Advertisement

Archive for Wednesday, August 27, 2008

Baldwin City man faces indecent liberties charges

August 27, 2008, 1:51 p.m. Updated August 27, 2008, 2:49 p.m.

Advertisement

A Baldwin City man pleaded not guilty Tuesday to two felony charges of aggravated indecent liberties with a child.

The 42-year-old suspect was a friend of the victim's family, who had been called over to their house on Aug. 23, said Baldwin Police Chief Michael McKenna.

"After he had finished visiting with the two adults, the husband and wife, he stayed around the house to watch television with some of the kids that were present," McKenna said. "A short time later, the wife walked into the living room area and observed him touching a teenage girl; rubbing her thighs with one hand and gratifying himself with the other."

The man ran from the house when he was caught, McKenna said, but was arrested and booked into jail Monday morning. The Journal-World generally does not name suspects in sex crimes unless they are convicted.

Prosecutors charged the man with lewd fondling or touching of the girl, who is now 14. The man also allegedly was involved in lewd fondling or touching of the same girl, between July and August 2007, when she was 13, prosecutors said.

"In talking to the girl, we learned that (the suspect) had prior contact with her," McKenna said. "She told us about that."

The suspect is being held in the Douglas County Jail. On Tuesday, his bond was set at $250,000, court records said. His next court appearance has been scheduled for Sept. 4 in Douglas County District Court.

Comments

somebodynew 6 years, 4 months ago

And it doesn't matter if the LJW names the suspect or not - the info is on the DGSO web site if you really want to know.

dweezil222 6 years, 4 months ago

The calls haven't been returned because he's probably in Wichita.

Sigmund 6 years, 4 months ago

secretresistance (Anonymous) says ... "Sigmund- You are in absolutely no position whatsoever to determine whether or not this 14 year old girl was willing to do anything. To work off of any other mindframe is a classic example of victim blaming."You are in absolutely no position whatsoever to determine whether or not this 14 year old girl was unwilling to do anything. The facts are this happened in a house with mom and dad at home not to mention the other kids around, but this 14 year old girl protesth not at all, let alone cry attempted rape. To work off of any other set of facts reflects your bias.secretresistance (Anonymous) says: "Incidentally, victim blaming is one thing out of about a million that could reasonably impair someone's confidence enough that they might not talk about what has been happening to them."Where did I "blame" anyone other than the 42 year old? If you think that 14-16 year olds aren't sexual and that many are interested in willingly involved with older guys you must live a very sheltered life or don't know many teen girls. Kansas recently adopted a Romeo and Juliet provision to the law that if the male had been less than 2 years older no crime occurred. The rational for this change, in part, was meant to reflect the reality that many teens, both male and female, are sexual years before age 16, the legal age of consent for sex in Kansas for adults.None of this discussion changes my opinion that if this occurred and regardless of the 14 year old girl's state of mind, the 42 year old man is to blame and should be convicted. I am not a apologist for him. Am I clear enough now?

secretresistance 6 years, 4 months ago

Do you want to be a little more bold with your insinuations, Sigmund? I didn't think I could be so disgusted at only 8 in the morning. Ever heard of the term 'rape apologist'? You're in awfully misogynistic territory with your victim blaming.

webmocker 6 years, 4 months ago

rousseau108 (Anonymous) says:"So the paper won't name the guy even though he's already pleaded guilty? Makes a lot of sense."The article says "A Baldwin City man pleaded not guilty...."

somebodynew 6 years, 4 months ago

angel-- to make it even easier, just go to www.dgso.org and click on booking recap. then you have to put the date in at the bottom if you don't want to see todays arrests.

Sigmund 6 years, 4 months ago

Mom catches her 14 year old daughter, with both her parents home, engaged in foreplay with a 42 year old acquaintance. The daughter isn't complaining nor did she tell them about a similar incident a year ago. Mom and dad are obviously clueless and have no idea what is going on in their daughters life. They may even believe that this is her only older guy and that these are the only two incidents.

secretresistance 6 years, 4 months ago

Sigmund-You are in absolutely no position whatsoever to determine whether or not this 14 year old girl was willing to do anything. To work off of any other mindframe is a classic example of victim blaming.Incidentally, victim blaming is one thing out of about a million that could reasonably impair someone's confidence enough that they might not talk about what has been happening to them.

ronwell_dobbs 6 years, 4 months ago

Hearing a lot lately about young girls being targeted in Baldwin City (on the Internet and otherwise). What's the allure of this weird little town?

Sigmund 6 years, 4 months ago

secretresistance (Anonymous) says: "Do you want to be a little more bold with your insinuations, Sigmund? I didn't think I could be so disgusted at only 8 in the morning. Ever heard of the term 'rape apologist'? You're in awfully misogynistic territory with your victim blaming."I am apologizing for no one. This happened in a house with mom and dad at home not to mention the other kids, but this 14 year old girl protesth not at all, let alone cry attempted rape. But even if she was willing the 42 year old committed a crime, that is why willing under aged girls are called jail bait.BTW, if this was a 15 year old boy this behaviour would not be a crime in Kansas via the Romeo and Juliet provisions of the statute, 17 and older a serious criminal offense. All I am saying is this girl was willing and her consent would be valid with a 15 year old boy, but her consent with a man is irrelevant and invalid.If she was she willing to engage in this behaviour in her own house with her mom, dad, and other kids around, what are the odds this was only one of two times or only with this one older horny, guy? If her parents believe that I suspect they are totally clueless about their daughter.

secretresistance 6 years, 4 months ago

Dweezil222 says: But you're just as naive for pretending it could never happen. Examples abound of sex crime allegations that turned out to be wholly fabricated.I've never pretended anything could never happen, and fabrication of sex crimes isn't the issue here.

OldEnuf2BYurDad 6 years, 4 months ago

Sigmund: You don't understand the position of the child victim. The daughter obviously didn't tell them because she didn't know what to do, or didn't feel empowered. Or, like so many child victims, she may have been threatened by the man.You really need to make an apology.

dweezil222 6 years, 4 months ago

secretresistance (Anonymous) says: Do you want to be a little more bold with your insinuations, Sigmund? I didn't think I could be so disgusted at only 8 in the morning.Ever heard of the term 'rape apologist'? You're in awfully misogynistic territory with your victim blaming.==============================But you're just as naive for pretending it could never happen. Examples abound of sex crime allegations that turned out to be wholly fabricated.

rousseau108 6 years, 4 months ago

So the paper won't name the guy even though he's already pleaded guilty? Makes a lot of sense.

ebyrdstarr 6 years, 4 months ago

Sigmund, did the legislature amend Romeo & Juliet in this last session? I didn't think they had.To the best of my knowledge, Romeo & Juliet, 21-3522, is still the crime of unlawful voluntary sexual relations for all teens who engage in sexual activity with someone between 14 and 16, even those teens who are less than 2 years older than their sexual partner. The older teen must be 19 or younger and no more than 4 years older than the "victim" who must be at least 14. In the scenario of a 14 year-old engaging in sexual activity with a 15 year-old, they could both technically be charged with the crime.

coolmom 6 years, 4 months ago

there is every possibility that she was afraid to say anything especially if this family friend is around a lot and has been for a long time. i know of one young lady that did tell and was severely punished by the parents for lying. makes no difference anyway with him being in his 40's he is a predator. she is a child.

lovethemjayhawks 6 years, 4 months ago

ChristmasCarol I know for a fact that Bert Nash hires people who abuse others. I used to work with a lady who abuse a child at a day care center where I worked with her. She also allowed her staff to abuse children and they keep their job. Now she has a high up job working with children at Bert Nash. To bad that Bert Nash doesn't check their employees out better.

Sigmund 6 years, 4 months ago

ebyrdstarr (Anonymous) says: "Sigmund, did the legislature amend Romeo & Juliet in this last session? I didn't think they had."They pass it but I misread it, you are absolutely correct. ebyrdstarr (Anonymous) says: "To the best of my knowledge, Romeo & Juliet, 21-3522, is still the crime of unlawful voluntary sexual relations for all teens who engage in sexual activity with someone between 14 and 16, even those teens who are less than 2 years older than their sexual partner. The older teen must be 19 or younger and no more than 4 years older than the "victim" who must be at least 14."Again, you are 100% correct. Still a crime between 14-16 but penalties are reduced if the age difference is less than 4 years.ebyrdstarr (Anonymous) says: "In the scenario of a 14 year-old engaging in sexual activity with a 15 year-old, they could both technically be charged with the crime."Once again you are correct on Romeo and Juliet as currently stands in Kansas, it provides only for less severe punishment. 16 is still the age of consent for sex in Kansas unless your married. Again ebyrdstarr, thanks so much for taking the time to set me straight.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.