[Kevin]

Originally Posted by als463

I don't know, Kevin. Most people wouldn't "admit" to committing such heinous acts, even if it meant saving money.

I just had a client "admit" to having control of meth, paraphernalia and a gun because the state offered a seven-year deferred sentence. She was looking at 20+ to do. I'll bet I'd have won that trial, but sometimes, when your client is looking at serious time, they'll admit to a lot in order to stay out of the pokey. Her real crime was hanging out with the wrong crowd and not inspecting her "friend's" backpack before letting him in her car.

With her sentence, assume she stays clean and sober and commits no serious crimes for 7 years, the whole thing comes off of her record.

Child molester is pretty much the worst title any person can carry. I don't know too many people that would take on such a title to save money.

I think you misread the article. He was looking at 10 years minimum on the original charge. And that may have been consecutive sentences, so he was looking at potentially 20 minimum (I'd have to read the guidelines to know for sure, but whatever it is, that's serious time).

As someone who has worked in child protective services, I can tell you that I have seen some people try to use their children as pawns but, to assume that could be the case is problematic. This attitude that children will believe anything told to them is the same attitude that made our DA choose not to prosecute someone who was otherwise guilty because, "Well, the kid looked coached." Even though CPS knew he was guilty, the DA didn't want to do her job or thought it might be too tough to make a case because the kid was young. I agree with DBB. We need to stop victim-blaming as a society or people will not feel comfortable coming forward.

I always take issue with CPS saying they "know" someone is guilty. I'm not sure what kind of training you have, but around here, you can be a CPS caseworker so long as you have any bachelor's degree from anywhere and can pass a background check. Limited language skills? Terrible personality? Tendency to lie under pressure? No problem, you're hired. On top of the lack of qualification, here they get a caseload no ordinary human could keep up with, have supervisors who are products of the Peter Principle, who have their own various agendas, a Supreme Court dumping new rules on them every so often, etc. So when they say they "know" something, my eyes can't help to roll back just a little.

I'm not assuming anything. I'm simply stating that no one knows that's not the case, and therefore to state they KNOW he's guilty... well, there's just not enough information here to really determine that except that as a legal fiction, yes, he's plead guilty and legally he's now guilty of 4th degree rape.

Mom does potentially have a HUGE financial motive here, but put yourself in this guy's shoes. Even if you're not a convicted sex offender, would you rather spend potentially 20 years as a convicted sex offender out in the world with a large trust fund or 20 years in the penitentiary?