Heimlich

infielddad posted:

"I guess I'm uncomfortable with assuming that we can see into the hearts of others, whether it's the heart of the prosecutor who dropped the failure to report charge, the judge who assigned the original verdict, or the relatives who have supported the kid rather than the victim. And I certainly can't see into the heart or mind of a kid who committed the crime to begin with."

IowaMom23,

While I acknowledge your heart felt approach, I think you, and some others, are looking in the wrong places, but understandably now the press coverage and this thread begins to focus the discussion in one arena.

The focus, in my view, remains that young girl, her future and likely struggles to live within the challenges of what happened TO her.

I personally have a very different view when it comes to supporting this young adult in "forgetting" and any analogy being provided to support his "forgetting." 

The real victim, more than likely, won't forget.

In fact, the impact of the trauma will likely envelop her life, her relationships (or lack of them) and her ability to function when she becomes a teenager and then struggles into adulthood.

"Effects of Child Sexual Abuse on Victims

For victims, the effects of child sexual abuse can be devastating. Victims may feel significant distress and display a wide range of psychological symptoms, both short- and long-term.  They may feel powerless, ashamed, and distrustful of others. The abuse may disrupt victims’ development and increase the likelihood that they will experience other sexual assaults in the future.  

In the short-term (up to two years), victims may exhibit regressive behaviors (e.g., thumb-sucking and bed-wetting in younger children), sleep disturbances, eating problems, behavior and/or performance problems at school, and unwillingness to participate in school or social activities (p.4).

Longer-term effects may be wide-ranging, to include anxiety-related, self-destructive behaviors such as alcoholism or drug abuse, anxiety attacks, and insomnia (p.4).

Victims may show fear and anxiety in response to people who share characteristics of the abuser, i.e., the same sex as the abuser or similar physical characteristics. Victims may experience difficulties in adult relationships and adult sexual functioning (page 4)."

I don't want anyone to forget. 

My point is when you are on the outside of the situation you shouldn't make the mistake of thinking you know what's going on the inside.

And it happened twice. Not once but twice. He damn well knew that it was wrong 

He can get on with his life but I hope not to see him in Omaha. 

Its not fair to his team, college baseball and more than anyone the little girl and her family. 

Hang up the college cleats and get on with whatever. 

I've now had time to read through this thread and hundreds of other comments through our local media. There are a lot of good points on both sides. There are a few fundamental issues I keep coming back to.

1. He admitted his crime and agreed to a sentence. The crime he was convicted of was reduced as part of the plea. Standard practice to entice a quick outcome. Part of the plea agreement was registering for life. As a society, this is what we have settled on as a just punishment for this type of crime. If people don't agree, they are free to work on changing the requirements. However, that's the agreement. He didn't fulfill his agreement and that's how the conviction came to light. I've always been taught that ignorance of a law is not a defense for breaking it.

2. It turns my stomach a little bit to hear people defend him because of his age. Teenagers are tried as adults for crimes every day. We're talking about a physically mature person and a toddler. Teenagers make mistakes. They are forgetful. This was not a mistake or a lapse in memory. This was a major lapse in morality. There is absolutely no excuse for a 15 year old making this choice. These are not two 8 or 10 year old's playing doctor. How many victims would be needed for people to take this more seriously? Is it 2, 3, more? It minimizes the victim to blame the actions on the perpetrator's age.

3. As an Oregon tax payer, I want more accountability by the Universities. I do not think that a criminal conviction should prevent someone from attending college. However, I do think the Universities need to know who is on their campus. If athletes are going to interact with the public, especially kids, then the schools need to know who is representing them and the risk of those interactions. I go back to my point above about the youth camps that every sports program runs. How can they not know who is chaperoning these camp participants? The coaches are not in the dorms or leading the evening activities with the kids. It's all student led. I also have an issue with using tax payer money to pay for scholarships for people convicted of crimes. We've had a long, ongoing debate about this over the last decade, mainly due to a lot of the legal troubles from the Oregon football program. For years, the Beaver faithful have pointed a lot of fingers at the Duck programs (I am neither a Beaver or Duck), now that the shoe is on the other foot, there are a lot of Beaver apologists out there.

I don't wish Heimlich any ill will. I only want him to live up to the agreement he made to lessen his punishment. It is the least he owes the community. I believe he will be drafted. I do not think he will play another game as a Beaver. My main concern, however, is for his victim. Secondary, our Universities need to find a way to understand who is on their campus and minimize any risk as it pertains to their students and the visitors to their campus. 

Yeah, okay, this will likely get the thread closed.....here I go anyway. 

Anyone ever play Doctor with a cousin? A sibling? A neighbor? I did.

Anyone ever have internal family squabbles? I do.

What you all have been posting about is long sexual term abuse, and that isn't what happened here.

We aren't them and we don't know what happened.

CaCO3Girl posted:

Yeah, okay, this will likely get the thread closed.....here I go anyway. 

Anyone ever play Doctor with a cousin? A sibling? A neighbor? I did.

Anyone ever have internal family squabbles? I do.

What you all have been posting about is long sexual term abuse, and that isn't what happened here.

We aren't them and we don't know what happened.

Are you kidding? A 15yo and a 6yo (13yo and 4yo first offense) is not playing doctor in any Western legal system I'm aware of. It certainly isn't in the US. It wasn't in the court Heimlich was tried. As part of negotiating down the charges he had an agreement with the court. He violated the agreement.

CaCO3Girl posted:

Yeah, okay, this will likely get the thread closed.....here I go anyway. 

Anyone ever play Doctor with a cousin? A sibling? A neighbor? I did.

Anyone ever have internal family squabbles? I do.

What you all have been posting about is long sexual term abuse, and that isn't what happened here.

We aren't them and we don't know what happened.

CaCO3,

Personally, I very much disagree with your views as each has unfolded.

No, I am not posting about "long term sexual abuse." I am posting about the "long term" impact and effects of  sexual abuse which occurs with a very young girl.

No, we are not them. We were not there.

If one explores the issue of sexual abuse with a very young girl, it would be extraordinary for anyone to know what happened other than 2 people. Sexual violators don't invite witnesses. 

Of those two  one is so young she  does not know or understand the nature or the extent of her violation.  One other common theme is she knows the person and trusts that person and that trust is betrayed, a trust betrayal which can last a lifetime and which can create so much upheaval when she finally is of an age to realize what happened with and to her.

RJM posted:

CaCO3Girl posted:

Yeah, okay, this will likely get the thread closed.....here I go anyway. 

Anyone ever play Doctor with a cousin? A sibling? A neighbor? I did.

Anyone ever have internal family squabbles? I do.

What you all have been posting about is long sexual term abuse, and that isn't what happened here.

We aren't them and we don't know what happened.

Are you kidding? A 15yo and a 6yo (13yo and 4yo first offense) is not playing doctor in any Western legal system I'm aware of. It certainly isn't in the US. It wasn't in the court Heimlich was tried. As part of negotiating down the charges he had an agreement with the court. He violated the agreement.

-Not kidding

-He wasn't tried

-His agreement was with Washington. In my opinion Oregon may as well have admitted "we have weird rules and we know it which is why we dropped the charges".

CaCO3Girl posted:

Yeah, okay, this will likely get the thread closed.....here I go anyway. 

Anyone ever play Doctor with a cousin? A sibling? A neighbor? I did.

Anyone ever have internal family squabbles? I do.

What you all have been posting about is long sexual term abuse, and that isn't what happened here.

We aren't them and we don't know what happened.

He was in high school.  She was in kindergarten.  Stop and let that really sink in.

Enjoying the Ride posted:

CaCO3Girl posted:

Yeah, okay, this will likely get the thread closed.....here I go anyway. 

Anyone ever play Doctor with a cousin? A sibling? A neighbor? I did.

Anyone ever have internal family squabbles? I do.

What you all have been posting about is long sexual term abuse, and that isn't what happened here.

We aren't them and we don't know what happened.

He was in high school.  She was in kindergarten.  Stop and let that really sink in.

Not to mention that this went on for a period of TWO YEARS.

CaCO3Girl posted:

RJM posted:

CaCO3Girl posted:

Yeah, okay, this will likely get the thread closed.....here I go anyway. 

Anyone ever play Doctor with a cousin? A sibling? A neighbor? I did.

Anyone ever have internal family squabbles? I do.

What you all have been posting about is long sexual term abuse, and that isn't what happened here.

We aren't them and we don't know what happened.

Are you kidding? A 15yo and a 6yo (13yo and 4yo first offense) is not playing doctor in any Western legal system I'm aware of. It certainly isn't in the US. It wasn't in the court Heimlich was tried. As part of negotiating down the charges he had an agreement with the court. He violated the agreement.

-Not kidding

-He wasn't tried

-His agreement was with Washington. In my opinion Oregon may as well have admitted "we have weird rules and we know it which is why we dropped the charges".

Most charges result in a plea deal. He pleaded guilty. It's a federal law sex offenders be in a national registry. It's up to the offender to keep the registry current. He didn't. It was a violation of the law. He's fortunate he's not going to prison. Maybe a month in jail would be a good wake up call. 

Heimlich has hardly paid any price for his crime to this point. I don't believe he understands the severity of the crime. When outed he didn't apologize about what he did. He talked about himself. He should be apologizing every time the issue comes up. 

Heimlich has one good option if he's drafted. He has to make it publicly. He needs to do charity work related to the cause. There needs to be a statement ... "I made a horrible mistake a few years ago. I'm deeply sorry. I'm going to dedicate my non baseball time to helping others." He may not be allowed near certain people. But he can do fund raising and public speaking. If he wants to be a man he should stand up and be accountable. 

Many of you have wondered on my viewpoint on this...it comes from being on a jury for a case involving 7 counts of molestation of minors.  I learned a lot on that case, including that not everything in these cases is cut and dry, prosecutors have interesting ways of phrasing things, and internal family squabbles dating back 10+ years can find their way into courts through children.

There are SEVERAL things going on here that are not adding up.  The only true fact that we know is that he didn't file paperwork correctly and he was given a citation for it.

CaCO3Girl posted:

Many of you have wondered on my viewpoint on this...it comes from being on a jury for a case involving 7 counts of molestation of minors.  I learned a lot on that case, including that not everything in these cases is cut and dry, prosecutors have interesting ways of phrasing things, and internal family squabbles dating back 10+ years can find their way into courts through children.

There are SEVERAL things going on here that are not adding up.  The only true fact that we know is that he didn't file paperwork correctly and he was given a citation for it.

I dunno about the "only" true fact conclusion.

These also are true facts:

"As a teenager, Heimlich pleaded guilty to a single charge of sexually molesting a 6-year-old female family member. Heimlich registered as a sex offender in Benton County after arriving at Oregon State. When he was cited in April for missing an annual update, it put the case in Oregon court records for the first time."

RJM,

I agree with you & infielddad 100% & then some. 

These last few posts  reminded me of Fungo's tag line....

"Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level, then beat you with experience."

http://deadspin.com/internal-m...ees-on-ho-1796022176

http://m.mlb.com/video/topic/2...ker-player-id-415389

I've stood back on this one, pondering whether to respond - but like everyone, I want to be fair about this.  But to show you my own biases, I was once summoned for a jury for a child mole***ion case.  Defendant was charged with 20 counts.  When the judge asked if anyone in the jury box had such a serious issue with this that they couldn't be unbiased, I raised my hand.

I was amazed that out of about 70 people, I was the only one who did that.  Others had to feel similarly I would think?

That got me a private meeting in the judge's chambers with both attorneys and the defendant.  I explained that I had met young women who were victims of this crime and the after-effects seemed so large to me that I couldn't see how I could not think the b***ard was probably guilty.

The judge thanked me for my honesty (he said most are not about this type of thing), dismissed me from the jury, the defendant thanked me and shook my hand.  I washed it and found out 3-4 weeks later that he was convicted on all 20 counts (I was right!) and it wasn't his first time.  The young girls he molested were family friends.

It may be an illness - I don't know?  All I know is I cannot imagine ever committing such an offense and it disgusts me immensely.

No, I don't think its a life sentence...or is it?  I think the victim has a life sentence of one form or another.  I don't know what to think about this - I'd like to see this young man get a second shot, but he violated his agreement, which just somehow tells me something...I think?  Frankly, I'd rather I didn't know - it grosses me out.  Seems to me that someone who was truly sorry, truly embarrassed, truly understood the gravity of such an act, truly wanted to be a good/changed adult...woulda never failed to cross every t and dot every i.

infielddad posted:

CaCO3Girl posted:

Many of you have wondered on my viewpoint on this...it comes from being on a jury for a case involving 7 counts of molestation of minors.  I learned a lot on that case, including that not everything in these cases is cut and dry, prosecutors have interesting ways of phrasing things, and internal family squabbles dating back 10+ years can find their way into courts through children.

There are SEVERAL things going on here that are not adding up.  The only true fact that we know is that he didn't file paperwork correctly and he was given a citation for it.

I dunno about the "only" true fact conclusion.

These also are true facts:

"As a teenager, Heimlich pleaded guilty to a single charge of sexually molesting a 6-year-old female family member. Heimlich registered as a sex offender in Benton County after arriving at Oregon State. When he was cited in April for missing an annual update, it put the case in Oregon court records for the first time."

He's supposedly paid for those crimes. And part of the deal was that it be unsearchable by the public. Neither the school or the NCAA has a problem with him playing. He forgot to file paperwork. That is his current crime, I wish people would remember that.

CaCO3Girl posted:

infielddad posted:

CaCO3Girl posted:

Many of you have wondered on my viewpoint on this...it comes from being on a jury for a case involving 7 counts of molestation of minors.  I learned a lot on that case, including that not everything in these cases is cut and dry, prosecutors have interesting ways of phrasing things, and internal family squabbles dating back 10+ years can find their way into courts through children.

There are SEVERAL things going on here that are not adding up.  The only true fact that we know is that he didn't file paperwork correctly and he was given a citation for it.

I dunno about the "only" true fact conclusion.

These also are true facts:

"As a teenager, Heimlich pleaded guilty to a single charge of sexually molesting a 6-year-old female family member. Heimlich registered as a sex offender in Benton County after arriving at Oregon State. When he was cited in April for missing an annual update, it put the case in Oregon court records for the first time."

He's supposedly paid for those crimes. And part of the deal was that it be unsearchable by the public. Neither the school or the NCAA has a problem with him playing. He forgot to file paperwork. That is his current crime, I wish people would remember that.

I'm betting the OSU and the NCAA have serious issues with him playing. It's a black eye for both. You're going to see the rules change at OSU and the NCAA. There's already a precedent. Indiana does background checks on athletic recruits. 

I think we get it.  

CaCO3Girl posted:

infielddad posted:

CaCO3Girl posted:

Many of you have wondered on my viewpoint on this...it comes from being on a jury for a case involving 7 counts of molestation of minors.  I learned a lot on that case, including that not everything in these cases is cut and dry, prosecutors have interesting ways of phrasing things, and internal family squabbles dating back 10+ years can find their way into courts through children.

There are SEVERAL things going on here that are not adding up.  The only true fact that we know is that he didn't file paperwork correctly and he was given a citation for it.

I dunno about the "only" true fact conclusion.

These also are true facts:

"As a teenager, Heimlich pleaded guilty to a single charge of sexually molesting a 6-year-old female family member. Heimlich registered as a sex offender in Benton County after arriving at Oregon State. When he was cited in April for missing an annual update, it put the case in Oregon court records for the first time."

He's supposedly paid for those crimes. And part of the deal was that it be unsearchable by the public. Neither the school or the NCAA has a problem with him playing. He forgot to file paperwork. That is his current crime, I wish people would remember that.

It seems that you feel there is only one set of facts. In that aspect, I would, respectfully, disagree with you, again.

There is nothing in the "facts" which would establish the "deal" was unsearchable by the public. 

"Moran requested court documents in Washington state, where the molestation occurred. The public records reveal what happened and include a short admission of guilt written in Heimlich's own hand."

"OSU's top pitcher was 15 years old when the crime occurred in his family's home in Puyallup, Washington, according to court documents obtained last week by The Oregonian/OregonLive through a public records request. Juvenile court records in Washington, unlike in Oregon, are not automatically confidential."

He has not "paid" for the crime in terms of the sentence which was imposed.  The sentence  includes registration as a sex-offender.   His current crime is part and parcel of the   crime to which he plead guilty in his own handwriting.

I don't feel anyone should seek any "comfort" by your suggestion that decisions made by the NCAA or OSU (assuming each knew something and made a decision) should be viewed as better than those within the Washington criminal justice system for the crime to which he agreed, in his own handwriting and the sentence attached with the crime.

infielddad posted:

CaCO3Girl posted:

infielddad posted:

CaCO3Girl posted:

Many of you have wondered on my viewpoint on this...it comes from being on a jury for a case involving 7 counts of molestation of minors.  I learned a lot on that case, including that not everything in these cases is cut and dry, prosecutors have interesting ways of phrasing things, and internal family squabbles dating back 10+ years can find their way into courts through children.

There are SEVERAL things going on here that are not adding up.  The only true fact that we know is that he didn't file paperwork correctly and he was given a citation for it.

I dunno about the "only" true fact conclusion.

These also are true facts:

"As a teenager, Heimlich pleaded guilty to a single charge of sexually molesting a 6-year-old female family member. Heimlich registered as a sex offender in Benton County after arriving at Oregon State. When he was cited in April for missing an annual update, it put the case in Oregon court records for the first time."

He's supposedly paid for those crimes. And part of the deal was that it be unsearchable by the public. Neither the school or the NCAA has a problem with him playing. He forgot to file paperwork. That is his current crime, I wish people would remember that.

It seems that you feel there is only one set of facts. In that aspect, I would, respectfully, disagree with you, again.

There is nothing in the "facts" which would establish the "deal" was unsearchable by the public. 

"Moran requested court documents in Washington state, where the molestation occurred. The public records reveal what happened and include a short admission of guilt written in Heimlich's own hand."

"OSU's top pitcher was 15 years old when the crime occurred in his family's home in Puyallup, Washington, according to court documents obtained last week by The Oregonian/OregonLive through a public records request. Juvenile court records in Washington, unlike in Oregon, are not automatically confidential."

He has not "paid" for the crime in terms of the sentence which was imposed.  The sentence  includes registration as a sex-offender.   His current crime is part and parcel of the   crime to which he plead guilty in his own handwriting.

I don't feel anyone should seek any "comfort" by your suggestion that decisions made by the NCAA or OSU (assuming each knew something and made a decision) should be viewed as better than those within the Washington criminal justice system for the crime to which he agreed, in his own handwriting and the sentence attached with the crime.

You keep throwing things out that are not true.

1. The article said level 1 sex offender isn't searchable by the public. 

2. The lack of paperwork was for Oregon not Washington, which is where he plead guilty.  They dropped the charge because they realized he hadn't been told to register within 10 days of his birthday.  His only statement when he was cited was confusion because he had updated them every time he moved, there is apparently an additional rule he wasn't aware of.

3. He fulfilled all aspects of his plea deal.

4. I'm not saying anyone should seek comfort by my saying the school and the NCAA don't have rules against him playing. It's a fact, they don't have rules against felons playing.

If you continue to twist the story I will continue to correct you. 

Bolts-Coach-PR posted:

http://deadspin.com/internal-m...ees-on-ho-1796022176

From a legal standpoint the PAC 12 memo makes sense. 

Bolts-Coach-PR posted:

http://m.mlb.com/video/topic/2...ker-player-id-415389

 

This may be the valuable life lesson he needs.

The author of the article is quoted twice in my post.  They made an information act request and the criminal file was produced, with the handwritten guilty plea.

This is a further part of their article:

"But Washington considers the type of crime Heimlich committed to be so serious that the records are not confidential for juvenile offenders. And since 1997, Oregon has required people convicted of felony sex offenses elsewhere as juveniles to register as sex offenders here."

As part of his victim's sentence, she will live with being violated at age 4-6 for the rest of her life. The fact that he only plead guilty to one count does not mean others did not happen!  His requirement to register is part of his sentence. He has not completed his sentence without compliance!

Just a personal response which traces back to one of my earlier posts in this thread, but  I find it  regretable that  your posts  do not seem to acknowledge his victim  (except for the playing doctor post.) I hope you are not suggesting, somehow, there was "voluntarily consent" of a 5 year old?  

infielddad posted:

The author of the article is quoted twice in my post.  They made an information act request and the criminal file was produced, with the handwritten guilty plea.

This is a further part of their article:

"But Washington considers the type of crime Heimlich committed to be so serious that the records are not confidential for juvenile offenders. And since 1997, Oregon has required people convicted of felony sex offenses elsewhere as juveniles to register as sex offenders here."

As part of his victim's sentence, she will live with being violated at age 4-6 for the rest of her life. The fact that he only plead guilty to one count does not mean others did not happen!  His requirement to register is part of his sentence. He has not completed his sentence without compliance!

Just a personal response which traces back to one of my earlier posts in this thread, but  I find it  regretable that  your posts  do not seem to acknowledge his victim  (except for the playing doctor post.) I hope you are not suggesting, somehow, there was "voluntarily consent" of a 5 year old?  

Im not discussing the incident, im discussing an obscure rule in OR, and that his "crime" at the moment is that he didn't file paperwork so obscure they dropped the citation because they couldn't prove he had been told.

CaCO3Girl posted:

infielddad posted:

CaCO3Girl posted:

infielddad posted:

CaCO3Girl posted:

Many of you have wondered on my viewpoint on this...it comes from being on a jury for a case involving 7 counts of molestation of minors.  I learned a lot on that case, including that not everything in these cases is cut and dry, prosecutors have interesting ways of phrasing things, and internal family squabbles dating back 10+ years can find their way into courts through children.

There are SEVERAL things going on here that are not adding up.  The only true fact that we know is that he didn't file paperwork correctly and he was given a citation for it.

I dunno about the "only" true fact conclusion.

These also are true facts:

"As a teenager, Heimlich pleaded guilty to a single charge of sexually molesting a 6-year-old female family member. Heimlich registered as a sex offender in Benton County after arriving at Oregon State. When he was cited in April for missing an annual update, it put the case in Oregon court records for the first time."

He's supposedly paid for those crimes. And part of the deal was that it be unsearchable by the public. Neither the school or the NCAA has a problem with him playing. He forgot to file paperwork. That is his current crime, I wish people would remember that.

It seems that you feel there is only one set of facts. In that aspect, I would, respectfully, disagree with you, again.

There is nothing in the "facts" which would establish the "deal" was unsearchable by the public. 

"Moran requested court documents in Washington state, where the molestation occurred. The public records reveal what happened and include a short admission of guilt written in Heimlich's own hand."

"OSU's top pitcher was 15 years old when the crime occurred in his family's home in Puyallup, Washington, according to court documents obtained last week by The Oregonian/OregonLive through a public records request. Juvenile court records in Washington, unlike in Oregon, are not automatically confidential."

He has not "paid" for the crime in terms of the sentence which was imposed.  The sentence  includes registration as a sex-offender.   His current crime is part and parcel of the   crime to which he plead guilty in his own handwriting.

I don't feel anyone should seek any "comfort" by your suggestion that decisions made by the NCAA or OSU (assuming each knew something and made a decision) should be viewed as better than those within the Washington criminal justice system for the crime to which he agreed, in his own handwriting and the sentence attached with the crime.

You keep throwing things out that are not true.

1. The article said level 1 sex offender isn't searchable by the public. 

2. The lack of paperwork was for Oregon not Washington, which is where he plead guilty.  They dropped the charge because they realized he hadn't been told to register within 10 days of his birthday.  His only statement when he was cited was confusion because he had updated them every time he moved, there is apparently an additional rule he wasn't aware of.

3. He fulfilled all aspects of his plea deal.

4. I'm not saying anyone should seek comfort by my saying the school and the NCAA don't have rules against him playing. It's a fact, they don't have rules against felons playing.

 

If you continue to twist the story I will continue to correct you. 

It seems very clear that the school did not know about this because they do not ask. Casey was blindsided. The rules for OSU will assuredly change over the summer. Hopefully, all Oregon Universities will follow suit.

It's also clear that the court records are public. Moran got them through a simple request of Washington courts. This is different than his name being searchable through sex crimes databases. They records are public and not sealed because of the registration aspect of the case. Any person can request the records if they know what to request. Moran was alerted because Heimlich failed to comply with the rules in the state to which he moved. That's on him. Stop minimizing and calling it a simple mistake. He has to learn to deal with this for the rest of his life. The rules in every state are different. Time to grow up and learn.

To imply that it's not that big of a deal because it was only one time (it wasn't) or that this is somehow kids experimenting is nauseating. A kindergartner should never be subjected to any type of experimentation. As a society, we have to stop saying that these types of crimes are serious but offering excuses for people when they cross the line. Sex abuse can be a one time offense. Rape can be a one time offense. It doesn't lessen the crime or the affects.

kandkfunk posted:

To imply that it's not that big of a deal because it was only one time (it wasn't) or that this is somehow kids experimenting is nauseating. A kindergartner should never be subjected to any type of experimentation. As a society, we have to stop saying that these types of crimes are serious but offering excuses for people when they cross the line. Sex abuse can be a one time offense. Rape can be a one time offense. It doesn't lessen the crime or the affects.

Yes it is...absolutely nauseating.

There is a reason we seal the records of juvenile defenders. I have some sympathy for his case becoming public. However, as an adult, he violated the law by not doing what he was required to do. This shows a lack of the ability to learn from his horrible mistake and demonstrates that he didn't take it seriously. That, I have a problem with. 

Tough situation. The story i read said "repeatedly molested".......my heart hurts for the little girl. 

While i believe in second chances, these actions are in the realm of absolute evil, i have a hard time digesting him having unfettered access to play a game and make an incredible living while the victim, who had no choice in the molestation is probably waking up every day in fear and more than likely in life-long therapy with no simple answer as to "why" it happened to her. I might be content if he faced castration. 

Reminds me of Gary Plauche, i'm not sure i would have handled it any differently if i was her dad.

When a kid plays college ball he usually interacts with preteen kids. It could be a summer camp, at the park, at schools or charity events. How comfortable would you be with a child molester interacting with your preteen kid? It's why it's important for college programs to know player's backgrounds.

Our contract with the YMCA's, JCC, and Boys and Girls Club's require background checks for every single employee on site during camps. This wasn't a policy a decade ago; the organizations got very serious about it over the past five years. We hire a company for the checks but noticed certain things which should be red flags are not picked up (e.g., drug addiction), though arguably are very relevant; but as a vendor, we do what is required.

I haven't read the complete court history behind this case, but can give some generic info that will explain a few things.  Some juvenile sex offenses can be expunged once the offender reaches 18. That includes cases where they have to register. In many states, juveniles may be required to register, but won't be on a sex offender registration list available to the public unless they violate registration requirements. So, if his case were sealed, OSU wouldn't have found it on a background check, even though he was required to register. However, once he violated that - which is a separate felony criminal offense committed as an adult - the whole thing comes to light. I'll have to read more on exactly what the circumstances were here.

kandkfunk posted:

CaCO3Girl posted:

infielddad posted:

CaCO3Girl posted:

infielddad posted:

CaCO3Girl posted:

Many of you have wondered on my viewpoint on this...it comes from being on a jury for a case involving 7 counts of molestation of minors.  I learned a lot on that case, including that not everything in these cases is cut and dry, prosecutors have interesting ways of phrasing things, and internal family squabbles dating back 10+ years can find their way into courts through children.

There are SEVERAL things going on here that are not adding up.  The only true fact that we know is that he didn't file paperwork correctly and he was given a citation for it.

I dunno about the "only" true fact conclusion.

These also are true facts:

"As a teenager, Heimlich pleaded guilty to a single charge of sexually molesting a 6-year-old female family member. Heimlich registered as a sex offender in Benton County after arriving at Oregon State. When he was cited in April for missing an annual update, it put the case in Oregon court records for the first time."

He's supposedly paid for those crimes. And part of the deal was that it be unsearchable by the public. Neither the school or the NCAA has a problem with him playing. He forgot to file paperwork. That is his current crime, I wish people would remember that.

It seems that you feel there is only one set of facts. In that aspect, I would, respectfully, disagree with you, again.

There is nothing in the "facts" which would establish the "deal" was unsearchable by the public. 

"Moran requested court documents in Washington state, where the molestation occurred. The public records reveal what happened and include a short admission of guilt written in Heimlich's own hand."

"OSU's top pitcher was 15 years old when the crime occurred in his family's home in Puyallup, Washington, according to court documents obtained last week by The Oregonian/OregonLive through a public records request. Juvenile court records in Washington, unlike in Oregon, are not automatically confidential."

He has not "paid" for the crime in terms of the sentence which was imposed.  The sentence  includes registration as a sex-offender.   His current crime is part and parcel of the   crime to which he plead guilty in his own handwriting.

I don't feel anyone should seek any "comfort" by your suggestion that decisions made by the NCAA or OSU (assuming each knew something and made a decision) should be viewed as better than those within the Washington criminal justice system for the crime to which he agreed, in his own handwriting and the sentence attached with the crime.

You keep throwing things out that are not true.

1. The article said level 1 sex offender isn't searchable by the public. 

2. The lack of paperwork was for Oregon not Washington, which is where he plead guilty.  They dropped the charge because they realized he hadn't been told to register within 10 days of his birthday.  His only statement when he was cited was confusion because he had updated them every time he moved, there is apparently an additional rule he wasn't aware of.

3. He fulfilled all aspects of his plea deal.

4. I'm not saying anyone should seek comfort by my saying the school and the NCAA don't have rules against him playing. It's a fact, they don't have rules against felons playing.

 

If you continue to twist the story I will continue to correct you. 

It seems very clear that the school did not know about this because they do not ask. Casey was blindsided. The rules for OSU will assuredly change over the summer. Hopefully, all Oregon Universities will follow suit.

It's also clear that the court records are public. Moran got them through a simple request of Washington courts. This is different than his name being searchable through sex crimes databases. They records are public and not sealed because of the registration aspect of the case. Any person can request the records if they know what to request. Moran was alerted because Heimlich failed to comply with the rules in the state to which he moved. That's on him. Stop minimizing and calling it a simple mistake. He has to learn to deal with this for the rest of his life. The rules in every state are different. Time to grow up and learn.

To imply that it's not that big of a deal because it was only one time (it wasn't) or that this is somehow kids experimenting is nauseating. A kindergartner should never be subjected to any type of experimentation. As a society, we have to stop saying that these types of crimes are serious but offering excuses for people when they cross the line. Sex abuse can be a one time offense. Rape can be a one time offense. It doesn't lessen the crime or the affects.

Under Washington law, a level 1 juvenile sex offender is required to register, but it could be marked as "expunged" which doesn't revoke the requirement to register, but does mean it won't show up to the public unless and until a charge of Failure to Register is filed, at which point it becomes public record. 

This thread should have ended days ago.  It never fails to amaze me how HSbaseball web spends page after page and post after post on things only tangentially related to baseball but allow people to argue over things that have little to no relationship to any of us.  

The laws are on the books.  The legal system has done its job. Don't like it?  Look to change the law or deal with the judges who didn't make a big deal out of the kid not re-upping his paper work.  But quit trying this guy on HSbaseballweb and calling for extra-codified legal repercussions.  

I think I hear Anna. "Let it go."

I will inject this into the conversation: what exactly do some of you propose we do with juvenile sex offenders? Are we supposed to cut their legs out from under them and never allow them another opportunity in life? For those who don't understand why he would be allowed the opportunity to play ball, do you think if you take away a sex offender's ability to get a job, go to school, find a decent place to live, etc., do you make it more or less likely that this person will commit such a crime again? 

If a person has gone through the criminal system and satisfied the conditions put o him by the court, I just don't see how ostracizing him from the ability to recover and lead a useful life is of any value to society. Once you remove all incentives to lead a better life and be a better person, I believe you are more likely to drive them back to the crime because, hey, what do they have to lose anymore?

This shouldn't be taken as tolerance. I'm hard on the kid more because, by not fulfilling requirements put on him by the court, he minimizes the seriousness of his offense. I have no problem giving a kid a chance to play ball. I completely understand the frustration a victim would experience seeing their tormentor succeed in life - I do. However, I don't see any good to society coming from making a juvenile sex offender an outcast for life. Hopeless people fall back on bad instincts.

roothog66 posted:

I will inject this into the conversation: what exactly do some of you propose we do with juvenile sex offenders? Are we supposed to cut out there legs from them and never allow them another opportunity in life? For those who don't understand why he would be allowed the opportunity to play ball, do you think if you take away a sex offender's ability to get a job, go to school, find a decent place to live, etc., do you make it more or less likely that this person will commit such a crime again? 

If a person has gone through the criminal system and satisfied the conditions put o him by the court, I just don't see how ostracizing him from the ability to recover and lead a useful life is of any value to society. Once you remove all incentives to lead a better life and be a better person, I believe you are more likely to drive them back to the crime because, hey, what do they have to lose anymore?

This shouldn't be taken as tolerance. I'm hard on the kid more because, by not fulfilling requirements put on him by the court, he minimizes the seriousness of his offense. I have no problem giving a kid a chance to play ball. I completely understand the frustration a victim would experience seeing their tormentor succeed in life - I do. However, I don't see any good to society coming from making a juvenile sex offender an outcast for life. Hopeless people fall back on bad instincts.

He wouldn't have had a problem had he adhered to the rules set by the court. Given the light penalties received for his crime along with lack of adherence I don't believe the kid gets it. 

The issue with his job future is there is the potential to participate in a high visibility career. There may not be a team that wants to deal with the high level of community blow back that will come their way. At the least there probably isn't a franchise that wants to invest/risk any level of slot money on him.

If a team drafts him late or signs him as a free agent the first time thing the kid should do is express tremendous regret for his last actions and express graciousness a team was willing to risk signing him. When asked this past week he expressed no regret and only talked about himself. It doesn't sell well. The right statement along with a commitment to work against sexual abuse could go a long way. The level of protest would be low in some obscure, small town minor league environment.

A low visibility route might be to play Indy ball for a year. I don't know how a person erases the stigma of child molester in a high visibility profession. I guess we will ultimately see how mentally strong he is and if he genuinely has any regret for his past actions.

RJM posted:

roothog66 posted:

I will inject this into the conversation: what exactly do some of you propose we do with juvenile sex offenders? Are we supposed to cut out there legs from them and never allow them another opportunity in life? For those who don't understand why he would be allowed the opportunity to play ball, do you think if you take away a sex offender's ability to get a job, go to school, find a decent place to live, etc., do you make it more or less likely that this person will commit such a crime again? 

If a person has gone through the criminal system and satisfied the conditions put o him by the court, I just don't see how ostracizing him from the ability to recover and lead a useful life is of any value to society. Once you remove all incentives to lead a better life and be a better person, I believe you are more likely to drive them back to the crime because, hey, what do they have to lose anymore?

This shouldn't be taken as tolerance. I'm hard on the kid more because, by not fulfilling requirements put on him by the court, he minimizes the seriousness of his offense. I have no problem giving a kid a chance to play ball. I completely understand the frustration a victim would experience seeing their tormentor succeed in life - I do. However, I don't see any good to society coming from making a juvenile sex offender an outcast for life. Hopeless people fall back on bad instincts.

He wouldn't have had a problem had he adhered to the rules set by the court. Given the light penalties received for his crime along with lack of adherence I don't believe the kid gets it. 

The issue with his job future is there is the potential to participate in a high visibility career. There may not be a team that wants to deal with the high level of community blow back that will come their way. At the least there probably isn't a franchise that wants to invest/risk any level of slot money on him.

If a team drafts him late or signs him as a free agent the first time thing the kid should do is express tremendous regret for his last actions and express graciousness a team was willing to risk signing him. When asked this past week he expressed no regret and only talked about himself. It doesn't sell well. The right statement along with a commitment to work against sexual abuse could go a long way. The level of protest would be low in some obscure, small town minor league environment.

A low visibility route might be to play Indy ball for a year. I don't know how a person erases the stigma of child molester in a high visibility profession. I guess we will ultimately see how mentally strong he is and if he genuinely has any regret for his past actions.

So are you saying if he had registered in Oregon, you be be "A-Okay" with him playing ball in the CWS, getting drafted, and having a comfortable life? You seem to be hanging your judgment of his situation on a technicality after he went through the criminal justice process, which seems...well, it just seems odd. He still committed that crime, still has that hanging over his head. His victim still has her burden in life to deal with. But somehow it seems that if he simply had registered as a sex offender it would have been an acceptable situation to you.

If he is not given the opportunity to play again in college or as a professional, that's on those who are in a position to make that decision. I think professional sports are becoming risk averse as it relates to the employment of those with a criminal past, especially if it has a domestic violence or sex crime aspect to it. It's their right, they have a brand image to maintain and anything that pulls people OUT of the stadium is not good for business. Any business decision that lessens the value of their television revenue by advertisers pulling out is bad for business. It is easy and understandable for me to see why MLB teams would want to avoid him.

As a communication strategy, I don't think he did anything wrong by not talking about it. If anything, it was the smartest tactic to employ at that moment. Do no harm. If he had profusely apologized would that have had the desired effect. "Oh, he's showing remorse, let's give him a break," or would he have been seen as disingenuous and self serving, be honest here. I would never recommend that communication strategy. He still has that hanging over his head. It would still affect his ability to be in the public eye. It would still be undesirable to an employer who would need to have their employee in the public eye.

I agree with Roothog on all of his comments above, there has to be a point, especially as it relates to crimes committed by a minor, that you can say "he served the sentence we gave him" and then allow that person to salvage what they can of their lives. That said, there is no obligation on anyone to help him do it, right or wrong. God pity the team that does, they will be on the hot seat. The team that does give him the chance will bring on their own set of PR problems...

While it may be the PC thing to be doing now a days the idea of a celebrity who say beat the crud out of his girlfriend and then commits money or time for other women who have been beaten rings false to me.  It doesn't erase what he did and I really don't think the organizations receiving the money/time are all that happy to be getting it if they have to be associated with the criminal who did beat his girlfriend.

If this kid opens up about what happened he opens it up for questions...questions from reporters won't help him or the little girl. If he doesn't talk about it he "isn't showing remorse"? I'd be shutting up too.

SanDiegoRealist posted:

RJM posted:

roothog66 posted:

I will inject this into the conversation: what exactly do some of you propose we do with juvenile sex offenders? Are we supposed to cut out there legs from them and never allow them another opportunity in life? For those who don't understand why he would be allowed the opportunity to play ball, do you think if you take away a sex offender's ability to get a job, go to school, find a decent place to live, etc., do you make it more or less likely that this person will commit such a crime again? 

If a person has gone through the criminal system and satisfied the conditions put o him by the court, I just don't see how ostracizing him from the ability to recover and lead a useful life is of any value to society. Once you remove all incentives to lead a better life and be a better person, I believe you are more likely to drive them back to the crime because, hey, what do they have to lose anymore?

This shouldn't be taken as tolerance. I'm hard on the kid more because, by not fulfilling requirements put on him by the court, he minimizes the seriousness of his offense. I have no problem giving a kid a chance to play ball. I completely understand the frustration a victim would experience seeing their tormentor succeed in life - I do. However, I don't see any good to society coming from making a juvenile sex offender an outcast for life. Hopeless people fall back on bad instincts.

He wouldn't have had a problem had he adhered to the rules set by the court. Given the light penalties received for his crime along with lack of adherence I don't believe the kid gets it. 

The issue with his job future is there is the potential to participate in a high visibility career. There may not be a team that wants to deal with the high level of community blow back that will come their way. At the least there probably isn't a franchise that wants to invest/risk any level of slot money on him.

If a team drafts him late or signs him as a free agent the first time thing the kid should do is express tremendous regret for his last actions and express graciousness a team was willing to risk signing him. When asked this past week he expressed no regret and only talked about himself. It doesn't sell well. The right statement along with a commitment to work against sexual abuse could go a long way. The level of protest would be low in some obscure, small town minor league environment.

A low visibility route might be to play Indy ball for a year. I don't know how a person erases the stigma of child molester in a high visibility profession. I guess we will ultimately see how mentally strong he is and if he genuinely has any regret for his past actions.

So are you saying if he had registered in Oregon, you be be "A-Okay" with him playing ball in the CWS, getting drafted, and having a comfortable life? You seem to be hanging your judgment of his situation on a technicality after he went through the criminal justice process, which seems...well, it just seems odd. He still committed that crime, still has that hanging over his head. His victim still has her burden in life to deal with. But somehow it seems that if he simply had registered as a sex offender it would have been an acceptable situation to you.

If he is not given the opportunity to play again in college or as a professional, that's on those who are in a position to make that decision. I think professional sports are becoming risk averse as it relates to the employment of those with a criminal past, especially if it has a domestic violence or sex crime aspect to it. It's their right, they have a brand image to maintain and anything that pulls people OUT of the stadium is not good for business. Any business decision that lessens the value of their television revenue by advertisers pulling out is bad for business. It is easy and understandable for me to see why MLB teams would want to avoid him.

As a communication strategy, I don't think he did anything wrong by not talking about it. If anything, it was the smartest tactic to employ at that moment. Do no harm. If he had profusely apologized would that have had the desired effect. "Oh, he's showing remorse, let's give him a break," or would he have been seen as disingenuous and self serving, be honest here. I would never recommend that communication strategy. He still has that hanging over his head. It would still affect his ability to be in the public eye. It would still be undesirable to an employer who would need to have their employee in the public eye.

I agree with Roothog on all of his comments above, there has to be a point, especially as it relates to crimes committed by a minor, that you can say "he served the sentence we gave him" and then allow that person to salvage what they can of their lives. That said, there is no obligation on anyone to help him do it, right or wrong. God pity the team that does, they will be on the hot seat. The team that does give him the chance will bring on their own set of PR problems...

 

I'm not saying one single word you're trying to attribute to me. I suggest next time you ask questions rather than make assumptions and accusations. 

I posted this is all Heimlich's fault. There aren't any excuses to be made for him. Had he been responsible and followed the law he wouldn't have showed up on a list that ultimately led the reporter back to Washington and the original charges. 

I could care less whether Heimlich ever steps on a baseball field. Baseball will be just fine without him. No one player is bigger than the game.  I presented how it could possibly be done. He is entitled to redeem himself and have a life. It may be extremely hard to do if he wants to participate in the high visibility career of pro sports.

The biggest issue I have with Heimlich is I don't believe he understands the gravity of his crimes. He was given a light sentence. Then he didn't comply with a simple legal requirement. He didn't acknowledge his crime when approached about it. He only talked about himself. He's lost millions by not registering as required by law. He's learning irresponsibility and bad decisions have conseqences. I hope he comes to term with the severity of his crime. So far his actions say "no."

RJM posted:

SanDiegoRealist posted:

RJM posted:

roothog66 posted:

I will inject this into the conversation: what exactly do some of you propose we do with juvenile sex offenders? Are we supposed to cut out there legs from them and never allow them another opportunity in life? For those who don't understand why he would be allowed the opportunity to play ball, do you think if you take away a sex offender's ability to get a job, go to school, find a decent place to live, etc., do you make it more or less likely that this person will commit such a crime again? 

If a person has gone through the criminal system and satisfied the conditions put o him by the court, I just don't see how ostracizing him from the ability to recover and lead a useful life is of any value to society. Once you remove all incentives to lead a better life and be a better person, I believe you are more likely to drive them back to the crime because, hey, what do they have to lose anymore?

This shouldn't be taken as tolerance. I'm hard on the kid more because, by not fulfilling requirements put on him by the court, he minimizes the seriousness of his offense. I have no problem giving a kid a chance to play ball. I completely understand the frustration a victim would experience seeing their tormentor succeed in life - I do. However, I don't see any good to society coming from making a juvenile sex offender an outcast for life. Hopeless people fall back on bad instincts.

He wouldn't have had a problem had he adhered to the rules set by the court. Given the light penalties received for his crime along with lack of adherence I don't believe the kid gets it. 

The issue with his job future is there is the potential to participate in a high visibility career. There may not be a team that wants to deal with the high level of community blow back that will come their way. At the least there probably isn't a franchise that wants to invest/risk any level of slot money on him.

If a team drafts him late or signs him as a free agent the first time thing the kid should do is express tremendous regret for his last actions and express graciousness a team was willing to risk signing him. When asked this past week he expressed no regret and only talked about himself. It doesn't sell well. The right statement along with a commitment to work against sexual abuse could go a long way. The level of protest would be low in some obscure, small town minor league environment.

A low visibility route might be to play Indy ball for a year. I don't know how a person erases the stigma of child molester in a high visibility profession. I guess we will ultimately see how mentally strong he is and if he genuinely has any regret for his past actions.

So are you saying if he had registered in Oregon, you be be "A-Okay" with him playing ball in the CWS, getting drafted, and having a comfortable life?  

I'm not saying one single word you're trying to attribute to me. I suggest next time you ask questions rather than make assumptions and accusations. 

I posted this is all Heimlich's fault. There aren't any excuses to be made for him. Had he been responsible and followed the law he wouldn't have showed up on a list that ultimately led the reporter back to Washington and the original charges. 

I could care less whether Heimlich ever steps on a baseball field. Baseball will be just fine without him. No one player is bigger than the game.  I presented how it could possibly be done. He is entitled to redeem himself and have a life. It may be extremely hard to do if he wants to participate in the high visibility career of pro sports.

The biggest issue I have with Heimlich is I don't believe he understands the gravity of his crimes. He was given a light sentence. Then he didn't comply with a simple legal requirement. He didn't acknowledge his crime when approached about it. He only talked about himself. He's lost millions by not registering as required by law. He's learning irresponsibility and bad decisions have conseqences. I hope he comes to term with the severity of his crime. So far his actions say "no."

Sorry, thought I used a question in the first sentence....oh, that's right, I did.