Posted on 11/02/2011 7:01:11 AM PDT by massmike
Dallas police have arrested a man who allegedly sexually assaulted a minor at the Occupy Dallas campsite downtown. Richard Armstrong, 24, was charged with sexual assault of child and failure to register as a sex offender.
Armstrong was identified as the man who police said had sex with a runaway from Garland. The alleged incident happened in a tent at one of the encampments on or before Oct. 23.
Police received information that a 14-year-old runaway from Garland was at the camp. Police checked the area and found the girl. During an interview, she revealed that she had had sex with a man in a tent. Armstrong was identified as that man and arrested.
The girl also told dectectives she had told Armstrong she was 19 years old.
He was previously convicted of sexual assault in 2009 and was ordered to register. Court papers indicate he had sex with a 14-year-old girl at a party in Coppell.
(Excerpt) Read more at wfaa.com ...
Great. So anything you did in the past you’re automatically guilty of doing again for the rest of your life.
Hey i don’t think she was dating him either.
Lots of accused rapist defenders on here this morning.Is there something in THEIR past they’d like to share?
I guess he should have thought of that before he assaulted a 14 year old girl!
Do you notice a suspicious lack of "on site" video coverage of these events, considering all the time the newsies have devoted to fawning over the protestors?
Just think - She could have been YOUR daughter!
I only saw one camera that could be professional media and it wasn’t in use.
Of course they don’t want to publicize how this army of creeps, freeloaders, commies and garbage-pickers have removed a public space from public use in New York.
And of course the sheeple of New York aren’t going to complain.
As I was standing on a nearby corner waiting for a light to change so I could walk back to the E Train, a guy in a suit said to me, “exciting, isn’t it?”
I said: “In what way?”
I wanted to say more, and was working out how to get the landfill metaphor into a sentence when the light turned green and he said “well, I’m not from here” and walked briskly away.
You seem to be vociferously attacking alleged statutory rapists. History has shown that the loudest voices in opposition are hiding their own sins, so...
Any confessions?
I do have one serious question for you: Do you believe in the rule of law, or do you believe that accusation=conviction? So far, the evidence supports your believing the latter.
How liberal.
My daughter, my wife, my grandkids - doesn’t matter.
NO ONE should be able to imprision anyone else without evidence. If my daughter, wife or grandchild decided to engage in sex with someone else; they made their decision and get to live with the consequences.
But, to come forward at some later point and imprison another man, is just evil. Just think, it could have been you or I. Just a person pointing a finger - and the accused is imprisoned.
Not that long ago, we had adults sentenced to decades in Federal prision, based upon the testamony of children. A whole Daycare was destroyed, families who did NOTHING wrong were destroyed by self-righteous people just like you. All it took was a child to point a finger, and a public willing to believe the word of a child over overwhelming evidence that the child was ‘coached’ and ‘threatened’.
I prefer the Constitution.
...and if there's no evidence,he'll be released! AND the girl should be penalized if she's lying!
If my daughter, wife or grandchild decided to engage in sex with someone else; they made their decision and get to live with the consequences.
So you're good with it if your 14 year old daughter sleeps with a grown man! Great parenting!
it could have been you or I
And that matters more to you than if your daughter is taken advantage of by a grown man?I feel sorry for her!
We had adults sentenced to decades in Federal prision, based upon the testamony of children.
...Which was a miscarriage of justice! But to use your earlier argument,what does that case have to do with this one?
I prefer the Constitution.
Me,too! Isn't that the document that guarantees us a fair,speedy trial?
BTW...we're still waiting for your new,improved system....
But the lie-o-crats back these people so they must back ALL their actions.
By the way,the law says "innocent until proven guilty".Got a better system?
I do have one serious question for you,too:
The girls says he did it;he says he didn't. How do you propose we get to the truth?
Take your time!
So do a few freepers,it does appear......
He was also arrested for failing to register as a sex offender per his previous sentencing two years ago.
Simple - no evidence, no crime.
If sex took place, there is evidence; pretty simple, huh?
If the girl gets up, cleans up and then goes back to bed; it would certainly appear it was consentual, wouldn’t it? As is; you are more worried about your precious child, that you would freely imprison anyone whom she would accuse.
What happens when your daugher realizes that she can get revenge for you grounding her, simply by saying “Daddy touched me”? She can now freely extort anything her little 8-18 yr old heart desires, simply by threatening to make the statement. Whether it’s true or not, is really inconsequential, isn’t it? You will get you day in court, just like him. It may mean you don’t have a job anymore, and will lose your house and marriage - but that is the amount of power you have willingly and aggressively ceded to your child. Makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside, doesn’t it?
Or, do different rules apply when you are involved?
Fine, book him and charge him with THAT crime. That is a crime that you can easily prove that he committed. It's easy to verify and bring forth evidence.
Book him on stupidity, too. Or possibly uncontrollable sex drive. Unregistered sex offenders should not have young girls in their tents.
That's easy, we arrest him, publically humiliate him, threaten him and have a witch-hunt. Never ever consider the validity of the sole witness. It's ever so much fun. Oh, wait; that's what you want to do.
How about we establish whether there is any evidence that a crime was actually committed? The charge is "Statuatory Rape". Then, let's see if he knew the 'victim's age; oh wait, she admitted that she told him that she was 19. So, what do you have left? Oh, yeah; her word against his as to whether anyting sexual really took place; and no evidence to show either way.
How does "He said, She said" work in every other case in court, in the US? If you don't have evidence, you don't have a crime.
“That’s easy, we arrest him, publically humiliate him, threaten him and have a witch-hunt. Never ever consider the validity of the sole witness. It’s ever so much fun. Oh, wait; that’s what you want to do.”
Doesn’t seem like anything will stop this guy!
He would eventually plead guilty to the charge in May 2009 and received 10 years’ probation for the assault, and was fined $2,500. But court records show he violated terms of the agreement that September. Court records show he came in contact with a child under 17, failed a polygraph test, attempted to move out of the county and was “unsuccessfully discharged from sex offender treatment.” Matter of fact, Armstrong’s been in and out of Dallas County courts since early October, when, on October 10, a judge denied his attempts to revoke community supervision.
http://blogs.dallasobserver.com/unfairpark/2011/11/23-year-old_man_arrested_charg.php
Not much time needed. I propose a vigorous, thorough investigation, a trial, and a sentence if convicted.
I am not defending this individual. I am defending the best juris prudence system yet devised. We agree that innocence until guilt is proven is the law - I say we should approach this case following the law.
Finally, there is one aspect I do find troubling about all of this. If the girl misrepresented her age (assuming she appears as though she could have been legal) and they engaged in consensual sex, then I am troubled that he could be convicted of statutory based on her lie (about being 19). That, however, is an issue with the law, not with the facts in this case.
It would trouble me much more if they had met in a bar - which is a (presumably) age restrictive environment.
If the only evidence is her testimony, I do not know if the truth can be found, given that she has already admitted to having lied about her age.
In the end, I sincerely hope the truth will win out, with a hearty serving of true justice for all involved.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.