http://eagletimes.villagesoup.com/p/judge-charlestown-man-guilty-of-having-sex-with-14-year-old/1160808
Judge: Charlestown man guilty of having sex with 14-year-old By CHRIS GAROFOLO | Apr 02, 2014 Eagle-Times 0 WHITE RIVER JUNCTION, VT. — A Vermont judge sentenced a New Hampshire man to a 31-month prison sentence for having nonconsensual sex with a 14-year-old minor in September 2012. Kyle Stevens, 24, of Charlestown, N.H., entered a guilty plea Tuesday to a felony count of lewd & lascivious conduct with a child and will serve slightly more than a year behind bars as part of his agreement since he was credited for 17 months. While the sentence ordered by Judge Karen Carroll of five-to-15 years was all suspended except 31 months, he was given credit for more than half of that time and will remain incarcerated for 14 months. Stevens also had a felony count of sexual assault dismissed by the state through the plea bargain. According to court documents, Stevens engaged in a nonconsensual sexual act with a then 14-year-old female in September 2012 at a River Street residence in Springfield. Police became aware of the incident after the juvenile — the Eagle Times does not identify victims of sexual assault — spoke with a guidance counselor at Springfield High School and reported Stevens “had molested her” and “basically raped me” after she attempted to stop his advances. The victim told police she had been drinking heavily while hanging out at a friend’s home approximately two weeks after school started and observed Stevens at the gathering, referring to him by his nickname “Turtle.” “She advised that she went to lay down on the couch and when she did, Stevens came over to lay down next to her. She advised that he started to put his hands down her shirt and touched her breasts,” said Springfield officer Anthony Moriglioni in an affidavit. Court records indicate the victim awoke with her pants and underwear down to her thigh and reported Stevens was on top of her. Officers met with Stevens on Nov. 2, 2013 and identified him from a prior mug shot police had in their possession because he was an active fugitive from justice at the time. He acknowledged that he was intoxicated at the Springfield party and thought he engaged in sexual intercourse with the victim. “He then advised that they did hook up. I asked if he knew that she was 14 years old, and he advised that he did later,” wrote Moriglioni, who found a grand jury indictment indicating Stevens committed a felony count of burglary. Stevens’ defense looked to suppress his statement to police, claiming officers did not provide him with his Miranda warnings during the custodial interrogations. Prosecutors objected, saying the police interview did not require a Miranda warning because Stevens voluntarily met with officers, he was not restrained or isolated and he was the first to broach the topic of sexual intercourse with the victim.
"Nonconsensual". That isn't a codeword for rape?
ReplyDelete"14-year-old". That isn't statutory rape (which can't be 'consensual') in Vermont?
"31-month prison sentence"? There must have been 'extenuating' circumstances, eh? The kid was 'really pretty' maybe, and wearing 'short shorts'? So the poor guy couldn't help himself?
If she were my daughter, that sentence isn't long enough for me to lose the urge to enhance justice. But I suppose that's just me.
It's not just you Monty. There are a few cases where I am in favor of the death penalty and this is one of them. Nonconsensual means somebody said "no."
ReplyDeleteWell, if he were a DuPont, he'd be getting house arrest.
ReplyDeleteMonty, if you were her parent, perhaps she wouldn't have been drinking at a house with a 24 year old to begin with, disgusting.
ReplyDeleteso are we blaming the victim here?
DeleteHere's our wonderful "Justice" system at work again trying to figure out how to minimize jail time for a repeat offender. The court has gotton very creative this time, changing the offense from statuatory rape to "non-consensual sex". Once again, the bad guy gets to walk early and law abiding citizens are given no consideration by the courts.
ReplyDeleteThe details of this court proceeding must be interesting. If the charge was changed from statutory rape to "non-consensual", what is the difference in penalty range? What is the difference between 'noncon' and 'aggravated sexual assault'. i.e. rape?
DeleteTalk about a skinner. He definitely needs more time then that
ReplyDeleteWell if this isn't another piece of judicial slight of hand by Judge Karen Carroll. When judges refuse to institute adequate justice and afford the public the protection they deserve, the legislature should act.
ReplyDeleteVermont judges may be impeached by a two-thirds vote of the house of representatives and convicted by a two-thirds vote of the senate.
Like that will ever happen in Vermont's Democrap legislature, most of whom are cheering on this kind of judicial malfeasance, to be sure.
I second your emotion 4/5/14 11:01 AM! I have nothing but contempt for these judges who keep routinely signing off on these ridiculous plea deals that favor repeat offenders at the expense of the rest of the community. As you pointed out in your post, until the apathetic voters of this state decide to do something at the polls, it will continue to be business as usual: the cops will pick up the bad guys and our wonderful so-called justice system will turn them back out on the street to prey on law abiding citizens. The behavior of our courts is outrageous and I am amazed that voters don't show any interest in holding them accountable.
ReplyDelete