Friend's Son was Molested

[TromboneAl]

A good friend's 15-year-old son was molested by his music teacher last year. He told his mom about it, she took him to a therapist, and the therapist reported it to the police.

The police got a search warrant, and even though the guy tried to delete everything from his computer, they recovered the data and found incriminating material.

Two other victims came forward.

Many community members believed the man was too nice to be guilty of this, and they organized a movement supporting him. They raised $75,000 for a defense lawyer.

They had a hearing yesterday, and because some of the evidence was deemed inadmissible, all charges were dropped.

My friends are devastated -- what a mess.

 

[brewer12345]

Now it is time for the civil suit, Al. Just because the SOB stayed out of prison doesn't mean he cannot be nailed (just by lawyers this way instead of his fellow inmates).

 

[ronin]

Where's Charles Bronson when you need him? Hopefully further investigation will result in refiling of charges, if warranted. Very sticky issue. I know teachers who have been accused unfairly and and had their lives ruined. I've also know teachers who have been rightfully charged and ruined, as they should have been. I've known teachers who have gotten away with things. I feel bad for your friends.

 

[bbbamI]

I am so sorry for your friends.

I have seen this type of thing many times. It doesn't get any easier.

 

[73ss454]

That sucks Al, sorry.

 

[bright eyed]

That's absolutely awful. One of the things I worry about since I have a few friends who were molested as children too.

One thing for sure the parents can do is ensure that they support their kid (no matter the outcome of the case) and let him know he can talk with them about it whenever he needs to. A friend of mine told her parents and they never talked with her about it and even sent her back to the same baby sitter. Denial is awful. To this day, she hasn't raised it with her parents because she's afraid of hurting THEIR feelings!

 

[honobob]

The judge seemed to think the investigators made "misstatements and omissions" to get the search warrant. I think the only thing we can say for sure in this case is that it was handled improperly by the authorities. If the boy was molested he's been victimized twice now.


Molestation case against music teacher dropped

 

[lazygood4nothinbum]

also sorry for your friend and i don't intend offense but i just can't help but to wonder why no one ever tried to molest me as a child. i'm starting to take it personally.

 

[Razor]

If the guy is innocent of the charges his life is probably ruined. If guilty, hopefully they can still put him away.

 

[Walt34]

The police got a search warrant, and even though the guy tried to delete everything from his computer, they recovered the data and found incriminating material.

<snip>

They had a hearing yesterday, and because some of the evidence was deemed inadmissible, all charges were dropped.

It is infuriating. I used to do that kind of work - computer forensics. It's an incredibly complex field, not so much for the technical issues but the legal ones. They're still using basic search warrant text that I wrote from scratch 15 years ago because it covers all the bases.

The nuances of search and seizure law will fill a library. Throw in brand-new legal issues and it gets worse. "The Book" on search and seizure law as it applies to electronic data storage devices is still being written.

I read the newspaper article and there isn't enough information there to make a conclusion that anyone screwed up. Maybe they did, it's just that I don't know.

Sometimes judges simply don't grasp the concepts and make a bad ruling, which I have seen happen.

 

[honobob]

I read the newspaper article and there isn't enough information there to make a conclusion that anyone screwed up. Maybe they did, it's just that I don't know

Sometimes judges simply don't grasp the concepts and make a bad ruling, which I have seen happen.

Walt34 did you see this?

"...a judge ruled that an investigator in the case had shown a "reckless disregard for the truth."

I'm not tryng to stand up for a pedophile but I don't believe an innocent person should suffer from police misconduct. If the guy was guilty and the police had advance notice I don't see why they could not have gotten incriminating evidence in a proper legal manner. This is a wealthy area of the SF Bay, near Silicon Valley, not some poor rural area with an unsophisticated police force. The fault of the authorities seems obvious.

 

[jazz4cash]

Here are the details pertaining to the reckless disregard......

"the sheriff's investigator warped his statement with a false assertion that the teacher had touched the boy's genitals, the defense attorney said."

 

[bright eyed]

i think it's challenging when it's just one person's word against another's - but to have 3 kids come forward takes a lot of courage - why would they subject themselves to those horrible conversations and then further scrutiny?

 

[Notmuchlonger]

Walt34 did you see this?

"...a judge ruled that an investigator in the case had shown a "reckless disregard for the truth."

I'm not tryng to stand up for a pedophile but I don't believe an innocent person should suffer from police misconduct. If the guy was guilty and the police had advance notice I don't see why they could not have gotten incriminating evidence in a proper legal manner. This is a wealthy area of the SF Bay, near Silicon Valley, not some poor rural area with an unsophisticated police force. The fault of the authorities seems obvious.

I do not understand that either. Why wasnt the investigation done properly. Or maybe the guy was innocent. After all we are innocent until proven guilty right?...right?

 

[jazz4cash]

i think it's challenging when it's just one person's word against another's -

I don't think that's the case here. They have evidence on the guy's computer, but it was not obtained properly, so they let threw the case out! It seems like they should have known exactly what they were looking for and if they had not exagerated when they filed for the search warrant, they could have convicted the guy.

 

[bright eyed]

I don't think that's the case here. They have evidence on the guy's computer, but it was not obtained properly, so they let threw the case out! It seems like they should have known exactly what they were looking for and if they had not exagerated when they filed for the search warrant, they could have convicted the guy.

i wasn't saying it specifically - just in general - what if someone did something to your kid and you have no way of proving it other than your kids' word? that seems a tall mountain to climb. i guess they usually have some kiddy porn or other behaviors to build a case?

 

[Hillbilly]

What a sad story Al.

The older I get the more I start to understand why some choose to take matters in their own hands, right or wrong.

Here is an example that almost went off:

Man's daughter gets killed at a party by a guy. Rather that let the system tie things up, man goes to jail to bail out the guy. He was there to "take things in his own hands". I know this man and he is one mean dude. It seems odd now but I could understand his pain and anger, right or wrong. As you would guess, the jail would not let the guy out on bail from then forward.

I hope your friends can take the high road, God Bless.

 

[JPatrick]

My friends are devastated -- what a mess.

Let's hope the "other side" isn't thinking civil suit.

 

[haha]

I can understand all the concern, but I am confused about several aspects.

I read that the alleged miscreant didn't touch the boy's genitals.

How did the boy know he was being molested? Did the guy look at him meaningfully? Could this look have been miisunderstood? I was never come onto by a man, but as a 15-16 year old I had a few odd looks from girl's mothers.

If it was blatant, even then I wouldn't have wanted to get the lady in trouble with her husband, let alone the f'ing law. If it wasn't blatant, how would I be sure that I wasn't just too impressed with my attractiveness?

And if there was odd non-genital touch, this kid is 15. Are music teachers such physically overpowering figures that a 15 year old male couldn't make it totally clear that he off base?

As to the computer, I think it would hard to prove molestation, which presumably at least is more than a mental state, by the contents of a computer. I think kiddie porn is illegal in and of itself, so they could prosecute that. But what would kiddie porn have to do with a 15 year old, who unless he has endocrine problems is no kiddie.

My first GF was 15, I wasn't her first, and be assured that she was no kiddie.

What would you men have done at age 15 if a music teacher had made a pass at you?

I'd have said no. If the advances went further than that, the music teacher would have stood a good chance of winding up on the floor, or with a broken jaw.

If I was held down by one person, and raped by another, or raped at gunpoint or knifepoint, the police would have had a real good case that no one would be confused about. Or perhaps older men in my town would have seen to it that the teacher was very, very sorry.

Some people will believe anything if it is "for the children". Twenty years or so ago in various smaller towns and cities around here there were some amazing prosecutions, and convictions, for child abuse. In at least one case involving dragons, and corpses. Until somehow someone woke up and said- how can these kids have been forced to have sex with dragons, as dragons do not exist. And as to corpses, they havn't yet turned up either.

Ha

 

[zoey]

TromboneAl, so sorry to hear this. Our small town is reeling from some recent news of the same nature. A young wife and mother of two came home early from work to find her husband molesting a neighbor's child. She called the police and he was arrested. How devastating for her, her children, and most of all his victim.

Everyone thought this sicko was such a great guy, too. I doubt, however, that he will have much support. I could be wrong, but so far the response is quite the opposite.

 

[Walt34]

Walt34 did you see this?

"...a judge ruled that an investigator in the case had shown a "reckless disregard for the truth."

Yes, I did. But that's the point - there wasn't enough detail in the newspaper article to tell what the facts were - just the judge's conclusion.

An example: When I was doing fraud investigations, one of the techniques we used to get admissions/confessions was to call the guy on the telephone and get what we called a "telephonic confession". Just chat with him and see if we could get him to admit to the facts of the offense. Legally, this is absolutely useless since in court there was no way I could prove that the suspect was who I was talking to - he was just a voice on the telephone. But I could do this without the Miranda warning since he's not in custody. If he doesn't want to talk to me all he has to do is hang up. Therefore, no force, no implied threats or coercion of any kind.

But after the arrest warrant was issued, he's arrested and IS in custody and I read him his rights - the Miranda warning - "You have a right to a lawyer, ...etc." - the psychological effect of the phone call was invaluable. In his mind, he's already told me about it and we're just rehashing the same conversation. The difference is that this confession is admissible in court if the guy falls for it.

So we had one judge rule that the "telephonic confession" - and the later written confession resulting from it - "fruit of the poisonous tree" was inadmissible since the suspect was in "constructive custody" (over the telephone? That's brand new).

This was a District Court judge (lower court) so the decision was non-binding on other courts and set no precedents. We continued to use that technique until I retired with no further issues from other judges.

See how complicated it all gets, and I've grossly oversimplified the issues since I didn't want to write a book online.