:25:05 PM MDT
what Facts

Ruidoso, NM

#86 Aug 24, 2012
for example todays paper wrote:
<quoted text>
Accused rapist competency questionedBy Harold Oakes [email protected] ews.com
Posted: 08/20/2012 03:25:05 PM MDT
Different alledged crime.
read it again my friend

Ruidoso, NM

#87 Aug 24, 2012
what Facts wrote:
<quoted text>
Different alledged crime.
Are you kidding?
The ALLEGED crime is both instances is RAPE.
And both stories alledge other crimes.
What differences do you see? One story gets weekely updates since it originally occured and a front page, detailed blow by blow accounting of every aspect of the case, and the other story gets barely two paragraphs.
You are a complete idiot if you cannot tell the difference between the intended coverages of both stories.
And our Ruidoso Free Press could not even devote a single sentence to the more recent ALLEGED rape, as both are ALLEGED.
what Facts

Ruidoso, NM

#88 Aug 25, 2012
In the first one there is no doubt a rape took place, only a question of who to convict. In the second the police have to determine if actually a crime took place. That is the difference. Who is the idiot now.
outsider

Centralia, MO

#89 Aug 25, 2012
Ruidoso news has a picture of Kenneth Kauley in orange clothes stating that he is accused not convicted. Kenneth is in jail or he just likes wearing orange jump suits while David M Hubbard bails out on $250,000.00 a mere third of the tax dollars coerced by grandpa from the good citizens of Lincoln County every year. Yes the constitution guarantees all men are created equal it's just the administration of justice that is so heavy handed against you little people.
Really

Ruidoso, NM

#90 Aug 25, 2012
what Facts wrote:
In the first one there is no doubt a rape took place, only a question of who to convict. In the second the police have to determine if actually a crime took place. That is the difference. Who is the idiot now.
You are the idiot. In the eyes of the law, both are innocent until proven guilty. Who convicted the first man? Why is there "no doubt a rape took place"...according to who, you? You stated the alleged crimes were different, not the unsupported assumption of guilt. I assume that the police have equally strong evidence in the second case or the wealthy man would have never even been formally charged. Yes, you are an idiot if you can look at these two cases from you living room computer and decide, based on your own apparent biases or prejudiced that one should be convicted now and the other not even talked about in town.
outsider

Centralia, MO

#91 Aug 25, 2012
Just a generalized clarification of my post #89;
the Constitution say all men are created equal, the Bill of Rights number 5 says you are innocent until proven guilty barring the Patriot Act which in essence nullifies that.
what Facts

Ruidoso, NM

#92 Aug 25, 2012
In the first the woman was beaten to a pulp and it was clearly a rape. In the second there is an allegation of rape. They are different. Just because someone says they were raped does not mean there was one.

. In the first one I said it had to be determined who to convict. That fact the police are treating these different is probably because of the evidence they have on the individual crimes and the people involved.You are letting your hatred of Hubbard influence how you look at these different events.
Really

Ruidoso, NM

#93 Aug 25, 2012
what Facts wrote:
In the first the woman was beaten to a pulp and it was clearly a rape. In the second there is an allegation of rape. They are different. Just because someone says they were raped does not mean there was one.
. In the first one I said it had to be determined who to convict. That fact the police are treating these different is probably because of the evidence they have on the individual crimes and the people involved.You are letting your hatred of Hubbard influence how you look at these different events.
Excuse me...the first man is having his competency questioned before any of his case is even discussed in a court of law...do you not think it is possible therefore that an insane man could allow himself to be incriminated or alternatively, this man could be found not guilty due to his state of mind?...surf the internet, it happens every day somewhere in our criminal justice system. Here is a “Fact”...police departments do not officially charge anyone, no matter who they are, just because a police officer may have a hunch that a crime occurred. And after charges are brought, all persons MUST (or are assumed to) be treated the same within our criminal justice system. Especially in this case, where the man has a relative that owns half the County and much of the police department via grant funding he has provided to that department. These cops knew darn well that there was more than significant evidence to charge this man or they would have been cut off at the knees if they charged this particular man without just cause. Have you noticed the names of the attorneys hired by this man? He was not just assigned any no-named public defender but yet he has hired the best that money can buy. No need to have done this if the evidence against him was non-existent and the police were so callus to have charged an innocent man. You would be a great witness juror for the prosecution of the first man...in you mind, you have convicted one and not the other before either has gone to trial, or any evidence has been presented and for this reason, you are living proof that biases do and have entered a court room on occasion. And as far as my hatred for Mr. Hubbard, I have never met the man and would not know him if he was standing next to me. However, I would admit to you that I believe greatly in our criminal justice system (despite its imperfections). Having said this, I also believe that no one should be granted special privileges under our laws or judged differently by our society because of who they are. But yet, you can see examples of this occurring every single day on the national news. And you my friend are a bit naive if you do not think that wealth or fame has its privileges in our society.
what Facts

Ruidoso, NM

#94 Aug 25, 2012
Really wrote:
<quoted text>
Excuse me...the first man is having his competency questioned before any of his case is even discussed in a court of law...do you not think it is possible therefore that an insane man could allow himself to be incriminated or alternatively, this man could be found not guilty due to his state of mind?...surf the internet, it happens every day somewhere in our criminal justice system. Here is a “Fact”...police departments do not officially charge anyone, no matter who they are, just because a police officer may have a hunch that a crime occurred. And after charges are brought, all persons MUST (or are assumed to) be treated the same within our criminal justice system. Especially in this case, where the man has a relative that owns half the County and much of the police department via grant funding he has provided to that department. These cops knew darn well that there was more than significant evidence to charge this man or they would have been cut off at the knees if they charged this particular man without just cause. Have you noticed the names of the attorneys hired by this man? He was not just assigned any no-named public defender but yet he has hired the best that money can buy. No need to have done this if the evidence against him was non-existent and the police were so callus to have charged an innocent man. You would be a great witness juror for the prosecution of the first man...in you mind, you have convicted one and not the other before either has gone to trial, or any evidence has been presented and for this reason, you are living proof that biases do and have entered a court room on occasion. And as far as my hatred for Mr. Hubbard, I have never met the man and would not know him if he was standing next to me. However, I would admit to you that I believe greatly in our criminal justice system (despite its imperfections). Having said this, I also believe that no one should be granted special privileges under our laws or judged differently by our society because of who they are. But yet, you can see examples of this occurring every single day on the national news. And you my friend are a bit naive if you do not think that wealth or fame has its privileges in our society.
You are clearly not looking at this without any emotion. The police have no choice but to file initial charges when a crime is alleged. It will be up to the DA or Grand jury to determine if there is enough evidence to prosecute not you. This has only gone to the Magistrate Judge so far. Once the police have finished their complete investigation then, and only then, will it be bound over to the district court or sent to the DA for determination of what comes next.

You said you know this man committed this crime. How do you know this? Just because someone said so? That is a scary thought in our world.

If you were innocent would you leave your defense to a public defender? Of course not,you would hired the best Lawyer you could afford. This man certainly has that same right.

If this man committed the crimes alleged he will go to jail as he should.

As to the first rape, I only said there was yet to be a conviction as to WHO raped the woman. If the man currently charged is insane he might not be competent to stand trial but may be put away in a mental institution. He can also be convicted of the crime but found insane where again he will be placed in a mental institution. He could be found innocent but will not be found innocent because he is insane. If he committed the crime, he committed the crime and the courts must determine what to with him.
Criminal Justice 101

Ruidoso, NM

#95 Aug 25, 2012
what Facts wrote:
<quoted text>
You are clearly not looking at this without any emotion. The police have no choice but to file initial charges when a crime is alleged. It will be up to the DA or Grand jury to determine if there is enough evidence to prosecute not you. This has only gone to the Magistrate Judge so far. Once the police have finished their complete investigation then, and only then, will it be bound over to the district court or sent to the DA for determination of what comes next.
You said you know this man committed this crime. How do you know this? Just because someone said so? That is a scary thought in our world.
If you were innocent would you leave your defense to a public defender? Of course not,you would hired the best Lawyer you could afford. This man certainly has that same right.
If this man committed the crimes alleged he will go to jail as he should.
As to the first rape, I only said there was yet to be a conviction as to WHO raped the woman. If the man currently charged is insane he might not be competent to stand trial but may be put away in a mental institution. He can also be convicted of the crime but found insane where again he will be placed in a mental institution. He could be found innocent but will not be found innocent because he is insane. If he committed the crime, he committed the crime and the courts must determine what to with him.
You are simply wrong.
If the police referred every alleged crime that they receive to the DA's office or anywhere else for that matter, then the police would do nothing other than write alleged crime narratives.
In fact, police officers often get advice from the DA's office, especially on serious crimes such as this BEFORE the case is referred to the Magistrate court or the DA's office or anywhere else for that matter. The "elements" of a crime in accordance with state statutes must exist before charges are proposed by the cops or anyone else.
If you have ever read a criminal complaint, consultation with the DA is often referenced on the complaint that is sent to the magistrate’s court.
Anyone can claim that a crime has been committed.
Most police officers investigate allegations BEFORE they make a decision to send charges to the DA, or to even call the DA to consult on possible charges.
Call any police department and they will explain this to you. Otherwise, there are classes that you can take at ENMU that will educate you on this process.
And where in the previous posting did the poster state that "this man committed this crime"...where, quote the previous post please. To the contrary, the previous poster suggests just the opposite, that both crimes are alleged at this point.
And yes, if I am poor and I am innocent I would possibly need to accept the defense that a public defender could provide to me because I can afford nothing else!
Frank

Palm Desert, CA

#96 Aug 28, 2012
It's not the first time this guy is charged for RAPE!
4justice

Denver, CO

#97 Aug 28, 2012
Frank wrote:
It's not the first time this guy is charged for RAPE!
Not true!
fruitful family

Ruidoso, NM

#98 Aug 28, 2012
What's that old saying, "The fruit doesn't fall far from the tree"
Why isn't anyone looking at the sperm donor of this poor, degenerate family member? Dear ole dad has had his share of brushes with the law and gramps has bailed and co-oerced his way out of them, but where is daddy darrol now?
Help us out here Frank. Is daddy darrol locked up in some condo in Palm Desert?
Dont be a Sucker

Carrizozo, NM

#99 Aug 28, 2012
4justice wrote:
<quoted text> Not true!
Is this the same guy who is a principal in a tent company with offices in FL and CO?
what Facts

Ruidoso, NM

#100 Aug 29, 2012
Sorry more misinformation. Derrol Hubbard is not the Father.
Nothing but

Denver, CO

#101 Aug 29, 2012
These blogs are nothing but........misinformation!
better than nothing

Ruidoso, NM

#102 Aug 29, 2012
Nothing but wrote:
These blogs are nothing but........misinformation!
why are you reading then? go out an get a copy of the Ruidoso Free Press, that way you will read "nothing" about this matter.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

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.

Ruidoso Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Trump`s son in law now under ? from FBI 44 min TheAten 6
10 Idiotic (and Debunked) Conspiracies Many Re... 1 hr TheAten 3
us ! 2 hr HorusTheFalcon 13
boom: trump’s new budget requires food stamp re... 3 hr Good Luck 35
Court says essentially that Trump is not be bel... 6 hr Nope 10
Difference between BO and Trump 7 hr Yeah 50
Same story different day 7 hr Good Luck 1

Ruidoso Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Ruidoso Mortgages