It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Texas Town Rallies to Support Man Convicted of the Super Aggravated Sexual Assault of a 4 yr old Boy

page: 9
14
<< 6  7  8   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 28 2014 @ 06:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: lonweld
It probably shouldn't, yet the simple fact that there are 8 pages of response from people who "know" this teenager is guilty or innocent, when they were not in the courtroom or have access to the transcripts, surprises me. You all should be ashamed of yourselves. Although imperfect, our justice system is set in place to try to find the truth.

"....trial by jury of 12 of your peers..." This assures that your conviction does not rest in the hands of one person, the judge, who can easily make mistakes or have a grudge or a predetermined disposition towards the type of offense in question.

"....the right to legal council..." This insures anyone accused of a crime will have someone trained in the law to assist them in their defenses.

The jury deliberated for almost 12 hours in this case. Why? Since none of us here at ATS were on that jury, we will never know. Obviously the evidence did not completely convince one or more of the jurors, and it took time to deliberate amongst themselves to get everyone on the same page.

The young man copped a plea bargain after the guilty vertic was announced? Why would the DA bargain AFTER he won? I've never heard of such a thing, and wonder the accuracy of that statement.

My brother is a sherriff deputy in the state where we both live. We have discussed similar cases that he had sent to the DA for trial (always long after the trial was over, and he never mentioned any names). One thing is for certain, he would not trust the word of one or two toddlers by itself. He would investigate and dig up whatever he can find about the case and individuals involved- does the accused have a history of the crime? Have there been similar complaints about them in the past? Is there any DNA evidence? Psychological evaluations, prescriptions, grades, eye witnesses, charector witnesses... He would even find out about which book you didn't return to the library in fourth grade... He is very thorough. In short, my brother is always AT LEAST 95% certain of a persons guilt before presenting his case to the DA. After all, his reputation is on the line. Perhaps he is a rare breed in today's legal system.

Is there corruption in the legal system? Yes, and there always will be. But just because one seemingly erroronious judgement had been passed in the history of a city, county, or state, that does not mean this one is as well.

So in closing, I would just like to say that everyone needs to get the facts before they decide they "know" if he is guilty or innocent.




P.s. someone mentioned that serving time is not a deterrent for this type of crime.... How about chemical castration? Do you think that would deter someone from committing rape/molestation?




Fabulous post; very logical and thoughtful.

As I learned in this article it was Kelley's team that approached prosecutors with the Sentencing Plea Bargain Deal to avoid facing sentencing by the Court; this alone is VERY telling.



Williamson County Assistant District Attorney Mark Brunner told KVUE that Kelley's defense team approached prosecutors with a plea deal: If Kelley was given 25 years he would waive his right at an appeal.




posted on Jul, 28 2014 @ 07:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: lonweld

Is there corruption in the legal system? Yes, and there always will be. But just because one seemingly erroronious judgement had been passed in the history of a city, county, or state, that does not mean this one is as well.

So in closing, I would just like to say that everyone needs to get the facts before they decide they "know" if he is guilty or innocent.





First I never said I knew if he was guilty or innocent. And that's the problem. If a person is convicted in a generally honest system you can say you know he is guilty. If this guy was convicted in most other States, I probably would have said I could know he is guilty.

Texas isn't like most other States as their motto goes it's like a different country. Texas a past pattern and practice of corruption - not just a few isolated cases. Big difference.

While the original comments referenced in the first post did go too far, there is a specific effort by people to punish anyone who dares to even discuss the possible innocence of someone accused of this crime. If someone felt obligated to side with the children, they should have look up some evidence in this case and presented that - instead they made the choice to name call and twist words.

Acting like a crazed mob and going after people only distracts from any real evidence. If you feel you have truth on your side, you shouldn't feel you have to stop open discussion.



posted on Jul, 28 2014 @ 07:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: Daughter2
First I never said I knew if he was guilty or innocent. And that's the problem. If a person is convicted in a generally honest system you can say you know he is guilty. If this guy was convicted in most other States, I probably would have said I could know he is guilty.

Texas isn't like most other States as their motto goes it's like a different country. Texas a past pattern and practice of corruption - not just a few isolated cases. Big difference.

While the original comments referenced in the first post did go too far, there is a specific effort by people to punish anyone who dares to even discuss the possible innocence of someone accused of this crime. If someone felt obligated to side with the children, they should have look up some evidence in this case and presented that - instead they made the choice to name call and twist words.

Acting like a crazed mob and going after people only distracts from any real evidence. If you feel you have truth on your side, you shouldn't feel you have to stop open discussion.



When a 4 year old boy is sexually assaulted and his abuser is convicted of the offense and agrees to a sentencing plea where he admits guilt and waives his right to appeal, most communities would respond by supporting the young victim....Not in Leander, Texas.

In Leander they bully the victim and worship his abuser.

The angry mob is not those who are raising their voices in support of the victim, the angry mob is those in support of the convicted child sex offender who, via his Sentencing Plea Bargain, admitted guilt. Simply do a quick search of Twitter and you'll quickly learn that those bullying a 4 year old victim far outnumber those supporting the victim.

It's not that people disagree or oppose the supporters of the convicted sex offender right to be heard; the issue is that they are acting in a tasteless, bullying, all-knowing mob mentality -- these people and their merchandise sales seem to love nothing more than shaming and blaming victims of sexual abuse. The way they're operating I don't think they'll be happy until Leander adopts the Iranian sexual abuse & rape laws.



posted on Jul, 28 2014 @ 07:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: Daughter2
First I never said I knew if he was guilty or innocent. And that's the problem. If a person is convicted in a generally honest system you can say you know he is guilty. If this guy was convicted in most other States, I probably would have said I could know he is guilty.

Texas isn't like most other States as their motto goes it's like a different country. Texas a past pattern and practice of corruption - not just a few isolated cases. Big difference.

While the original comments referenced in the first post did go too far, there is a specific effort by people to punish anyone who dares to even discuss the possible innocence of someone accused of this crime. If someone felt obligated to side with the children, they should have look up some evidence in this case and presented that - instead they made the choice to name call and twist words.

Acting like a crazed mob and going after people only distracts from any real evidence. If you feel you have truth on your side, you shouldn't feel you have to stop open discussion.



When a 4 year old boy is sexually assaulted and his abuser is convicted of the offense and agrees to a sentencing plea where he admits guilt and waives his right to appeal, most communities would respond by supporting the young victim....Not in Leander, Texas.

In Leander they bully the victim and worship his abuser.

The angry mob is not those who are raising their voices in support of the victim, the angry mob is those in support of the convicted child sex offender who, via his Sentencing Plea Bargain, admitted guilt. Simply do a quick search of Twitter and you'll quickly learn that those bullying a 4 year old victim far outnumber those supporting the victim.

It's not that people disagree or oppose the supporters of the convicted sex offender right to be heard; the issue is that they are acting in a tasteless, bullying, all-knowing mob mentality -- these people and their merchandise sales seem to love nothing more than shaming and blaming victims of sexual abuse. The way they're operating I don't think they'll be happy until Leander adopts the Iranian sexual abuse & rape laws.



posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 10:03 PM
link   
a reply to: NickDC202

I am not going to comment on the case or if I think he is guilty or the kid is lying. It's all irrelevant now. I am going to simply speculate on reasons why he would take the plea.

#1. He was convicted once. It stands to reason he will be denied appeals unless new evidence arises.

#2. The judicial system in the country as a whole has given absurd levels of confidence in victim testimony in sexual related crimes. If he does get a new trial the testimony of the victim will most likely keep him in jail if nothing substantial has changed in the case. No new exonerating evidence, etc.

Considering those reasons a chance of getting released can be a very strong motivator to make a deal. After all if he did not take the plea, guilty or innocent, he would most likely be behind bars for life. It has happened before. Innocent people have accepted plea deals because the evidence was against them. The sentence at conviction would be a ridiculous amount of years. Getting out when one has outlived the prime of life. The hope of rebuilding their life with some amount of youth remaining can be a strong motivator.

There are other reasons mostly related to the system. The push from politicians and media to provide a suspect. The pressure from chain of command to clear cases. The adversarial system itself.

Or he took the plea cause he is guilty and wants to get out one day. Other than that I won't comment on the case because I know so little about it.



new topics

top topics
 
14
<< 6  7  8   >>

log in

join