Skip to comments.Suspected child molester slain by victim's relative
Posted on 01/03/2010 10:41:08 AM PST by NCjim
Concord, N.C. The Cabarrus County Sheriff's Office says that a man charged with murder sought revenge on a man suspected of molesting his young relative.
WBTV, a CBS affiliate in Charlotte, reports that Christopher Michael Hartsell, 32, shot and killed William Lee Ballance, 47, in his residence in a small mobile home park early Friday.
Neighbors told WBTV that Hartsell had lived with Ballance, a convicted sex offender, until about a week ago. Around the same time that Hartsell moved out, rumors started that Ballance had molested a young relative of Hartsell.
On Thursday, the Cabarrus County Sheriff's Office issued warrants for Ballance's arrest on sex-related charges, including first-degree rape of a child. Ballance was slain before they could be served.
More details of the case aren't being reported to protect the victim's identity.
Hartsell was being held in the Cabarrus County Jail Saturday without bond.
Ballance was sentenced to 20 months' probation for a 1998 conviction for taking indecent liberties with a minor in Guilford County, according to state Department of Correction records. DOC records show he also got probation in 2007 for possession of a firearm by a felon.
(Excerpt) Read more at wral.com ...
If the convicted sex offender was in prison doing a life (or death) sentence then this would not have happened.
As much as I hate to see anyone taking the law into their own hands,this seems Ok.
Child molestors should never be allowed back into society anyways.
Agreed, there are other forms of justice. Sex offenders cannot be rehabilitated. That’s why you see so many old ones.
3) Shut up
Nowhere in there does it say "Sheriff".
Treat these people just like serial killers. Because they are serial.
20 months probation?
I'd need more than rumors.
the Cabarrus County Sheriff's Office issued warrants for Ballance's arrest on sex-related charges, including first-degree rape of a child.
Hopefully they had more than rumors.
Yeah, just cap those 13 and 14 year old girls too huh?
They are classified as “sex offenders” as well. And so are people who get put on the list for peeing on the side of the road. Look it up.
I am glad people like you aren’t in charge.
Confusing. Sounds lie a bunch of hillbilly honkys.
Most have an emotional reaction and not a rational one.
I hope the guy who murdered the “suspect” (not guilty until proven guilty which protects you, me, and the rest of the innocent world from thugs who take the law into their own hands) gets the death penalty. IT IS NEVER OK TO KILL A SUSPECT FOR A CRIME HE HASN’T BEEN CONVICTED OF UNLESS HE MEANS YOU IMMINENT DANGER.
Please get over yourself. We aren’t talking about guys peeing on the road after a long night of getting their drink on (which I agree is an archaic law), or kids sexting. We are talking the most likely offenders, adult males who predate on children or commit forcible rape or sodomy.
The world ‘allegedly’ doesn’t appear once. Isn’t it standard practice to use it about a dozen times?
Yeah. Screw things like the right to trial by a jury of one’s peers. Cletus, fetch me mah rope. Yee Haw...
And the thanks of a grateful community.
These two men were “living together” ...so how long had they known one another and how well? Was this a case of ‘birds of a feather’?
I would like more information on this relationship between the shooter/killer and the molester/parolee before rendering a verdict.
The parents of the young victim must be going through a guilty hell.
Conventional wisdom says people released after serving time for sex crimes are likely to strike again. The numbers aren't as certain.
Among convicted criminals released from prison, sex offenders released from prison are less likely to be arrested for any new crime than most other offenders, with the notable exception of murderers, researchers say. Child molesters' rate of recidivism is at least as low as the group of sex offenders taken as a whole. Abusers of children within their own family have a lower rate still.
Sins, how many kids does a guy get to victimize until he gets the rope?
The “justice” he got may have been “imperfect justice” but it was justice. And if played well in front of a jury, may be justified.
If the court system did what it was supposed to do the first time, we probably would not be having this discussion. More than a few people think that the justice system has failed to protect the people by incarcerating dangerous offenders for extended periods of time. I am one of them.
If anyone here has been the victim of violent crime, it was most assuredly done by a repeat offender.
Anyone molests my children and the better HOPE the cops get him before I do.
And some victims never report what happened to them. A case I worked, the victim came forward TEN years after the rapes. The guy had all the indications of being a serial predator but was always able to convince the victims, who were family not to testify.
He did the same thing in my case. Victim daughter refused to testify.
Whatever the numbers, NO ONE wants these guys living by them or interacting with their kids.
And what of those who have been falsely accused of sex crimes? (There have been many of those too). In your kind of ideal world, it would be easy to have someone killed by accusing them of ghastly crimes, which is why a justice system exists in the first place.
The solution is to have punishments for those fairly convicted to be tightened, not give any yahoo the licence to lynch anyone on the basis of ‘rumours’. This guy needs to be prosecuted for murder and punished accordingly...
The man in this story was accused. The story gives no evidence and only notes rumor.In this country, we don't kill because of a rumor.
Presumably the relative of the victim, and roommate of the child molester, had more than just rumors.
You said “presumably”. Not good enough for sanctioning murder.
Understand DJ, that I do NOT condone vigilantism, I just understand why people do it. More empathy than necessarily sympathy.
When I say there are other forms of justice, I also mean Karma, Fate, a divine justice if that’s your flavor.
Sure, there have been folks wrongly accused of sex crimes, it’s just been my personal and professional experience that the leopard doesn’t change it’s spots. I don’t know how many of the SO’s you have sat across from but they got some really sick notions.
Not guilty.Due to prior convictions of the accused for a start.
One outcome of this mess is the “Criminal Justice System” lost a repeat client. A criminal lawyer is crying somewhere. ;0)
I have friends who have a prison ministry that works only with sex offenders. Some of them are very sick people. But there are others who really do change. When you make blanket statements that aren’t backed by numbers, when you have an emotional response rather than a reasoned one, you shut out those who have changed. Those who are horrified by their acts. Some had drug and alcohol problems and once clean and sober, they lead productive lives. I’ve even met a few who weren’t guilty. They spend their lives in fear, shunning children or woman so that they are never accused again.
Really. He was convicted before he was murdered?
It seems that the sex offender has been this decade’s version of the 1950s communist, a cancer for people to take the law into their own hands to deal with with the police’s approval. I’ve never known how to feel about the situation. On one hand there is the idea that the person has served their sentence when released and those convicted of sex crimes for situations like those you speak of (sex with a minor when they were only a few years older or someone who urinated on the side of the road when children happened to pass). On the other hand are those who say that a sex offender can never change.
Deputy Dwayne Powell Looney: I got a little girl. Somebody rapes her, he's a dead dog. I'll blow him away just like Carl Lee did.
D.A. Rufus Buckley: Objection your Honor!
Jake Tyler Brigance: Do you think the jury should convict Carl Lee Hailey?
Judge Omar Noose: Don't answer that question.
Deputy Dwayne Powell Looney: He's a hero. You turn him loose.
I've posted this info before, you and I may be the only ones that believe it.
Another canard is that sex offenders get killed in prison. Fact is very few of them do. Many if not most prisons segregate sex offenders and if someone doesn't want to believe that they need to check their local offenders list. It will be packed with ex cons.
My friends in prison ministry said that the cons used to fix the food for the sex offenders until they put staples in it. They then had the offenders fix their own.
You know what, I think I’m a total idiot and completely misunderstood you.
I apologize, I’m a total moron. Admin_moderator, kindly remove the post above.
yeah,,because that has worked SOOOOOOO well!!!
Its better than what you would advocate...
It is illegal to murder someone for an accusation.
If he hadn’t been stopped he would have been in the Criminal Justice system for years and his lawyers would have made money. It all depends on the meaning of the word “guilty”. Money can buy a criminal’s innocence. Does that really make him innocent?
It is illegal to murder someone on an accusation. We are a nation of laws and rights. If you want to chuck them, you are on the wrong site.
I was going to answer you. I decided against it. Something about arguing with a fence post popped up in my mind. :0)
When you break up with your boyfriend, spread rumours that he's a kiddie fiddler. When the rumours take hold, kill him. Hope one person on the jury goes OJ.
You didn’t argue because there is no argument. That’s why you insulted instead. You take away someone elses rights and you lessen yours. That’s something that liberals never understand. I hope you do. Either we follow our laws and the Constitution or we chuck it all.
Possible. And it may be that the man was guilty. But I prefer a trial first. I take it that you do too.
You are wrong about my reasons.
So you believe that we can ignore laws and the Constitution?
What are you saying? They don’t reoffend that often? If so, did you read the whole article? The title says that it’s hard to know because the victims often tell no one. Therefore the observed rate is below the actual rate of reoffense. The articla notes that when the abuse happens inside of a family, the incident is less likely to be reported.
From the article:
“Most researchers agree crimes committed after a first brush with law enforcement count as recidivism, detected or not. But Ohio Northern University criminologist Keith Durkin points to anonymous surveys in which sex offenders admit to as many undetected offenses as the number for which they have been caught. He views 50% as a conservative estimate for recidivism.”
In reality it’s probably much higher. How many sex offenders are likely to trust anonymous surveys and report the truth. Some studies have suggested that these predators have dozens of victims before they are caught.
One reason for the numerical confusion may be that supporters of sex-offender registries who say sex offenders are more likely than not to re-offend are considering the rate of repeat sex offenses of sex criminals compared with the rate of sex offenses of prisoners released for other crimes.
Obviously they are mixing apples and oranges so there are no clear numbers. HOWEVER the author felt safe in saying what he did at teh beginning of teh article.
I've seen no stats proving that recidivism amongst child molesters is not exponentially more the rule than the exception....your Christian friend's ministries notwithstanding.
Declaring that child molesters are incorrigible is no more inaccurate than saying it's often cloudy in Dublin.
Then you read the article that I posted?