|
|
Forum: General
Thread (Discussion): Orolan's Story - Orolan
Message 120017
The Beginning
Posted by orolan
on Oct 17, 2003 12:41 PM | Also by orolan
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: 30 - 39,
State: N/A,
Country: United States |
I had seen this board in the past but I never took the time to read any posts, thinking it was simply a board for the “fringe” people who advocate the death penalty for all sex offenders, etc. A friend of mine told me it was not like that, so I recently began frequenting it. I jumped right in, offering my thoughts, opinions and knowledge where it suited. I realized along the way that nobody had ever asked me “why” I was even here, and I had never offered that information. I talked with Steve via email about it and he felt that I should go ahead and tell my story, feeling that it may be informative and helpful to somebody that reads it. After some thought, I concurred.
Some of you will be angry, some will not. Some will lash out in self-righteous “I knew it” posts, and others will not. Regardless, here it is. Please at least have the courtesy to read the whole thing before you post a response, if any.
Seven years ago my oldest daughter, then 12, came to stay with me for the summer. She brought along her best friend, along with the 14 year-old daughter of one of my older brother’s friends. Living with me at the time was my youngest brother, then 17. All three girls came from a state different than the one I live in. This is important later on in the story.
My brother and the 14 year-old eventually became quite “friendly”, to the point of having sex. When I found out, I sat them both down and discussed the situation quite frankly with them. I explained the perils of unprotected sex, made sure that she was not being coerced or pressured in any way, and then told them I did not want it occurring in my house while my child and her friend were there. I learned during this conversation that my brother was not her first sexual experience, which eased my mind somewhat.
The 14 year-old returned home after six weeks, and my daughter and her friend went home two weeks after that. If any further sexual activity occurred, it was without my knowledge.
Shortly after returning home, the 14 year-old went to the doctor for her first pelvic examination. Since she did not go to her pediatrician, this was a doctor who had never seen her before. This doctor noted evidence of her sexual activity, and saw fit to discuss it with the girl’s parents. Naturally they knew nothing about it, thinking that she was the little princess she had always been.
Well, they confronted her about it. She told them that she had sex while at my house. They asked her “with who?”, but she would not say. Then they asked if I knew about it, and she told them I did. The parents then called the police.
Two weeks later, I was arrested. I was charged with rape, aggravated child molestation, enticing a minor for immoral purposes, and transporting a minor across a state line for immoral purposes. And the Sheriff was trying to get the US Attorney to charge me with a Mann Act violation. Bond was set at $50,000. I was told later that the rationale behind all of this had been that if I knew about it, I must have been the person who did it.
I got out on bond 1 week later, and the following month a Grand Jury handed down an indictment on a single charge. The indictment read “Enticing a minor to commit illicit sexual acts with another; to whit, discussing said sexual acts in a frank and open manner with a minor not the indictee’s own child.” Turns out that the initial charges were brought at the request of the parents in an effort to boost the bond so high that I would not be able to make it. When it came time to present the case to the Grand Jury, the Prosecutor quickly determined that the charges would never stick. So she only presented the enticement charge.
I hired an attorney, and we began discussing our options. The girl would say no more than that I had talked with her about her sexual activity, in depth. She refused to name my brother as her sexual partner, and at the same time she was adamant that I had never so much as touched her in an inappropriate manner. The prosecutor had no idea that my brother had been living in my house, so she did not even attempt to charge him with a crime.
My attorney and I decided that a trial was not going to be the best route to take. It would require my daughter and her friend taking the stand, something I could not accept. It would also require exposing my brother to prosecution, because I would have to name him on the stand. And the final straw was that I was actually guilty of the indicted crime. I had indeed had a frank discussion about sex with a child who wasn’t my own. If I took the stand, I would have to admit the discussion or else risk perjury. I don’t lie, so that was not an option.
We went to the prosecutor and sought a deal. She offered a ten year probation sentence, with no sex offender status and a condition that I return to my home state to serve out my sentence. That of course was contingent on the home state accepting me, but since I had lived and worked in that state for over 12 years and my offense was a non-violent and non-contact offense, it was almost a sure thing.
The judge accepted the plea, and I was on my way. I returned home, and was contacted 3 months later by a local Probation Supervisor. He told me to come in and see him the next day, and I have been going to see him every month for the last 7 years. One important note here. My home state saw fit to provide me with a list of sex offender conditions, and placed me on its’ own sex offender registry. When I objected, citing the lack of such conditions by my sentencing judge, I was told “If you don’t like it, we can always refuse to continue supervising you. Then you would have to leave your home and job to go live in “x” where your conviction is.” So I have put up with it.
I did my court-ordered “therapy”, in which my psychologist decided that I had no place in her “group therapy” weekly meetings that the rest of the sex offenders went to. So we did our sessions one-on-one, once a month. I was discharged from therapy after 10 months. I went to see her for a second round of sessions two years later, but that was due to an event that will be told in another post. I have stayed in contact with her over the years, and drop in for a “session” about 4 times a year now(sometimes, you just need somebody to talk to). We have collaborated on several surveys of sex offenders in our community, because I have naturally become quite interested in sex offenders and what “makes them tick”. She was also the driving force behind my decision to seek a graduate degree.
Since the sex offender conditions prohibited me from being alone with minors, I went back to court to get an order from the sentencing judge that specifically allowed me to have full and unsupervised contact with my children, to the extent that they could even live with me if I so chose. The judge, knowing the history of my case, saw no problem with this arrangement, and my therapist supported it fully. My Probation Supervisor, on the other hand, was adamantly outspoken against it. He actually attended the hearing, and was chastised repeatedly by the judge for his mutterings and occasional outbursts. It was actually quite funny from where I was sitting. Thus I am the ONLY sex offender in my district who has teenage girls living with him, with court consent, that is.
So, there you have it. There is more to the story, as other things have happened in the last 7 years. But I will save those, feeding them in as the time is right.
I am a convicted sex offender. I am not a pedophile, nor am I a child molester. I am a human being. Hopefully those of you who are mature adults will understand. If you don’t, I’ll say a prayer for you.
Orolan
Forum Home
| Top of Thread
Message 120028 (In Reply to Message 120017)
Orolan's Story - Whats wrong with the registry
Posted by Silverthorne
on Oct 17, 2003 06:56 PM | Also by Silverthorne
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Arizona,
Country: United States |
Wow what a story. You hardly fit my image of a "sex offender". Have you considered seeking court intervention in your current state to have yourself removed from the registry?
This Probation Officer has a real chip on his shoulder. He's probably used to dealing with real "molesters" and finds you offensive. Either that or he's so poisoned by sterotypes he doesn't believe you didn't do anything.
I guess my real question is why did you take the fall? I would think the prosecutor would've dropped charges is you had told them the truth about your brother. Like it or not he has to be a man and take the consequences of what happend. He doesn't seem to me to be much of a man if he sat there and let all this happen to you and didn't speak up to stop the injustice.
Personally I find it ridiculous that you were even charged with a sex offense. You talked to a child about improper sexual conduct. Thats it. So why the registry?
This is more or less a textbook posterchild case of "WHATS WRONG WITH THE REGISTRY". If I were you I'd seriously consider hiring a lawyer and trying to get your name off the offender registry. If everything you've said is true I'd have no problem seeing you removed from it.
Silverthorne
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (120017)
Message 120030 (In Reply to Message 120017)
Part Two
Posted by orolan
on Oct 17, 2003 10:04 PM | Also by orolan
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: N/A,
Country: United States |
This post is a lead-in to a previously-promised polygraph post. It is needed to explain why I had to take the polygraph in the first place, especially since I didn’t have to do it before. It is also a continuation of my story, and a "slam" on SO registries.
A couple years after my conviction, I had occasion to attend a play being put on for the community by the local high-school. A very good friend of mine had a daughter who was playing a part in the play, so she asked if I wanted to go with her to see it.
I agreed, so she picked me up at my house and we went to the play. We were together the entire time, not even parting company to use the restroom or to go smoke. We met her daughter backstage afterwards, and we all three walked outside to her car.
Not long after arriving at her car, I was confronted by a police officer, who asked me if my name was “x” and asked for ID. I told him that was my name, and showed him my license. He then asked me if I knew a girl named “y”, which I did not. He then told me that she had made some rather serious allegations against me, and advised that I not leave town any time soon.
The following evening, a detective showed up at my house. He asked if he could come in, and I allowed him to enter. We sat at my kitchen table, and he asked if I would answer some questions about the night before. I agreed to talk with him when he promised to record the entire conversation on his pocket recorder and he allowed me to also record it on my own recorder at the same time.
After reading me my Miranda rights, he began asking me about the night before. He asked me again if I knew the girl “y”, and even showed me a picture of her. I told him, truthfully, that I had no idea who she was. He then asked if I had stepped outside at any time during the play, and I told him I had not. When asked if I could prove it, I told him to contact the woman I was with the entire time, as she would vouch for my un-interrupted presence inside the building. He noted her name, address and phone number, and then dropped the bomb.
He told me the girl had told the police the night before that I had threatened to come to her house and rape her later that night, and that I would kill her if she told anybody else about it. She also said that her cousin had overheard the threat being made, and the cousin confirmed that fact. He then told me that I would need to go with him, as he already had a warrant for my arrest. They charged me with assault and aggravated stalking.
I called my attorney from the jail, and he managed to get my sentencing judge to authorize my release on bail, much to the consternation of my local Probation Supervisor. My “de-facto” Probation Supervisor back in the sentencing state refused to seek a VOP warrant, stating that he would only do so if I were convicted or entered a guilty plea. He correctly stated that I had not willfully or intentionally violated any conditions of my probation.
The charges went nowhere, as the girls could not tell the same story at the same time. The “victim” told one story, and her cousin told another. Two days later, the girls were questioned again. This time, the cousin’s story matched the girl’s original story. But the girl’s story now matched the story originally told by the cousin. The third time, both girls told the same story, but this new story glaringly conflicted with both of the previous stories.
It was then learned that the girl had printed out the photos of every sex offender on the registry in our district, and had them in a loose-leaf binder. Apparently, she carried this binder with her everywhere she went. I was in there, of course. The prosecutor determined that the girl had recognized me, looked in the binder to confirm, and then made up this bogus allegation against me in a twisted desire for attention. The charges were dismissed, but at the cost of $6,000.00 in legal fees on my part. The girl and her family were poor white trash, so they had no money to sue for.
But the story doesn’t end there. A year later, my Probation Supervisor back in the sentencing state quit, and I was assigned to a new Supervisor. This Supervisor, in looking over my file, saw the reports of my arrest but no reports of a VOP. So she filed for a warrant and for revocation, on the grounds that I had a condition prohibiting me from frequenting the grounds of a school while students are present, my immediate Probation Supervisor had advised me of this condition, and thus I had disobeyed his instructions. When I pointed out that school typically was not in session at 8:00 PM on Saturday nights, she simply pointed out that the actors were students, thus there were students present, and the play was in the auditorium, thus I was on school grounds.
The judge revoked 6 months of my probation, so I spent my days in the county jail. Since the judge “resentenced” me at the revocation hearing, my local Probation Supervisor determined that I would have to go through therapy a second time. He also said that I would have to take a sex offender polygraph test as part of my “therapy”. When I asked him why I didn’t have to before, he just shrugged his shoulders and said, “We weren’t enforcing it before. Now we are”. So I started my monthly visits to the psychologist again, and got set to take the polygraph, set for 6 weeks later.
While mine may be an isolated incident, it is apparent that “some” people will use the sex offender registry for a purpose other than that which it is intended for.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (120017)
Message 120031 (In Reply to Message 120017)
The Polygraph Test
Posted by orolan
on Oct 17, 2003 10:14 PM | Also by orolan
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: N/A,
Country: United States |
I took my first polygraph after being told that I needed to repeat therapy due to a VOP. I was not given an explanation as to why I didn’t have to do it the first time I was in therapy.
My attorney and I had numerous discussions about the upcoming polygraph, mainly brainstorming sessions on how to discredit the polygraph without incurring another VOP or a criminal charge. I was confident that I could “lie” and the examiner would not be able to “detect” it. It would all depend on what lies were told. We decided that I would make some “admissions” on the pre-test questionnaire that would be of interest to the examiner but would actually be falsehoods. I would then answer that these falsehoods were in fact the truth. We were quite confident that these admissions would result in some action by the Probation Supervisor, and would then be proven as falsehoods.
I admitted on the questionnaire that I possessed pornographic videos, magazines and digital photographs involving children. During the pre-test interview, we further narrowed this down to 7 videos, 11 magazines and an educated guess at 12,000 images. Naturally, the examiner had assured me that I needed to be “honest and forthright” in my admissions, and that “nothing will happen to you for telling the truth, only for lying”. And he also gave me the spiel about “Forget about trying to lie, the machine will KNOW you are lying. Note that I (truthfully) made no admissions to having any unauthorized contact with minors.
I was hooked up, and we went on with the test. I was asked “Other than what you have told me about, do you possess any illicit images of any kind involving minors?”. I was asked “Have you had any unauthorized contact with minors?”. I was asked “Other than what you have told me about, have you violated any laws or probation conditions?”. I was asked “Have you been completely truthful with me today?”. And I was asked “Have you been completely truthful in your therapy sessions?”.
I was asked these questions five different times, in different orders. After the third series the examiner left the room for five minutes, stating that he “forgot to do something”. When he returned, he ran the last two series. He then unhooked me, shook my hand and said “Congratulations. You passed and I’m glad you aren’t out there molesting children. You’re free to go now.” So I left.
When I got home (a 50-mile drive), there were two Probation Supervisors, 5 police officers and one State Police Investigator sitting in my yard and driveway. My Probation Supervisor told me they were there to search my house for illicit materials, because the polygraph examiner had called him and told him about my admissions and that I had “flat-lined” all five charts, indicating that I was telling the truth. The State Police Investigator expressed some reservations about searching my house without my consent, even though my Probation Supervisor had a statutory right to conduct a search without any warrant or consent. The Investigator asked that I sign a consent form, which I did after a quick call to my attorney.
The search lasted for over 5 hours. My attorney showed up after two hours, when I called to tell him they were still there. They completely trashed my house looking for the “illicit materials”. Clothes dumped out of drawers, furniture moved, rugs lifted, kitchen cabinets emptied, beds dismantled, etc. They crawled around under my house, they ransacked my storage shed, and they combed the front and back yards looking for signs of digging. While all this went on, the State Police Investigator concentrated on my two computers. My “usual” computer, a Windows machine, was no problem for him. He ran his ‘Encase’ software, and found nothing out of the ordinary. A few photos of children that were “canned” images that came with Microsoft Powerpoint, but nothing else. It was my other computer that gave him fits. It was an older machine, and I had installed Red Hat Linux 5.0 on it as a “test” machine so I could learn how to use that OS. The Investigator was totally lost, and wanted me to “help” him navigate through it. I asked him if he was the resident “computer expert” at the local State Police Barracks, and he said he was. So I told him to figure it out himself, since he was the expert. My attorney stood by me and told him the same thing, telling me at the same time to not even give the guy my login info. Needless to say, this caused a bit of anger in the Investigator, followed quickly by a dawning realization on his part(wrongly so) that this must be the computer with all the images on it.
By this time, the search was winding down. The Probation Supervisors and police officers had managed to find a copy of TeenCosmo left by one of my kids, and a copy of the movie Wild America, also left by my kids. Nothing remotely resembling the illicit materials I was supposed to have was ever found. The State Police Investigator took my Linux computer back to the Barracks with him and sent it on to the crime lab, since he never could figure out how to access the files. The crime lab returned the computer 8 months later, with a letter stating that there were no illicit files or traces of illicit files.
I was never charged with anything, by Probation or the police. When I explained the “reasoning” behind my actions and that it was a pre-planned setup, my Probation Supervisor became quite angry. But he could do nothing. I had complied fully with the terms of my probation, and no laws had been broken.
The following year, I was once again scheduled for a polygraph. This time, the examiner sent a letter to me and my Probation Supervisor declining to give me another polygraph. I was disappointed, because I had a whole new story about alien abduction and sex with underage aliens from a far-off galaxy that I wanted to “confess” to. Anyway, it was agreed that if my therapist would discharge me from therapy, I would not have to take the polygraph. So she did discharge me. Funny thing is, other probationers in my district who have been discharged from therapy are still taking annual polygraphs.
Polygraphs are a joke. If you tell the examiner what he wants or expects to hear, he’ll say you’re telling the truth. If you don’t admit to something relevant, you’re lying. I will concede that the “fear” of the polygraph may cause some sex offenders to think before they do something they shouldn’t do. As a deterrent, the polygraph has some validity. But as my case proved, it sucks at detecting truth or deception.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (120017)
Message 120036 (In Reply to Message 120017)
Courage to Reveal
Posted by dp1
on Oct 18, 2003 01:39 AM | Also by dp1
| Gender: Female,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Florida,
Country: United States |
Orolan,
It took a lot of courage for you to open up and start telling your story. I admire you for that. I am also one lucky probation officer who hasn't had the opportunity to meet you in a professional setting. I have a few right now that are more than a handful like yourself and they keep me very busy.
Your story comes as no surprise since your attitudes about certain topics on this site are indicative of the types of behavior you've been accused of in real life. There is no excuse for anyone having sex with a 14 year old so whether you did, or your brother did, or the mailman did is really unimportant as far as I can see by your story. Either way it was irresponsible. I am sorry that your judgement was so poor at that time. We all live and learn. Hopefully, next time you're faced with being an adult in a parental role you'll step up to the plate. Thanks for sharing with others that may learn from your experiences.
DP1
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (120017)
Message 120037 (In Reply to Message 120031)
Orolan's Lie
Posted by dp1
on Oct 18, 2003 01:51 AM | Also by dp1
| Gender: Female,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Florida,
Country: United States |
You stated that you needed to make up falsehood's on the test so you admitted (or lied) about having porn, etc... to discredit the test? You were afraid of? the truth? What truth would have violated your probation? Obviously, the truth is worse than having porn...hmmm ...this could be very interesting...I will anxiously wait for your reply regarding your motives to this incredible, elaborate scam.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (120031)
Message 120043 (In Reply to Message 120017)
Age of consent?
Posted by steve
on Oct 18, 2003 02:51 AM | Also by steve
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Virginia,
Country: United States |
> It would also require exposing my brother to prosecution, because I would
> have to name him on the stand.
You stated that your brother was 17 at the time and the girl he had sex with was 14. Were those their ages when the first act occurred? What was their age difference in months? And in the state the sex acts occurred in what did the relevant state laws state?
I ask because in some states sex acts between minors is legal so long as their age difference is less than a certain number of years, based on their actual birth dates, not their ages rounded down to a whole year number.
Based on the details you provided I assume that the sex acts between them were illegal, but since you didn't actually state that they were and what the laws said at the time so I think those details would be useful to those of us reading.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (120017)
Message 120045 (In Reply to Message 120028)
Do You Have A Chip on Your Shoulder?
Posted by dp1
on Oct 18, 2003 03:17 AM | Also by dp1
| Gender: Female,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Florida,
Country: United States |
I am sorry Silver but I have to disagree with both you and Orolan on this one. The Probation Officer's job is to protect the public which includes recommending that registered sex offenders not be allowed to have contact or live with children. Whether or not he believes Orolan, it is his duty to stand up and address the Court on the possible risks to children. I have been in positions many a times where I had to put my personal feelings aside and just do my my job by representing the public or the victims. No need to take it to the personal level. Someone has to speak up and mention the unmentionable. Whether the Judge rules in favor of the defendant or not is not important. Let's just hope the Judge made the right decision based on the facts in front of him at the time. Only time will tell if the Court's decision was right or wrong.
DP1
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (120028)
Message 120047 (In Reply to Message 120045)
this is a very rare instance
Posted by myoung
on Oct 18, 2003 03:56 AM | Also by myoung
| Gender: N/A,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Pennsylvania,
Country: United States |
The types of things that have happened to you are very rare indeed. I hold fast the idea that generally a person doing all the right things and staying out of precarious situations will not fall prey to our judicial system. We, of course, don't know you nor do we know if you are telling us the entire truth. My gut tells me that if you are as innocent as you claim, it would not have gone as far as it did (just a thread of skepticism). There are very few incidences like yours therefore it does not eliminate the usefulness of a sex offender registry for all sex offenders. I hope that most of us are educated enough to know that a person on the registry who is 19 years of age at conviction and his MO reads as victims under age of 18, it is "possible" but not probable that a parent got a little crazy when they found out their 17 year old was having sex with a nineteen year old. Consentually or not, I know it happens and parents take control of the situation and all hell breaks loose. On the other hand, sex offenders who make it to the registry have either been part of a situation that is more than questionable or have done something so heinous there truly isn't enough justice. There is a wide range in between. Let's face it shall we, child abuse in any form is unacceptable. Children are to be envied for all of their innocence and silliness. I love watching my children grow up and being witness to how they see the world. When someone comes along and destroys that beautiful part of them it is just too unacceptable and words cannot express the sadness I feel everyday because I know it exists in the world in which we live. In Silverthorne's case, I will think of him everyday just knowing that someone murdered his soul so many years ago. You can try to fix it but let's be honest, they are only bandaids. The pain may fade but the memories are burned into our hearts and souls. One thing you can never escape is your own mind..
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (120045)
Message 120062 (In Reply to Message 120045)
But it is personal
Posted by Silverthorne
on Oct 18, 2003 09:40 AM | Also by Silverthorne
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Arizona,
Country: United States |
DP1 I have to disagree here. I've always thought the PO's job was to supervise and KNOW the probationer.
Don't PO's talk about knowing everything about an SO? You get into their lives and know them better then anyone else right?
I guess I'm wondering if a standard "KEEP THEM AWAY FROM KIDS" is the form-letter policy why they would even need to show up in court?
Silverthorne
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (120045)
Message 120063 (In Reply to Message 120030)
Sue them anyway
Posted by Silverthorne
on Oct 18, 2003 09:45 AM | Also by Silverthorne
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Arizona,
Country: United States |
Orolan,
You should've sued them anyway white trash or not. Lawsuit judgements for criminal conduct can't be discharged by bankruptcy. If they ever made money you could go after it.
Also why didn't the police file charges against them of false reporting? That's a crime!
This is beyond pathetic. Therapy a second time around? Its clear they're making it up as they go.
Silverthorne
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (120030)
Message 120069 (In Reply to Message 120037)
Scam
Posted by orolan
on Oct 18, 2003 03:01 PM | Also by orolan
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: N/A,
Country: United States |
DP1,
You misread the intent. No "truth" would have violated my probation, because there were and are no violations. A "false positive", wherein the truth is scored as a lie, could have caused numerous problems, including revocation. Rather than risk the false positive, we went on the offensive and forced a "false negative", wherein a lie is scored as the truth.
It was necessary to make "admissions" that COULD be proved as lies. For example, an admission to unsupervised contact can't be proved 100%, but by the same token, it can't be dis-proved. I'm sure you're aware of the "preponderance of the evidence" rule for revocation. In the above example, all the court would need is the Probation Supervisor's statement that I admitted to the contact, because his statement automatically carries more "weight" than my denial.
On the other hand, an admission to being in possession of illicit materials AT THE TIME OF THE TEST is easily refuted by the simple lack of said materials or any traces that said materials ever did exist. As was the case in my "scam". It worked, and it worked beautifully. A documented, proven case that the polygraph has no validity and polygraphers will "score" the test to suit their preconceived notions. While my actions did nothing to stop the state from continuing to order the tests, 3 of the 4 sex-offender therapists in my area no longer even bother to look at the test results.
Eventually, polygraphs will be outlawed for "screening" purposes. I have been fighting this fight longer than I've been a sex offender, and this just gave me an opportunity to further the cause.
BTW, the polygrapher and his professional associations refuse to comment on or acknowledge that this event ever occurred. And they say sex offenders have "denial" issues!
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (120037)
Message 120070 (In Reply to Message 120036)
Judgement
Posted by orolan
on Oct 18, 2003 03:14 PM | Also by orolan
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: N/A,
Country: United States |
DP1,
Thanks. In hindsight, yes it was a poor judgement decision on my part. I should have just taken the girl home and told her parents what happened. If I learned nothing else from therapy, I did learn that.
I'm really not as bad as I used to be. My Probation Supervisor has "mellowed" just a little, and I am nowhere near as confrontational as I used to be towards him. We get along fine these days. I think the tide started turning when my kids moved in with me. After 3 years of seeing me with them, I think he has figured out that I'm not the "monster" he saw me as before.
But he is a strict P.S. I can't fault him for that, because he's just doing his job. It does aggravate me sometimes, but what can I do?
As for opinions about teen sex, yes we are diametrically opposite on that subject. But you will note that I have never "excused" anybody's behavior because it "shouldn't be illegal". The law is the law, and must be obeyed and enforced, otherwise we have total anarchy. But that doesn't make the law "right", and it doesn't mean that some of us can't work to have them changed. That's all I'm doing. Looking for some continuity and common sense in the laws. And you will never see me pushing for a law legalizing sexual activity between an adult and an 8 year-old. Lines do have to be drawn.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (120036)
Message 120076 (In Reply to Message 120069)
Polygraph
Posted by dp1
on Oct 18, 2003 06:19 PM | Also by dp1
| Gender: Female,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Florida,
Country: United States |
So what you're saying is that in your state they could violate your probation on the poly results alone? I find that hard to believe because if that was the case they could have violated you for admitting to having certain porn materials without the search. Your officer's failure to arrest you after the search and after the admission tells me he/she had no evidence.
So on the contrary, if you didn't scam up a lie, told the truth but was accused of lying then your officer would have to run out and find the proof again...Once again, with no proof there would be no violation. If you weren't up to something then why bother with trying to manipulate the test?
Further, in your first post you mentioned that you don't lie. Hmmm let's look at that false statement for a minute. You were charged with sexualy battery, stated you didn't do it because it was your brother, but accepted the plea in Court? Never bothered to tell the Court the truth? OK. Now. You lied to your polygrapher and boast about not having the porn material you previously admitted to (obviously you could have had it but trashed it before your test)
Then you're general discussions regarding your crime appear to insinuate that all you did was talk about sex? Looks like you are on for sexual battery among other things. Inticing a minor is far more serious than talking about sex don't you think?
I might be wrong Orolan, but I would have to read the victim's statement before I made a judgement. Why don't you post the comments from the victim and her parents (without names and addresses) so we can all empathize with you and say poor baby he was just trying to talk about sex. I would also love to read the investigator's report to see what all the other players had to say.
Am I wrong about you being on for Sexual Battery or did they get you for enticing a minor? If they got you for enticing a minor then I suspect the truth might be more like you found out the victim was having sex with your brother and you tried to get some action also. Is that more like the truth? What did you talk to her about? Safe sex? Why teenagers shouldn't have sex? Why she should call her mother and go home? Or was it more like.... so you're having sex with my brother....how about with me too since your not a virgin, anyway? Did you need some bootie action Orolan?
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (120069)
Message 120077 (In Reply to Message 120070)
Interesting Indeed
Posted by PVulcan
on Oct 18, 2003 07:02 PM | Also by PVulcan
| Gender: N/A,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: N/A,
Country: United States |
Isn't it interesting that when victims post here about their assault, they are questioned about things like, did you say NO loud enough etc etc, all types of victim blaming type statements. People even go as far as to blame parents of victims for their assault.Yet in this narrative about orolan no one is questioning his behavior or insinuating that he did this crime, because he is a SO he supposedly got a raw deal. And we all wonder WHY sexual crimes continue in our society!!
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (120070)
Message 120080 (In Reply to Message 120076)
Its true
Posted by Silverthorne
on Oct 18, 2003 09:52 PM | Also by Silverthorne
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Arizona,
Country: United States |
DP1,
I believe in Texas for example they can pull you back off probation for a failed polygraph. I can check but I believe its the same way here in Arizona.
I'd ask you though given the mixed accuracy of the polygraph do you feel its fair to revoke based on it alone or should substantiating evidence be required?
I guess I'm asking because most courts (and the same police who use it to supervise SO) won't allow it as "proof" of innocence - yet they'll use it to bury someone on probation.
Fair?
Silverthorne
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (120076)
Message 120081 (In Reply to Message 120077)
Reply to PVulcan
Posted by Silverthorne
on Oct 18, 2003 09:58 PM | Also by Silverthorne
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Arizona,
Country: United States |
PVulcan,
If you'll look at my first post I asked him why he "took the fall" like this. Personally I find that he was convicted on what amounts to a "legal loophole" of a crime. He surely didnt solicit a child for sex. The prosecutor was out on a limb charging him like he would someone who lured a kid with an offer of Playboy magazines.
I do believe he learned his lesson and should've told the parents. I guess though in this day of making the punishment fit the crime this isn't even close. Its a complete waste of taxpayer resources to register and polygraph this person given this history. To be honest if I was a judge and this case came before me I'd ask the prosecutor how talking to a kid about improper sex (which they committed) would be the same as luring.
Its a bad law that needs to be rewritten As for the PO I guess I have a problem with his personality (tossing a house like that and throwing everything around I believe is improper). I've always felt in cases like that they should at least make an effort to TRY and not trash the place. Likewise eight months to check his computer? What gives? What if he used that in his job? Now its lost and THAT would violate probation too wouldn't it?
At least Orolan says the PO is relaxing a little. I think the guy deals with these molester scumbags so long he thinks EVERYONE is the same. I'm sure for example if someone like him were to post here he'd be railing on me about having pedophilia conviced everyone acts out. If his job is really to know and supervise he has to KNOW the person.
Silverthorne
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (120077)
Message 120084 (In Reply to Message 120077)
To Vulcan
Posted by myoung
on Oct 19, 2003 03:31 AM | Also by myoung
| Gender: N/A,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Pennsylvania,
Country: United States |
Did you read my reply Vulcan? I have my doubts about anything someone tells me about a story so questionable! I am a mother.....it's in my nature:)
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (120077)
Message 120096 (In Reply to Message 120081)
Posted by PVulcan
on Oct 19, 2003 08:14 AM | Also by PVulcan
| Gender: N/A,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: N/A,
Country: United States |
Silverthorne: Personally I find that he was convicted on what amounts to a "legal loophole" of a crime. He surely didnt solicit a child for sex
This is my point. BAsed on the information he gave you are making these assumptions. I 'd love to see court documentation on this.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (120081)
Message 120097 (In Reply to Message 120084)
Posted by PVulcan
on Oct 19, 2003 08:17 AM | Also by PVulcan
| Gender: N/A,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: N/A,
Country: United States |
Sorry about that. That was a 'general' statement that NO ONE is questioning this. Some are :)
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (120084)
Message 120099 (In Reply to Message 120080)
Silver's Reply
Posted by dp1
on Oct 19, 2003 12:27 PM | Also by dp1
| Gender: Female,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Florida,
Country: United States |
Silver says:
"I believe in Texas for example they can pull you back off probation for a failed polygraph. I can check but I believe its the same way here in Arizona.
I'd ask you though given the mixed accuracy of the polygraph do you feel its fair to revoke based on it alone or should substantiating evidence be required?
I guess I'm asking because most courts (and the same police who use it to supervise SO) won't allow it as "proof" of innocence - yet they'll use it to bury someone on probation.
Fair?
Silverthorne"
Yes Silver I agree. And I have heard people on this site (I think S.S. was one of them) who indicated that admisssions during a polygraph were grounds for revocation for parole or probation (but not for new charges).
We don't use the admissions during polygraph test here in Florida. We do the same as what happened to Orolan. When we have reason to believe something's going on we would do a search. No warrant required. The arrest is based on the physical evidence. In Orolan's case they found no physical evidence and made no arrest. So my point to Orolan was that they didn't arrest him on his admission during the poly, found no evidence of violations, so what's the motive for lying?
As stated in my earlier post, even if Orolan told the truth during the poly but was accused of lying anyway they still would have had to search for physical evidence, so I ask again.....what's the motive for lying?
If you're not up to no good or have no physical evidence that your up to something then why would you give a crap about anything the polygrapher or your P.O. had to say?
DP1
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (120080)
Message 120100 (In Reply to Message 120081)
Everyone's Innocent?
Posted by dp1
on Oct 19, 2003 12:50 PM | Also by dp1
| Gender: Female,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Florida,
Country: United States |
Silver,
What's all the whining about? Need some cheeze with that whine?
A law enforcement officer (including P.O.'s) have to believe that a person might have violated the law. How can they do a good thorough job investigating if they didn't? If you are law enforcement and take the position that the guy is innocent before you investigate then you will be short changing not only yourself but the community. Wasn't your father a career policeman? Didn't you say you had a criminal justice major? I'm surprised at your position and dissappointed quite frankly, because you are a so-called non-acting out pedophile, but then again? Taking the side of a convicted SO? Sorry, buddy - don't get it.
I mean no disrespect to either Orolan or yourself. I respect that Orolan has opened up. I believe that 90% of what he is saying is true. I don't fault you for supporting his efforts. But the truth to the matter is that his case as we heard is just one sided. We haven't heard from his P.O., from the victim, from the District Attorney, etc., etc, etc. My only beef with Orolan's story is that it seems' a weeeee bit minimized.
DP1
P.S. Oh, and as far as law enforcement throwing his crap around and grabbing his computer my advice is.....DON'T LIE NEXT TIME!
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (120081)
Message 120102 (In Reply to Message 120017)
Thanks for the story [nt]
Posted by yaesu
on Oct 19, 2003 03:10 PM | Also by yaesu
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: N/A,
Country: United States |
nt
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (120017)
Message 120110 (In Reply to Message 120100)
Why Im whining
Posted by Silverthorne
on Oct 19, 2003 05:35 PM | Also by Silverthorne
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Arizona,
Country: United States |
DP1,
I expect better then a whine and cheese flame.
Anyway, if the situation is as Orolan presented it then NO I don't consider him a sex offender (regardless of what some registry says).
Here's why I'm thinking the way I do:
1) His sentencing judge recommended probation, no registry, minimal therapy and seemed to understand he didn't commit a "sex crime". While under the letter of the law he may've discussed a sexual matter with a minor its obvious the statute was written for another purpose.
As an example look at the USA Patriot Act and the followup act. Despite all the claims it will "stop terrorists" remember a few weeks ago I posted an article describing how they're using it to go after normal domestic criminals? Theres a perfect example of a law being "warped" to get a conviction for something that was never intended when the law was passed.
He was given custody of his kids. I realize the PO had a duty to "protect the public" but isn't it possible his reaction was part of the "sterotype" here. If the PO had read the case file he'd have known what the original judge obviously did. If he had talked to Orolon respectfully and been told the story - backed up with the case files - isn't it possible he'd have a different view? What I'm saying is its obvious this particular PO (if he is truly as Orolan presents him - and thats a big "if") then isn't it possible he's operating in misconceptions and sterotypes and not on individual facts in this case? If so do you think thats the best way to deal with situations like this?
Orolan says the PO has "mellowed out" a bit. He's still a tough guy but he'd obviously seen Orolan isn't some drooling child molester hiding behind a bush. I realize it takes time to know someone but you also have the make the EFFORT to know them?
2) If the police had investigated properly they would've discovered his brother was the one who had sex with this girl. Instead it sounds like they were pressured into getting a conviction by the parents.
I guess I'll ask Orolan why if it was obvious he didn't have sex with her (look at the sentence he got) did the police just "give up" finding the actual offender? They had a duty to protect the public and they failed.
3) You don't believe 10% of what he's saying (you said you believe 90% is true). What is he lying about? Perhaps you'd care to enlighten me (and him). I'd love to give him the opportunity to show us something is true when you assume its not (assuming he can).
4) Trashing his home. Regardless of whether he lied or not SO's are subject to random searches (read about them in the paper here). I'm just wondering if its standard PO practice to trash a persons home? Have you considered it may be another form of punishment, demeaning them and "putting them down" in a way? If so why do you feel its justified when they've served their jail sentence and are now on probation? Or is probation supposed to be more punishment? If not how is it justified to "trash" a persons home. A search can be done with a reasonable amount of respect for a persons home (I spent three years on a police reserve and helped with some search warrants - I know).
Don't say this doesn't happen. I've heard in group examples of PO's coming out and dumping drawers on the floor, pulling videos off a shelf and leaving them on the floor, dumping a garbage can out on the kitchen table, stuff like that. You hear stuff like that going on and it really makes you wonder what is going on? Despite the fact these people are on probation a little decency and respect for their right as a human being with feelings would go along way.
People who would say "they're a convicted SO we dont have to worry about their feelings look what they did" are in the wrong business if they're PO's.
Considering people who suffer from pedophilia (in particular) will tell you real life stresses can aggrevate the problem I find it completely irresponsible that an individual like a PO would do something to cause MORE STRESS in a person. I know there will be some stress being on probation and they did commit the crime -its part of the deal. But isn't it also the responsibility of the PO (who is supposed to help protect the public) to ensure stress is kept at a minimum so this person is likely to NOT reoffend? They seem like mutually inclusive goals to me.
Thats why I feel this way. If your wondering I was once the subject of a "search". I've mentioned before how while I was in group in Minnesota there was a high-profile abduction case. One of the group members (who was a convicted SO) gave the FBI my name as "someone suspicious" because I had talked about it in group ( the case upset me alot and I talked about that - I could relate to the boy and "imagine" what he was going thru).
So I came home one day and found an FBI business card stuck in my door. The agent came out after I called him and asked my alabi. Now I had been playing hockey that night so my alabi was good. Coincidently one of the other guys playing was the FBI agent in charge of the case investigating the abduction. Pretty good alibi.
Anyway he asked to "look around" when he got there. I had been very careful to put in a secure place my "scrapbook" of underwear clippings and didn't have anything around so I said sure. While he didn't really "mess up" anything he did go thru everything.
I realize I could've always said "no" but I was afraid to. Afraid he'd come back with a warrant and trash the place. Afraid because he asked what "your offense was" and was a little surprised when I told him there wasn't one. He had been investigating all convicted SO's in the area and assumed I was another one. He was a little surprised when I told him I was in group voluntarily. Either way I'm sure I'm on some computer somewhere now.
Anyway he left. I'll move on to the mid 90's. I owned a few trucks and was leased onto a large national trucking company. I was driving in South Carolina when I pulled into a weigh station. I was pulled aside and the truck searched. Now this is "legal" according the the governments because it's a commercial vehicle. Even though the truck (with custom sleeper) was my "home" it's open to search (which I consider illegal but the courts are still fighting that out).
Anyway he just waltzed in and started pulling stuff off shelves, from closets and dumped everything on the bed in a big pile. He made a mess of what was a "show truck" that I used to make school recruiting visits for the company I was leased to.
The point is he had no business doing it. Oh sure a search was "legal" but trashing the place was just some jerk on a power trip. If it's any consolation I wrote a complaint letter to the governor and commandant of the state patrol (including before and "after" pictures which I took when he was done). I actually got a reply back and this person was supposedly disciplined. So the system worked.
Now I was a law abiding taxpayer doing business there. I could "write a letter" and expect a response. Could an SO do that with an overzealous PO?
Don't get me wrong DP1. I believe PO's should have the right to conduct random searches of PO's homes. I believe in close supervison of SO's. I posted in the past an article (cant find it now) about the revolutionary probation team we have here in Phoenix and our under 2% recidivism rate for sex offenders (under 2% commit new sex crimes with 5 years). All this is good but there has to be a "checks and balances".
1) Can a search be conducted without trashing a place?
YES
2) Can the PO treat the SO with a level of dignity?
YES
3) Can the PO recognize the SO needs to rebuild his life and is he able to assist in that so he doesn't act out again?
YES
Now one question for you DP1,
WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF PROBATION?
My quess is: Its to provide continual monitoring of criminals after their release from an institution. By providing supervision the criminal has a checks and balaces system inplace to assist in his rehabilitation. This system also allows for the public safety by monitoring convicted criminals after release to ensure they rejoin productive society.
If I'm wrong let me know but to me that looks like the PO's job is the HELP the SO reenter society in a responsible manner. I've never viewed probation as a punishment in that sense. Instead I view it as supervision for someone to ensure they have the tools in place to rejoin society. A "checks and balances".
No where have I ever seen where the purpose of probation was to humiliate, degrade, disrespect and harrass an individual.
What I'm saying is properly done all the same things that are done now can be done without all the negative side effects.
Trashing a house is very negative.
Silverthorne
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (120100)
Message 120115 (In Reply to Message 120063)
False reporting
Posted by orolan
on Oct 19, 2003 06:54 PM | Also by orolan
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: N/A,
Country: United States |
"Also why didn't the police file charges against them of false reporting? That's a crime!"
Try convincing Marta of that. She, and you to some extent, believes it to be a civil matter. Not so. I shouldn't HAVE to sue them to get justice.
"Equal protection under the law" is what the Constitution says. I may be a sex offender, but I'm still a citizen of this country.
I filed charges. They got lost while being carried across the hall from the Sheriff's office to the prosecutor's office. It went downhill from there.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (120063)
Message 120116 (In Reply to Message 120076)
Posted by orolan
on Oct 19, 2003 07:50 PM | Also by orolan
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: N/A,
Country: United States |
"So what you're saying is that in your state they could violate your probation on the poly results alone?"
Of course not. But a verbal admission to illegal conduct during the pre-test interview could be grounds for a revocation hearing.
"Your officer's failure to arrest you after the search and after the admission tells me he/she had no evidence."
No kidding! Your perception is remarkable.
"...told the truth but was accused of lying then your officer would have to run out and find the proof again"
If the examiner had scored "deception indicated" to my answer of "no" to the question "Have you had unsupervised contact with minors", nobody would have needed to run out and find some proof. The petition to revoke would be filed, and it would be up to me to find some way to prove my innocence. Which I have already pointed out is not possible.
"Once again, with no proof there would be no violation"
No proof is required, only the Probation Supervisor's testimony that the violation occurred. It falls on the probationer to provide some clear and compelling evidence that will carry greater weight than the testimony in order to overcome it. In my case, that would be the State Police report detailing the search and the lack of illicit materials.
"You were charged with sexualy battery"
Sure. I was charged with rape, too. Do you need a lesson in how these things work? Police arrest for as many charges as they can remotely connect to the incident at hand. Makes the statistics look good. Prosecutors present as many charges as they can to the Grand Jury for indictment. Once the indictments are handed back down, prosecutor moves on to trying to convict on as many charges as possible. But what went wrong here? Well, the prosecutor saw that he would be a total IDIOT if he tried to present the "arrest" charges to a Grand Jury, because there was NO evidence he could give them. So he presented the only crime he thought the evidence indicated had occurred. I plead guilty to that charge, because it was true. Go back and read the text of the indictment. No "lying" going on here, as you seem to think.
"You lied to your polygrapher and boast about not having the porn material you previously admitted to (obviously you could have had it but trashed it before your test)"
Since polygraphs are all about lying on the part of the examiner, I have no moral qualms about lying to the quack. And "trashing" the materials prior to the test wouldn't have worked, because the question wasn't "Did you used to have", it was "Do you have".
"Looks like you are on for sexual battery among other things."
Where do you keep getting that? Read the indictment again. I have never been indicted or gone to trial or entered a plea to sexual battery. I am not on the registry for sexual battery. I have never committed sexual battery. Get it through your thick head.
"Inticing a minor is far more serious than talking about sex don't you think?"
This is being discussed elsewhere on the board, so I see no need to elaborate further here.
"Why don't you post the comments from the victim and her parents "
I told you what was said already. The "victim" admitted to engaging in sexual activity while at my house and that I was aware of it. When pressed for "who" she did it with, she clammed up, refusing to answer. When asked how I knew about it, her response was "we talked about it". Really not a lot more than that. The parent's comments on the record are only to the affect that the girl had their permission to be at my house.
"I would also love to read the investigator's report"
It's a piece of work. Compressed, it says "Victim was at suspect's home, victim admits to sexual activity at suspect's home, suspect lives alone but did have two other minor children staying with him at the time, no indication of sexual activity with the other two minors, suspect denies any sexual activity with victim, suspect admits "talking" to victim about sexual activity, case is cleared with arrest.
"Am I wrong about you being on for Sexual Battery"
YES!!!!!!!
"I suspect the truth might be more like you found out the victim was having sex with your brother and you tried to get some action also"
Not a surprising comment from the likes of you. But I have no need for 14 year-olds when there are plenty of willing partners out there who are legal.
"What did you talk to her about? Safe sex?"
Yes. Now you're on to something here. You're starting to get it.
"Did you need some bootie action Orolan?"
Aw, shucks. You lost it again, just when you were on the right track. Why would I "need some bootie action" from a 14 year-old when I could pick up a 20 year-old in the club with no problem at all and not have to worry about the law?
Pretty much what I expected from you. Kind of wish I had you for a Probation Supervisor. I could have had a blast making your life miserable.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (120076)
Message 120117 (In Reply to Message 120076)
Posted by orolan
on Oct 19, 2003 07:50 PM | Also by orolan
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: N/A,
Country: United States |
"So what you're saying is that in your state they could violate your probation on the poly results alone?"
Of course not. But a verbal admission to illegal conduct during the pre-test interview could be grounds for a revocation hearing.
"Your officer's failure to arrest you after the search and after the admission tells me he/she had no evidence."
No kidding! Your perception is remarkable.
"...told the truth but was accused of lying then your officer would have to run out and find the proof again"
If the examiner had scored "deception indicated" to my answer of "no" to the question "Have you had unsupervised contact with minors", nobody would have needed to run out and find some proof. The petition to revoke would be filed, and it would be up to me to find some way to prove my innocence. Which I have already pointed out is not possible.
"Once again, with no proof there would be no violation"
No proof is required, only the Probation Supervisor's testimony that the violation occurred. It falls on the probationer to provide some clear and compelling evidence that will carry greater weight than the testimony in order to overcome it. In my case, that would be the State Police report detailing the search and the lack of illicit materials.
"You were charged with sexualy battery"
Sure. I was charged with rape, too. Do you need a lesson in how these things work? Police arrest for as many charges as they can remotely connect to the incident at hand. Makes the statistics look good. Prosecutors present as many charges as they can to the Grand Jury for indictment. Once the indictments are handed back down, prosecutor moves on to trying to convict on as many charges as possible. But what went wrong here? Well, the prosecutor saw that he would be a total IDIOT if he tried to present the "arrest" charges to a Grand Jury, because there was NO evidence he could give them. So he presented the only crime he thought the evidence indicated had occurred. I plead guilty to that charge, because it was true. Go back and read the text of the indictment. No "lying" going on here, as you seem to think.
"You lied to your polygrapher and boast about not having the porn material you previously admitted to (obviously you could have had it but trashed it before your test)"
Since polygraphs are all about lying on the part of the examiner, I have no moral qualms about lying to the quack. And "trashing" the materials prior to the test wouldn't have worked, because the question wasn't "Did you used to have", it was "Do you have".
"Looks like you are on for sexual battery among other things."
Where do you keep getting that? Read the indictment again. I have never been indicted or gone to trial or entered a plea to sexual battery. I am not on the registry for sexual battery. I have never committed sexual battery. Get it through your thick head.
"Inticing a minor is far more serious than talking about sex don't you think?"
This is being discussed elsewhere on the board, so I see no need to elaborate further here.
"Why don't you post the comments from the victim and her parents "
I told you what was said already. The "victim" admitted to engaging in sexual activity while at my house and that I was aware of it. When pressed for "who" she did it with, she clammed up, refusing to answer. When asked how I knew about it, her response was "we talked about it". Really not a lot more than that. The parent's comments on the record are only to the affect that the girl had their permission to be at my house.
"I would also love to read the investigator's report"
It's a piece of work. Compressed, it says "Victim was at suspect's home, victim admits to sexual activity at suspect's home, suspect lives alone but did have two other minor children staying with him at the time, no indication of sexual activity with the other two minors, suspect denies any sexual activity with victim, suspect admits "talking" to victim about sexual activity, case is cleared with arrest.
"Am I wrong about you being on for Sexual Battery"
YES!!!!!!!
"I suspect the truth might be more like you found out the victim was having sex with your brother and you tried to get some action also"
Not a surprising comment from the likes of you. But I have no need for 14 year-olds when there are plenty of willing partners out there who are legal.
"What did you talk to her about? Safe sex?"
Yes. Now you're on to something here. You're starting to get it.
"Did you need some bootie action Orolan?"
Aw, shucks. You lost it again, just when you were on the right track. Why would I "need some bootie action" from a 14 year-old when I could pick up a 20 year-old in the club with no problem at all and not have to worry about the law?
Pretty much what I expected from you. Kind of wish I had you for a Probation Supervisor. I could have had a blast making your life miserable.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (120076)
Message 120118 (In Reply to Message 120099)
polygraphs
Posted by orolan
on Oct 19, 2003 07:59 PM | Also by orolan
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: N/A,
Country: United States |
DP1,
As I pointed out, the aim was to discredit the polygraph, becasue I have been doing that for years. Not to avoid a revocation. The evidence speaks for itself. I lied, the machine said I told the truth. But you don't think the process is flawed? I don't get it.
I'm glad that you wouldn't automatically seek a revocation based on a failed polygraph. If that is SOP everywhere in Florida, that's great. In some states, failing to complete treatment IS a violation. Is that so in Florida? If so, what would you do if the probationer was expelled from treatment for failing the polygraph? You would have to seek revocation, wouldn't you? And the underlying cause would be the polygraph. This is the work-around used in most other states that prohibit using the results for revocation.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (120099)
Message 120119 (In Reply to Message 120077)
PVulcan
Posted by orolan
on Oct 19, 2003 08:03 PM | Also by orolan
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: N/A,
Country: United States |
"no one is questioning his behavior or insinuating that he did this crime"
No need to question or insinuate. I have freely admitted to having committed the crime for which I was indicted. I made a mistake, and I know I did.
So what's YOUR problem???????????
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (120077)
Message 120120 (In Reply to Message 120100)
We haven't heard from
Posted by orolan
on Oct 19, 2003 08:15 PM | Also by orolan
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: N/A,
Country: United States |
Granted, you don't have that information. What you do have is the following facts:
Probation sentence with NO sex offender status
No conditions prohibiting contact with minors
Permission to have teenage girls LIVE in my house
No restrictions on Internet access
Just recently, permission to have my newborn grandson stay with me WITHOUT his mother for extended periods of time.
This from the judge who sentenced me. HE heard and saw it all, and knows the facts better than any of you. Do you not respect his judgement? Does this sound like a proper sentence for a child molester? No. But then again, I'm not a child molester.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (120100)
Message 120121 (In Reply to Message 120047)
Posted by orolan
on Oct 19, 2003 08:19 PM | Also by orolan
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: N/A,
Country: United States |
"We, of course, don't know you nor do we know if you are telling us the entire truth"
Nor do I have the slightest clue who or what you are. So that makes us even, doesn't it? If you expect me to respect you and your opinions, you'll have to respect mine and my story.
While it is no "defense", I could have posted to this board for the rest of my life without ever telling my story. So why would I tell a half-truth?
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (120047)
Message 120122 (In Reply to Message 120043)
AOC
Posted by orolan
on Oct 19, 2003 08:26 PM | Also by orolan
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: N/A,
Country: United States |
Steve,
40 months between the two of them, and they were 14 and 17 at the time of all incidents.
The AOC issue is a fuzzy one. In my home state, the contact was legal because he was under 18. But in her home state it was not. In her state, sexual activity by anyone under 16 is illegal, regardless of the age of the other person.
My brother could have been prosecuted under her home state's laws just like I was.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (120043)
Message 120126 (In Reply to Message 120100)
Posted by simon
on Oct 19, 2003 09:08 PM | Also by simon
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Oregon,
Country: United States |
"A law enforcement officer (including P.O.'s) have to believe that a person might have violated the law."
Are you saying that law enforcement people walk around looking at everyone as guilty? That they walk around in a perpetual state of suspicion? If so, that must be pretty rough on their families.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (120100)
Message 120129 (In Reply to Message 120110)
Posted by orolan
on Oct 19, 2003 11:38 PM | Also by orolan
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: N/A,
Country: United States |
"I guess I'll ask Orolan why if it was obvious he didn't have sex with her (look at the sentence he got) did the police just "give up" finding the actual offender?"
The charges were brought in a rural county that holds court twice a year, in April and October. My arrest occurred in September, so arraignment was set for April of the following year. In the 7 months that passed, the Sheriff got ousted by a landslide, and the victim and her family moved. By the time April rolled around, nobody really cared about it. And by then, my brother was gone, doing AIT in the Army at Aberdeen Proving Grounds.
"WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF PROBATION?"
In Burns v. United States, the United States Supreme Court held that "the purpose of probation is to provide a period of grace in order to aid the rehabilitation of a penitent offender. Probation affords an opportunity for reformation that actual service of the suspended sentence might make less probable".
The motto of DP1's employer is: "The Department of Corrections protects the public by operating a safe, secure, humane and efficient corrections system."
Funny. I don't see the word "rehabilitative" in there. That's because they care nothing about rehabilitation.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (120110)
Message 120135 (In Reply to Message 120017)
My opinion
Posted by marta
on Oct 20, 2003 12:29 AM | Also by marta
| Gender: Female,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: N/A,
Country: United States |
I think that you were dealt with more harshly than necessary because of the nature of bureaucracy and because of some of the hysteria surrounding sex.
It is not clear to me, however, why you saw fit to discuss sex with the youngsters and leave it at that, instead of alerting the parents of the girl to the situation so that they could make decisions about their daughter according to their value system. You were wrong to do what you did. If I were her parent, I would be VERY angry with you. Your behavior was irresponsible at best.
All of that said, again, I think you're suffering more than is necessary. If I were the girl's parent, given the situation EXACTLY as you described it, I would be content with not trusting you to supervise my daughter anymore, or for your brother to be able to see her.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (120017)
Message 120143 (In Reply to Message 120119)
interesting still
Posted by PVulcan
on Oct 20, 2003 01:53 AM | Also by PVulcan
| Gender: N/A,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: N/A,
Country: United States |
You 'admitted' to talking to a teen about sex. That is quite different from the original arrest etc, then arrested AGAIN on a different incident. Like I said, I'd love to read the documentation involved in this case. Like someone mentioned there is two sides to every story, and most sex criminals either deny of minimize what truly happened, hence the need for therapy etc
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (120119)
Message 120146 (In Reply to Message 120121)
orolan
Posted by myoung
on Oct 20, 2003 02:19 AM | Also by myoung
| Gender: N/A,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Pennsylvania,
Country: United States |
It isn't necessary for you to believe me. I didn't do anything wrong. I am just a parent who has lost a lot of trust and am hurting in ways I never thought possible. I am going to be skeptical of your story only because I know as a parent, I would have sold that girl down the river and told her parents what was going on. Any child in my care is my responsibility. I know there are a lot of should've, would've, could've (plural) but you can't now and it's simply too late. I guess it was just poor judgement. We've certainly all been there!!
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (120121)
Message 120150 (In Reply to Message 120118)
Orolan's Polygraph Reply
Posted by dp1
on Oct 20, 2003 03:26 AM | Also by dp1
| Gender: Female,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Florida,
Country: United States |
Orolan,
You mentioned that you've been trying to discredit the polygraph for years, why? That's what I don't get. We all know it's not 100% that's not the point. It's just a tool. I don't see anything wrong with questioning a convicted sex offender about things specific to his/her probation, contact with children, drugs, etc....Some things we need physical proof and others we don't for revocation.
Failing to complete treatment in a specified amount of time or before the end of probation is grounds for revocation. The failed polygraph in of itself is not grounds to be terminated from treatment (here where I am) however, it is reason for the therapist to continue you in treatment and in effect not let you graduate successfully from the program. So from that standpoint you are correct as far as "the process is flawed". However, for someone to go almost to the very end of therapy and flunk a poly all of a sudden....well let's just say that would be rare, but it can happen. I don't know how to respond to that since I am working a case sorta like that right now and trying like hell to eliminate the flaws (or to prove that he is guilty of something). The only difference in this case I'm working is that when I did the search I found pornography and pictures of him having contact with a child. Yes he was violated, but the point is, I wasn't hoping to find just porn and pictures since his poly indicated that he was up to much much more. I'll always suspect that he's up to something because I can't prove it one way or another, and I have good reason to doubt his word now because I did find the porn that he previously said he didn't have. I asked the Judge to let him back on probation with GPS monitoring (they thought I was nuts) because I didn't believe that the porn in of itself (soft legal porn) was relevant to his deviant behavior.
So this is the only case I ever had where I actually believed that maybe the test was not valid. I went out to prove the validity and proved myself wrong. We weren't able to prove all the things that were revealed in the poly but enough to revoke him. Is it still possible that the test on him was not valid? Sure. But as long as I keep finding violations on him what does it matter? The answer I think would be for him to stop doing things which cause him to violate his probation. Isn't that the point?
I actually was hoping that he was squeaky clean. I wanted to believe that he was telling the truth. I am working real close with him hoping that maybe he will eventually pass a poly and progress. I haven't seen any sex offenders who continually flunk polys and are squeaky clean. It just hasn't happened in the 15 years I've worked with them. I guess it's possible somewhere or somehow but it must be extremely rare.
I share your concern regarding the inherited power that the polygraph actually has over a sex offender on supervision. I tend to think that most Judges have the same concerns. I would be interested in knowing if there are actually any Judges out there that would lock up a sex offender and throw away the key just because of deception on a poly....I don't think you'll find too many if you actually had to the time to research it.
DP1
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (120118)
Message 120153 (In Reply to Message 120126)
Does Simon Have A Sense of Humor?
Posted by dp1
on Oct 20, 2003 04:22 AM | Also by dp1
| Gender: Female,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Florida,
Country: United States |
How can anyone investigate something if they don't believe something occurred? What's your beef Simon? Do you go to Doctors that don't believe you are sick when you're not feeling well? Would you waste your time reporting a crime to a policeman that didn't believe the crime happened to you?
Simon - either you have a very odd sense of humor or have a chip on your shoulder...which is it? Or is it pick on DP1 month?
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (120126)
Message 120160 (In Reply to Message 120116)
Reply to Orolan
Posted by dp1
on Oct 20, 2003 04:47 AM | Also by dp1
| Gender: Female,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Florida,
Country: United States |
Orolan,
I actually enjoyed reading your post. I am glad to see you could still have a sense of humor after all you've been through. I hardly think that you would have a blast making my life miserable since I am not a miserable person. I clearly see your points just disagree with some of your methods and beliefs. Overall, I still think you've done a great job posting your story.
DP1
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (120116)
Message 120174 (In Reply to Message 120126)
Posted by PVulcan
on Oct 20, 2003 06:06 AM | Also by PVulcan
| Gender: N/A,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: N/A,
Country: United States |
I would think that with law enforcement 'suspicion' goes with the territory, the endemics of the job. At the police academy here, vicarious traumatization is an issue that is discussed and taught. When you do this type of work, you will be changed, no getting around that. Hopefully, with good self care LE won't take their jobs home to their families, or anyone else that works in a career where not everything is pleasant.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (120126)
Message 120176 (In Reply to Message 120017)
Question on your therapy
Posted by lj
on Oct 20, 2003 08:56 AM | Also by lj
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: California,
Country: United States |
Welcome to the Machine, Orolan.
It appears to me that you were attempting to be "paternal" when you discussed the sexual activities between your younger brother and the 14 year old girl--not a bad thing necessarily. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems that you were trying to be a father figure and let it be known that you wouldn't allow that in the house when you and your daughter and her friend were around, to not have unprotected sex, etc. Plus, you are in a state to where this activity isn't considered illegal, judging from what you say their ages were at the time and also your state's AOC statute.
Then you get charged with "enticing a minor to commit illicit sexual acts with another," have to register as a sex offender, and go to therapy.
Was this an issue in your therapy at all: the conflict between giving what appears to be "fatherly advice" as opposed to what the law said about your frank discussion in another state as being a felony to do the same? If so, how did you resolve that within yourself?
My wife says to tell you that if you were an elementary or junior high school teacher, you would have no problems from giving the same advice to students nowadays.
Another Rider in the Storm
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (120017)
Message 120178 (In Reply to Message 120129)
Lack of Rehabilitation?
Posted by dp1
on Oct 20, 2003 12:08 PM | Also by dp1
| Gender: Female,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Florida,
Country: United States |
Orolan wrote:
"The motto of DP1's employer is: "The Department of Corrections protects the public by operating a safe, secure, humane and efficient corrections system."
Funny. I don't see the word "rehabilitative" in there. That's because they care nothing about rehabilitation."
Actually your comments have a lot of merit. The mission statement used to include the word "rehabilitate". Somehow it disappeared sometime between Jeb Bush getting elected and the teachers and voc-rehab instructors in the prisons getting laid off. Sex Offender treatment on the inside has been totally eliminated from what I hear. They say that certain drug programs are in jeopardy but realistically I don't see them being eliminated since Jeb's daughter has a drug problem.
I agree (in general) with your observations as far as little concern for rehabilitation. We could probably start a whole new discussion on just rehab alone - which actually I'd recommend since it is such an important topic.
I can guarentee you one thing .... as far as me personally you won't find someone more interested in rehabilitation and more pro-treatment than myself among my peers. Particularly for sex offenders. There is no question that there are a lot of people out there that just don't believe treatment works. But you'e not posting to one. I have seen a lot of sex offenders go through treatment and change their lives and become productive citizens. I or we have had our failures (revocations) but to actually see just one person make positive changes makes it all worth while.
So see Orolan - you can't make me miserable...we actually agree on a lot of stuff. Have a great day!
DP1
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (120129)
Message 120179 (In Reply to Message 120110)
Silver's Reply
Posted by dp1
on Oct 20, 2003 12:16 PM | Also by dp1
| Gender: Female,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Florida,
Country: United States |
Silver - I replied to this post last night but it isn't showing on the board this morning....If Steve doesn't find the post today I must have had a brain fart and not clicked send or something....my post was rather long and will reply when I have more time,,,,Dp1
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (120110)
Message 120195 (In Reply to Message 120150)
Question for DP1
Posted by myoung
on Oct 20, 2003 04:02 PM | Also by myoung
| Gender: N/A,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Pennsylvania,
Country: United States |
Hi dp1, just wanted to know......if a sex offender who was convicted in 1995 of aggrevated indecent assault on a two year old spends four years in state and gets on the ten year registry, are they still subject to parole? The tenant of mine I had mentioned in another setting on this site is currently residing in a household where children of his MO range (2-6) and some who are outside that age category are residing. Is that subject to registry rules that he is not to reside with children. He had told me when I found out about his crime that he was not allowed to reside in a domicile with a child. I guess I am just wondering if that has to do with registry requirements or parole/probation requirements. I did alert the police because not only is he living there but a man who is under investigation by the state for possible child molestation is also residing there.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (120150)
Message 120206 (In Reply to Message 120195)
MYoung
Posted by dp1
on Oct 20, 2003 09:21 PM | Also by dp1
| Gender: Female,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Florida,
Country: United States |
I work in Florida and don't know what state you are in. If he was in Florida he would be on supervision with DOC with standard sex offender conditions. Our registration is for life. Once people are off supervision there are no laws which prohibit sex offenders from living with children. If you are not from Florida I would contact the local parole office for sepcifi information regarding if he's on parole, who is parole supervisor is, and what his conditions of supervision are. If he's from Florida give me his DC# and I'll check it out. It's public information and you have a right to know.
DP1
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (120195)
Message 120207 (In Reply to Message 120174)
Great Point But the Real Point Is
Posted by dp1
on Oct 20, 2003 09:43 PM | Also by dp1
| Gender: Female,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Florida,
Country: United States |
Great Post Vulcan. However, I must point out that Simon's post refered to LE being suspicious of ALL people which is a big leap from a Probation Officer enforcing the rules with a known convicted sex offender and suspecting a violation of probation.
I think the conflicts come in when people forget we are working with known convicted sex offenders or felons. My attitudes (if you want to get personal ) towards felons or sex offenders are totally different than let's say my co-workers, family, neighbors, etc....Granted the only opinions expressed on this board are as it relates to either sex offenders or pedophiles just the mere thought that someone would jump to that conclusion is simply irrational. A known convicted felon or sex offender has in some way broken the bonds of trust. It would be illogical (and foolish) to resume trust before it was earned.
DP1
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (120174)
Message 120212 (In Reply to Message 120110)
Silver's Reply
Posted by dp1
on Oct 20, 2003 11:10 PM | Also by dp1
| Gender: Female,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Florida,
Country: United States |
"I expect better then a whine and cheese flame"
Ok. How about a steak dinner for all that hard work you did on this lengthy post I feel compelled to reply to? Medium or rare?
"1) His sentencing judge recommended probation, no registry, minimal therapy and seemed to understand he didn't commit a "sex crime". While under the letter of the law he may've discussed a sexual matter with a minor its obvious the statute was written for another purpose."
No registry? Is that true? Orolan please let us know if this is accurate. I don't remember that in your post. I have no depos or police reports with the victim's comments or statements so I am not in a position to say what Orolan said or did not say. Silver, did you read all the testimony or are you taking the word of a convicted felon? Based on Orolan's version I agree with you Silver. I will reserve comments or judgements until all facts are known.
"He was given custody of his kids. "
So? What's your point? I have plenty of examples on my caseload who have multiple sexual batteries on children and are sexual predators with Court approval to have contact with their own kids. Courts tend to be very lenient when it comes to contact with biological children...they have rights too...has no bearing on whether or not the SO will reoffend or is a risk.
"If the PO had read the case file he'd have known what the original judge obviously did. If he had talked to Orolon respectfully and been told the story - backed up with the case files - isn't it possible he'd have a different view?"
Orolan stated that his P.O. actually went to Court with him and spoke against his motion. For those folks not in the legal system let me enlighten you. A pro se' motion or a motion filed by a Defendant's attorney to modify or clarify conditions is an extremely low priority for a Probation Officer and are not mandatory Court appearances. For a P.O. to feel that strongly about the motion and to take time out of his busy day to drive down to Court and speak against something....well...what does that tell you? It has been years since I got up at 7:00 am, faced the traffic downtown, just to go to a hearing that wasn't even mandatory.....you bet your bippie I had that file memorized backwards and forwards. It's a major inconvenience and I don't do that often.
"If so do you think thats the best way to deal with situations like this?"
The best way for a PO to handle the situation is to do exactly what he did....express your concerns to the Judge and let him rule. That's what he get's paid to do. His failure to express his concerns would strike me as a failure in the system.
" guess I'll ask Orolan why if it was obvious he didn't have sex with her (look at the sentence he got) did the police just "give up" finding the actual offender? They had a duty to protect the public and they failed."
No doubt...now you see what I see. If the issue was her having sex then the person doing it should have been held responsible either by the Court or by the parents....not for Orolan to make that decision.
"You don't believe 10% of what he's saying (you said you believe 90% is true). What is he lying about? Perhaps you'd care to enlighten me (and him). I'd love to give him the opportunity to show us something is true when you assume its not (assuming he can)."
When I mentioned the 90% figure I thought I was being complimentary considering the circumstances. And I certainly don't want to bash Orolan since I truly respect the fact that he posted his story. But since you asked and I respect you also here's my answer.
Orolan stated that he wasn't the one having sex with the minor. He believed it was his brother. He chose not to tell LE or the Court the truth. He freely admitted to having inappropriate sexual conversations with a minor, believed that she was having sex and failed to report that information to the parents. He claims that he had on-going issues with polygraphers and conspired with his attorney to fabricate juicy lies to in some way manipulate the test or prove it isn't 100% accurate. Do I need to continue to prove why I don't have 100% trust or faith? The pattern speaks for itself. Trust must be earned from this point forward.
"Don't say this doesn't happen."
I promise I won't, but let me explain.
"I've heard in group examples of PO's coming out and dumping drawers on the floor, pulling videos off a shelf and leaving them on the floor, dumping a garbage can out on the kitchen table, stuff like that. You hear stuff like that going on and it really makes you wonder what is going on? Despite the fact these people are on probation a little decency and respect for their right as a human being with feelings would go along way. "
You are 100% correct. I have heard the stories. I have no idea how often this might occur (hopefully not much) since people with similar work ethics tend to work together. I take the lead on my searches and don't tolerate that behavior so officers don't pull that on my team. I believe in leading by example....if I treat my cases with respect then they will in turn treat me the same way. I don't demand respect I earn it. There's are difference.
"People who would say "they're a convicted SO we dont have to worry about their feelings look what they did" are in the wrong business if they're PO's."
Agreed - 100%. Sex offenders tend to be more emotional than the average (only from my perspective) so better reason to treat their feelings with respect even when searches and arrests are made.
"But isn't it also the responsibility of the PO (who is supposed to help protect the public) to ensure stress is kept at a minimum so this person is likely to NOT reoffend? They seem like mutually inclusive goals to me."
It's not a responsibility and it sure as heck isn't part of our job description. People are people. Some people are just oblivious to other people's stress. Silver, I think that you know me well enough (as well as some others on this board) that I am particularly sensitive to stress and depression because I am well aware that stress, anxiety and depression are major factors with relapsing or | | |
