|
|
Sex Offender Registries, Sex Offenders Search, News, Info and Discussion |
An Ottawa County man convicted of swindling sex Ducham, 51, avoided that possibility by pleading guilty in November to using false pretenses to gain $35 apiece from 269 convicted sex offenders in a scheme in which he promised to remove a sex offender's name from the state's registry. It sounded like a pretty clever scam, except I don't understand how he thought he'd get away with it. He identified his market, he determined his target customers' needs and he made a pitch that was hard to resist. Anyone who can do that can find a way to make fistloads of money if they focus on legitimate endeavors. Hanging over Ducham's head during the case was a charge accusing him of being a fourth-time habitual offender because of his prior criminal record. Normally, the felony false pretenses charge carries a maximum five-year prison sentence, but with the fourth-time enhancement, Ducham could have been sentenced to life in prison. He has 3 felony convictions from 1988 (ok, that *is* 16 years ago). He faced a 5 year sentence or life in prison and wound up with probation, a $1,000 fine and having to pay back the $9,415 he swindled the registered sex offenders out of. Probation? Interesting. Then there's the Detroit area dad (same state - Michigan) who faces criminal sexual conduct charges for allowing his 15 year old daughter to have sex with a 20 year old man he thought was 18 (which was still illegal by the way). The father took the initiative to file a complaint against the 20 year old man so it wasn't as though the police found out and caught him - he brought it to their attention. Now the father was charged with three counts of criminal sexual conduct in the third degree because "it could be considered a conspiracy-type charge". Think he'll get probation? Forum Home | Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (124930) In order to post a message to a new thread or reply to existing messages you must be logged in. If you'd like to post messages please login or register as a new user. Message 124971 (In Reply to Message 124932)Posted by orolan on Jan 13, 2004 10:25 PM | Also by orolan
You do realize that if this guy had swindled $10K from a bunch of retirees at the local nursing home he would be doing life under that habitual violator statute, don't you? But he only swindled some low-life SO scum, so he only needs a slap on the wrist. And the dad will not get probation. He'll get six years in prison and the state will take custody of his daughter, if they haven't already. IMHO Forum Home | Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (124932) In order to post a message to a new thread or reply to existing messages you must be logged in. If you'd like to post messages please login or register as a new user. Message 124977 (In Reply to Message 124971)Posted by Silverthorne on Jan 14, 2004 12:50 AM | Also by Silverthorne
I agree Orolan. He "only" scamed some vermin SO so its ok. Silverthorne Forum Home | Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (124971) Thread124930, admin, Jan 13, 2004 10:11 AM [Introduction] 124932, steve, Jan 13, 2004 03:24 PM [Scam involving Michigan Sex Offender Registry] 124971, orolan, Jan 13, 2004 10:25 PM 124977, Silverthorne, Jan 14, 2004 12:50 AM Forum Home | Top of Thread
|
||||||||||
| Copyright 1998-2007 SexCriminals.com and Befriend | About Site | Credits | Contact Us |