Ohio Man Charged With Assault After Catching Child Molester In The Act

20 year old man arrested for assault when he "ended" a sexual assault on a 5 year old by by a 17 year old. I think the man showed incredible restraint myself since the 17 year old is still alive and isn't damaged too badly.

Not Guilty, drop the charges and give the man a crime stoppers reward check.


www.wfla.com...

EASTLAKE,OH (WFLA) - An Ohio man is facing felony assault charges for allegedly attacking a teenager he caught molesting a boy.

According to WKYC-TV Richard Adams,20, was arrested and charged with Felonious Assault. The report says Adams walked in on a 17-year-old juvenile molesting a 5-year-old boy, then assaulted the teen.

The 17-year-old juvenile is being charged with rape.

www.wkyc.com... af0096

Richard Adams, 20, was arrested and charged with Felonious Assault. The report says Adams walked in on a 17-year-old juvenile molesting a 5-year-old boy, then assaulted the teen.

The 17-year-old juvenile is being charged with rape.

More details:
www.news5cleveland.com...

defensemaven.io...

a reply to: infolurker

I hope his potential jurors know about Juror Nullification.

If they don't, I hope someone tells them. (But we know it won't be the courts or attorneys...)

That's what I would call a legitimate use of the term triggered and rightfully so. I hope the jury has its priorities straight.

a reply to: infolurker

a hero Richard is. tis a pity a glove and a pair of aviation snips weren't in the vicinity. would have made an excellent mantle trophy.

f.

In Texas they give you a trophy for that...

I'll be amazed if any jury worth its salt convicts him.

What a wast of court time and tax money bringing these charges.

Can all the jurors have themselves removed by simply stating " I have a conflict of interest as I would done the same"?

Assuming there isn't more to the story, if ever there were a time to set up a gofundme account for a top legal team, this is it.

If it were me, the dude would be hospitalized, in critical condition.

I hope they are not making a case that the "assaulter" was a minor, therefore shouldn't have been forcibly stopped by an adult.

originally posted by: Sabrechucker
Can all the jurors have themselves removed by simply stating " I have a conflict of interest as I would done the same"?

I'm not sure. What they can do is sit there, listen to the spiel and then proceed to vote "innocent" whether or not they believe he was legally guilty of a crime or not. There is nothing in the world that could stop them.

Look up Jury Nullification. If you think a particular law is unjust you dont HAVE to vote guilty like they make you think you do. You could say the law regarding assault on another person is unjust because it does not include a clause for this. It includes an exception for self defense, defense of property... Somehow the authorities in charge forgot to include something about child molesters. I'm sure they were just busy and had a lot on their minds and it had nothing to do with them thinking "what if I got caught in the act? I dont want them to have the right to legally harm me. I'd rather they call the police, who I have connections with."

The people of Ohio should be proud of their judicial system. Seems to make a poor statement about their law makers.

A father or mother witnessing someone trying molest their child could justifiably trigger a vicious assault on the attacker.

Allowing anybody to attack anyone that has broken a law is not a good thing in my book.

That said, and to the subject the poster above me brought up, if there was a clause that allowed attacks against people in the act of harming children, such a clause would be warmly invited.

Things like this make me want to question the prosecutor. Me thinks he does the same crimes.

a reply to: infolurker

Charged with assault is the correct response. The jury will determine if he went too far, or if he applied an appropriate amount of force. It is always important to keep your wits about you when you are defending yourself or another person. The law in these cases is a very clear thin line. That is why you should probably go all the way and state that the abuser made you feel afraid for your life.

Dead men can’t testify against you.

originally posted by: whyamIhere
In Texas they give you a trophy for that...

In Texas, by law, the criminal get the short end in these type of assaults.

edit:

Deadly force is allowed to stop the sexual assault of another person. Ohio might be a better place to attack people.

a reply to: infolurker

Are you kidding me?

Too bad he didn't beat that pedophile POS to death

Pedophiles are not human beings. They are a disease to be stamped out

How could any sane prosecution justify this charge? Beyond that, using force (including deadly force) to prevent a forcible felony is perfectly legal. Sounds like the prosecution diddles young children him/herself

a reply to: Woodcarver

That is why you should probably go all the way and state that the abuser made you feel afraid for your life.

This to a "T"

Although prison will be a good time for the pedo scum, as long as someone makes sure the other inmates are aware of the crime. They take care of those kind in prison, one good thing to be said about inmates is they don't tolerate that disgusting BS

Where is Richard Adams' GoFundMe?

That is one I would gladly donate to.

How badly was the molester hurt? Did he just get a few punches to the face, or was he beaten unconscious? Any bones broken, any permanent damage done, etc?

I don't think anyone who is a normal human would fault the man who "assaulted" the child molesterer. Not do I, though obviously the simplest thing would have been for him to remove him to another room and keep him there while he waited for the cops to arrive, but again, no sane person will blame the guy for attacking.

Just wondering exactly what the injuries were, and if that is a factor in why they charged him with assault.

Furthermore: what about the poor child? Now he has this on his little head too, that the person who defended him is now in trouble????? That's the most important thing in this. How is this going to affect the child? He's alreadt going to have lifelong gigantic issues with being sexually abused, and now his rescuer is in trouble. How in the HELL is he EVER going to make sense of that? What kind of cognitive dissonance is that going to give him? Whomever charged the protecter has some explaining to do.

a reply to: KansasGirl

It does make it look as though the defender is the bad guy or at least standing up for someone appears to be wrong.

"Your honor, my client accidentally tripped and fell on the CHILD RAPIST *cough* *ahem* sorry, I meant victim."

I'd be surprised if a jury actually found him guilty of felony assault for stopping someone from raping a 5 year old.