Advertisement

Archive for Saturday, March 4, 2006

Child’s killer expresses regret as he’s given 16-year term

March 4, 2006

Advertisement

Shaking and holding his head in his hands, a man who admitted killing his girlfriend's 3-year-old daughter told a courtroom Friday that he wasn't worthy of forgiveness.

"I accept full responsibility in the death of Sydni Perkins," Jason W. Dillon said during his sentencing in Douglas County District Court. "I don't know what caused me to do what I did."

Dillon, 23, said he couldn't look at himself in the mirror "knowing I murdered the girl I called my daughter."

He said he regretted doing cocaine and drinking alcohol in the hours before Sydni's death on June 18, 2005, but that blaming the drugs would be too easy.

At the end of the roughly half-hour hearing, District Court Judge Michael Malone sentenced Dillon to 199 months - roughly 16 1/2 years - in prison for second-degree murder and child abuse.

"You took the most precious person from me," Sydni Perkins' mother, Rachel Perkins, told Dillon during the hearing. "I walk around in a fog, feeling incomplete. ... There is no pain like the pain of a mother losing her baby."

Rachel Perkins' mother, Tracey, said she wished Dillon would suffer every day while in prison.

"Sydni is an angel. She's up in heaven, and she's watching down on us," she said.

Dillon initially was charged with first-degree murder but entered a plea earlier this year, a deal that prosecutors said was endorsed by Sydni Perkins' family to spare them the pain of going through a trial.

Dillon, who lived with Rachel and Sydni Perkins in the 1100 block of George Court in northern Lawrence, was baby-sitting Sydni the day of her death after being out all night at a friend's birthday party in Kansas City. When Rachel Perkins got home from work about 5 p.m., she found her child alive but unresponsive, and Dillon told her she had fallen in the bath.

Eventually, Dillon admitted to police that during the day he knocked Sydni to the ground, shook her when she refused to help him pick up laundry and finally struck her in the back of the head with his hand 13 or 14 times after she told him she didn't want him to be her daddy anymore.

"He did not want or mean to kill her," said Darin Mangan, a friend of Dillon's who spoke on his behalf at sentencing.

Mangan told the judge he met Dillon in 1997 while taking a college course that required him to work with at-risk youths. Dillon grew up in Eudora, lived in state custody in a boys' group home while attending Lawrence High School, and then went to Kansas City, Kan., Community College.

"Jason beat the odds of what was expected of him," Mangan said.

Comments

Linda Endicott 8 years, 10 months ago

I always took the name to be "Jannie Bull in Lawrence". Could be wrong, though.

Maybe you should contact the LJW about it, Badger...just in case, you know, they haven't read all the posts.

daddax98 8 years, 10 months ago

This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

Becky Mitchell 8 years, 10 months ago

I understand from reading all of these post's ....most of the people here are upset because they think that the HIPPA law has been violated, if she is really who she says she is and has had access to any info of his, then yes i agree HIPPA has been violated, private sector or not..............but i do strongly agree with Marion, people are forgetting what the main subject is about .......AN INNOCENT CHILD was murderd......and the guilty person is receiving 16 years, where is the justice in that?

badger 8 years, 10 months ago

Jannie, unless you're Terri Bullington, Lottery employee, no combination of jannie, janni, j, bullin, bullen, bull, b brings you up.

I'm not going to complain to you, sweetcheeks. I'm going to find you, and then rat you out.

Or I'm going to prove you don't exist. So far, the State of Kansas agrees with the latter. Either one's fine by me, so long as you stop spreading around client data you either made up, shouldn't know or shouldn't be sharing.

raven 8 years, 10 months ago

Badger: Sorry I thought you were a social worker. Since you are not. Maybe you should consider it.

badger 8 years, 10 months ago

Tally:

Six state and local agencies, and counting.

Not one has heard of Jannie Bullin. However, more than one was interested to hear about what she has to say and where she's been saying it.

More calls tomorrow.

badger 8 years, 10 months ago

It's good work, and very rewarding.

However, my temperament is such that I know I'd take the work home with me, emotionally speaking, and burn out early. I saw too many people burn out while I was associated with the system (including one nice young man who had to be removed by an ambulance after an emotional collapse) to think I have the emotional fortitude to handle it full time as a job responsibility.

I stick with volunteering, because I can step back if I find myself over-involved in a situation, and scale back my volunteering activities if I find I'm experiencing stress.

classclown 8 years, 10 months ago

This is outragious.

macon47... Well put. Victimless crime my ass.

raven 8 years, 10 months ago

Jannie, Many more people know what goes on in the system than you appearantly think. You are not the only Social Worker in the world. Sounds like Badger was once a social worker. Badger-however is the kind of lady that everyone can admire. I usually agree with her posts and enjoy reading them--I have read many comments from other posters that do not agree but enjoy reading.

Many of my friends and family members are social workers. They work hard to make a difference in people's lives. You however-judge and think you know it all.

I too know Jason Dillon---if you knew him half as well as you think you do-you would know that most of his childhood was spent in Eudora and was not bad. You would also know that his siblings are all doing very well--they all had the same upbringing and no one else ended up in O'Connell.

Susan Mangan 8 years, 10 months ago

Marion - Just to clear up your misunderstanding, this isn't about HIPPA laws. Kansas Statutes cover these possible breaches of confidentiality. And, for the record, I understand HIPPA laws better than almost anyone because I was the individual responsible for implementing all HIPPA regulations for a series of metro hospitals. Again, this has NOTHING to do with HIPPA. Just because you don't agree with us doesn't mean we're wrong.

Susan Mangan 8 years, 10 months ago

Interesting, Conservativeman. Makes me think that Badger was quite insightful and she's just lying. Class B Misdemeanor...

compmd 8 years, 10 months ago

my "best post I've read in a while" award goes to oldenuf for a thought-provoking, insightful, and realistic opinion for us all to think about. Thank you.

punky 8 years, 10 months ago

this is completely uncalled for. this is the first time i have heard of this case. its so sad

classclown 8 years, 10 months ago

Speaking of the $200 drug fine, here is a question to the LJW wondering how one can talk themselves out of it. http://www2.ljworld.com/qa/sound_off/2006/mar/04/city_ordinance/

conserv26 8 years, 10 months ago

May he be BUBBA'S favorite girlfriend in the big house...he will and should suffer for the rest of his life. Sixteen years is a ridiculous sentence for this terrible crime, this should have been life in prison! Hopefully the Bubbas will not let him last sixteen years...

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 8 years, 10 months ago

Let's see-- pot-smoking rarely leads to cocaine (or other hard-drug) abuse, and hard-drug abuse rarely leads to murder.

I'm having a hard-time connecting removing criminal sanctions for first-time marijuana possession and this murder.

compmd 8 years, 10 months ago

oh, jannie, dont be surprised if a couple well dressed guys with badges show up at your house to talk to you about breaching the privacy of a patient's medical records. No guarantees anyone on here won't send them.

good call tanzer.

Susan Mangan 8 years, 10 months ago

Jannie -

"I saw Kaw Valley case plans related to Jason and his Father."

I don't think your employer is going to care if you happen to know him from the "private sector" after you announce your professional sources like that.

And you might want to review the Kansas Statutes regarding your profession. You don't seem to fully understand their rules regarding confidentiality. I'll even give you the link...I'm guessing you'll need to brush up before your interview with your boss.

http://www.ksbsrb.org/statutes/social_work/65-6315.html

Just copy and paste it if the link doesn't work.

YetAgain 8 years, 10 months ago

What an entertaining thread THIS has been. Jannie, the only person here who is stupid is you. You have pushed a huge number of professional buttons because your posts (if you are employed in the system) have violated some very clear and serious professional restrictions, not to mention state and federal laws. And yet some of your posts suggest you have no understanding of the professional restrictions. If you are not a social worker, your posts and your own admissions make it sound like you have somehow accessed records that should be extremely difficult for anyone outside the system to access. So if you are completely outside the system and simply know this guy, then he or someone close to him would have had to share records with you that only he, himself, is legally allowed to request. Which means you are sure awfully close to a very smarmy person. But, ah, yes, you are claiming to know him, aren't you? Hate to have to explain this to you in such simple language, but it seems you don't get anything more complex.

Grin!

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 8 years, 10 months ago

Oh come on, Dad, you're just being hysterical. Pot-smoking had nothing to do with this crime, and the vast majority of those who ever try it or use it never go on to use, much less abuse, other, more powerful drugs.

daddax98 8 years, 10 months ago

jannie has nothing to worry about. Just because she had access to these reports doesn't mean she has any type of provider client relationship. even if she did there is no criminal liability only (possibly) civil and most likely not even that. you guys watch to much law and order

kansas_prairieland 8 years, 10 months ago

So this guy is now officially a "child killer", huh?

Hmmm........now what do you suppose will happen to him (on a daily basis) once he is incarcerated in "the big house" with all of them big, mean, nasty (and horny) inmates??!!

Ahhh, yeah, that's right!----And all of the KY Jelly in the world won't make it any less painful for him, I'm sure!!

Fatty_McButterpants 8 years, 10 months ago

"He did not want or mean to kill her," said Darin Mangan, a friend of Dillon's who spoke on his behalf at sentencing."

-No, of course not. He just wanted to whack her in the head a dozen or more times. That seems reasonable...if you're trying to kill a young child.

cutny 8 years, 10 months ago

Nobody is trying to justify their actions. He took full responsibililty for what he did. He is clearly remorseful and will have the next 16 years to feel even more remorse. Clearly he was not fit to be watching Sydni's daughter, but she surely could have come to this conclusion long before this tragedy occured. As for Rachel Perkins, I can't help but feel she could've done a bit more to prevent this also. Why was she so comfortable to let him watch her granddaughter up until this occured. Maybe she could've advised her daughter that having a child out of wedlock and leaving her with a man that had a historicallly troubled past maybe wasn't such a great idea. Looks, to me, like there is plenty of blame to go around.

badger 8 years, 10 months ago

Jannie says she's a social worker in another thread. She says Jannie Bullin is her real name.

She's given out more information than this on this forum about people receiving social service benefits, including a lot of information about people 'in system' and their diagnoses, benefits, and actions. She's posted that she thinks people should assault police officers. She's posted an awful lot of abusive stuff.

Has she violated any sort of professional ethic? This isn't for me to judge. I don't make the call on whether she's violating any sort of confidentiality. I just know that when I did work in the offices of the Division of Family Services in Missouri, I signed a hard-core NDA that I wouldn't talk about any information I got there, my clients or not. I know that if Jannie Bullin is a real social worker employed by any local, state, or federal agency, or by any private company providing services to a local, state, or federal agency, there's a good chance that she's violating quite a bit of client confidentiality in many of her posts. You see, before they put you in a position to see any of the information she claims to have seen, you sign confidentiality agreements and you have for the last ten years, at least (It was eleven or twelve years ago that I signed one for Missouri).

This is why, Monday on my lunch break, I'll be calling agencies. I'll start with the State of Kansas, then county organizations, then city ones. I'll start by asking them if they have an employee named Jannie Bullin, and once I find an agency that admits to having her as an employee, I'll simply explain that I have a serious concern that she's giving out private information about recipients of state care on a public message board.

I don't think the poster has any reason to worry, honestly. Because, you see, I don't think Jannie Bullin, social worker, really exists, and I think 'she' posts a lot of things she just made up, and that the reason she's not violating any level of confidentiality is because she doesn't actually know any of the things she claims to know.

Either you're violating professional ethics and you can shortly expect to have a discussion with your employer about that, or you're a liar, jannie.

I'll let you all know what I find out.

badger 8 years, 10 months ago

Today's lunchtime tally (went to a lecture after work, just got home):

We're now at fourteen different organizations within the city of Lawrence, Douglas County, the State of Kansas, and the United States government, including both private and public agencies.

Still, no one's heard of Jannie Bullin.

So, there, we're getting back a pretty strong 'fraud' verdict, there.

OldEnuf2BYurDad 8 years, 10 months ago

Bozo:

Most cocaine addicts don't go on to kill children either.

Most people who drive drunk don't end up killing someone (I'm an example of that).

Should we be more lax regarding the coke users and drunk drivers just because of "most"?

Just because most pot smokers don't end up addicted to coke and end up killing children doesn't mean that we cannot make a direct connection to how this man's journey to destruction started with pot. One point I was trying to make is the connection between having been exposed to this culture from within his own family, and how that happened at an early age (as Jannie illegally revealed to us all). When I read all these "drugs aren't so bad" posts , I'm wondering how many of us are telling that to our children? Look at Ozzy Osbourne. After years of abusing drugs, and finally seeing the impact of it, he tried to back off and tell his kids not to do it. It didn't work, did it? When we are lighthearted about drugs and the impact they have on society (the macro scale), we are asking for trouble within our families (the micro scale).

"I smoked pot when I was young, and it was cool. Yuckety, yuck!" Will you be all "yuckety yuck" when your kid is 19 years old and cannot explain where his college savings went? 20 years ago my brother borrowed my mom's Volvo and never brought it back. 20 years later, he still cannot give a straight answer as to what happened to the car. That's what drugs will do in YOUR families. Be vigilant NOW. Don't take it so lightly. The consequences can be extreme (as Mr. Dillon's life has demonstrated).

badger 8 years, 10 months ago

Clarification: I am not a social worker, and I never have been. I worked inside the system as a professional assistant to someone with a physical impairment, to aid him in performing his job duties. This meant that I saw client files, read and wrote official correspondence with clients and with other state agencies, went to client meetings, sat in on policy meetings, everything that this person did in the course of his daily job. I was literally his eyes.

I had to sign an NDA, and there was nothing about it just being 'my' clients, given that I didn't have any actual clients. The terms were that I was not to discuss, by name or identifying criteria, the contents of any client's files, the existence of any client's private files, the recipient status of any individual, or even the fact that I'd seen someone in the DFS office.

I had another job, where I saw a lot of the 'clients' from DFS, and was not even allowed by the terms of my NDA to acknowledge that I'd seen them earlier that day in a different setting unless they brought it up first. If they brought it up first, I could respond generally, but if they wanted to talk about their case I had to refer them back to DFS. Very strict terms, explained to me in clear language.

There was no 'not my client' and no 'well, I can see the files but I'm not responsible for respecting the privacy of the clients.' If I was allowed to see it, I was required to keep it private. If I wasn't allowed to see it, the person who let me see it or gave me the information was at fault in addition to me, and the penalties were termination of employment and possible legal action for both of us.

Those were both state and federal laws about client confidentiality, not just departmental policies. I doubt they've gotten less strict.

badger 8 years, 10 months ago

Jannie -

Just for the record, it'll be my phone bill, not my employer's.

All hail free cell phone long distance.

Susan Mangan 8 years, 10 months ago

Badger --

I applaud your ethics! And here's an FYI for you. According to Kansas Statute, anyone who claims to be a licensed social worker, but is not, is guilty of a Class B Misdemeanor.

And...as far as confidentiality, K.S.A. 65-6315 says that, basically, ANYONE working as, with, or for a social worker can not disclose ANYTHING related to ANY of the clients. Any breach of disclosure is criminally equivalent to breach of attorney-client priveledge.

Gee...that would make her a criminal, whether she's lying or not. I wonder what prison she would go to. Hmmm.....

OldEnuf2BYurDad 8 years, 10 months ago

By the time everyone weighs in and posts their opinions about this situation, I wonder what the score will be? I wonder how many of the "Dillon should rot in hell" posters will be the same posters who applauded when they found out that drug abusers will now be getting traffic tickets in Lawrence. We can't have it both ways, peeps. We cannot act like society's drug issues should be taken lightly while reading this story. What caught my attention about this story was the opening statement by Dillon: he doesn't even know what happened. Do you think Dillon started his habit by mixing cocaine with booze? No. He most likely did what most out-of-control users do: starting with marijuana, then moving to the harder stuff.

Why does he not know what happened? Because the death of that child didn't happen in one day. It started years ago when someone told him "Weed is safe. Heck, I hear that someday the cops will just give you a traffic ticket for smoking it".

On this site Lawrencians have posted that they don't think it's a problem when teens drink. On this site they have shown support for legalizing marijuana, stating that it's no different than cigs. Well, I suggest we put the question to Dillon. Ask Dillon "if you had not been exposed to alcohol and weed when you were in your teens, do you think this child would still be alive?"

Dillon doesn't want to blame drugs, but I think he, and we, should blame drugs. If you take drugs out of the equation, the child is alive. We can still blame Dillon, because he chose the drugs... but what kind of decision making can a parentless 15 or 16 year old make about such things? If any of you came from families with a history of drug/alcohol abuse and found yourself tossed into a drug culture at a young age, the choice to NOT do drugs would have been somewhat obscured from your view. I think any of us, in the right circumstances, could be Dillon.

Also, the mother's self-righteous "you took my child" act is MAKING ME PUKE! Do ANY of us think she was unaware of his drug use? Do ANY of us believe that she wasn't a user herself? If I leave my baby at home with a pit bull and the baby gets eaten, do I just say "bad dog"? She needs to carry some blame for this if she's so willing to cast blame on him.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.