Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
I have such mixed feelings. On the one hand, a truly heinous crime. And on the other — once someone has served the sentence imposed by the courts, when does the punishment stop? And I understand that the victim's suffering never ends. My heart just bleeds because no matter what happens, neither the victim or the victimizer can move past this. So sad.
I have no mixed feelings on this one. I don't care what our justice system says. Some crimes don't have an end to their sentence and no amount of pentance will do.
Some of you should read the updated information rather than jumping to conclusions from hit pieces.
So if I'm reading this right....guilty or not, his brother basically threw him under the bus to appease his ex-wife and keep her from possibly keeping him from seeing his kids? Sorry, but it my mind it seems pretty clear....it's either 1) he is guilty....and the family knows it or 2) his brother needs his a$$ kicked based on the fact that the family still gets together and the brother doesn't seem to be being held at all responsible for ruining this kid's life, I'm leaning toward #1
Buckeye 2015 posted:So if I'm reading this right....guilty or not, his brother basically threw him under the bus to appease his ex-wife and keep her from possibly keeping him from seeing his kids? Sorry, but it my mind it seems pretty clear....it's either 1) he is guilty....and the family knows it or 2) his brother needs his a$$ kicked based on the fact that the family still gets together and the brother doesn't seem to be being held at all responsible for ruining this kid's life, I'm leaning toward #1
Idk. The ex wife factor could be an issue. Just a lousy situation no matter what.
Kyle Boddy posted:Some of you should read the updated information rather than jumping to conclusions from hit pieces.
Thank you Kyle, hope all is well.
There are two lessons to be learned. One relates to the follow up story. Don’t go cheap on a lawyer. Get the best one available.
The second relates to the original issue. Follow all the rules. Had Heimlich registered in the state of Oregon when he started college chances are none of this would have become public.
Wow, what a twist. He might actually be innocent. I don't blame the brother. It was a family decision that ended up being best for everyone. Blame it on the ex-wife who was desperate for custody.
The family was put in a very tough spot - put the 15 year old away for a year or just plead guilty as a minor and get probation... I'm sure many families would have picked door #2 given those options.
Kyle Boddy posted:Some of you should read the updated information rather than jumping to conclusions from hit pieces.
I've read all that information but a mother wanting custody doesn't make me jump to the conclusion she tried to frame someone for molestation. The kids parents being involved in the church doesn't make me jump to the conclusion there's nothing wrong with the kid. Him being a multisport athlete doesn't make me jump to the conclusion he would never do anything wrong.
All I know is he plead guilty to it. Yes he did so because being found guilty would carry a harsher sentence. Criminals do it all the time. They also declare their inocents. Im not going to jump to conclusions baised on a pro puff piece artical either.
Scotty83 posted:Kyle Boddy posted:Some of you should read the updated information rather than jumping to conclusions from hit pieces.
I've read all that information but a mother wanting custody doesn't make me jump to the conclusion she tried to frame someone for molestation. The kids parents being involved in the church doesn't make me jump to the conclusion there's nothing wrong with the kid. Him being a multisport athlete doesn't make me jump to the conclusion he would never do anything wrong.
All I know is he plead guilty to it. Yes he did so because being found guilty would carry a harsher sentence. Criminals do it all the time. They also declare their inocents. Im not going to jump to conclusions baised on a pro puff piece artical either.
It stands to reason that the chance someone/s like you might end up on the jury is why they decided to take the plea. If the victim herself got on the stand and recanted you'd still vote guilty.
SomeBaseballDad posted:Scotty83 posted:Kyle Boddy posted:Some of you should read the updated information rather than jumping to conclusions from hit pieces.
I've read all that information but a mother wanting custody doesn't make me jump to the conclusion she tried to frame someone for molestation. The kids parents being involved in the church doesn't make me jump to the conclusion there's nothing wrong with the kid. Him being a multisport athlete doesn't make me jump to the conclusion he would never do anything wrong.
All I know is he plead guilty to it. Yes he did so because being found guilty would carry a harsher sentence. Criminals do it all the time. They also declare their inocents. Im not going to jump to conclusions baised on a pro puff piece artical either.
It stands to reason that the chance someone/s like you might end up on the jury is why they decided to take the plea. If the victim herself got on the stand and recanted you'd still vote guilty.
Huh? What exactly is that supposed to mean?
SomeBaseballDad posted:Scotty83 posted:Kyle Boddy posted:Some of you should read the updated information rather than jumping to conclusions from hit pieces.
I've read all that information but a mother wanting custody doesn't make me jump to the conclusion she tried to frame someone for molestation. The kids parents being involved in the church doesn't make me jump to the conclusion there's nothing wrong with the kid. Him being a multisport athlete doesn't make me jump to the conclusion he would never do anything wrong.
All I know is he plead guilty to it. Yes he did so because being found guilty would carry a harsher sentence. Criminals do it all the time. They also declare their inocents. Im not going to jump to conclusions baised on a pro puff piece artical either.
It stands to reason that the chance someone/s like you might end up on the jury is why they decided to take the plea. If the victim herself got on the stand and recanted you'd still vote guilty.
It also stands to reason he molested a little girl.
And if it did go to jury having me or someone like me on the jury would be his best chance if he was innocent. I only listen to fact. The little girls accusation is not a fact. His guilty plea is. It's the only fact in this case.
SomeBaseballDad posted:Scotty83 posted:Kyle Boddy posted:Some of you should read the updated information rather than jumping to conclusions from hit pieces.
I've read all that information but a mother wanting custody doesn't make me jump to the conclusion she tried to frame someone for molestation. The kids parents being involved in the church doesn't make me jump to the conclusion there's nothing wrong with the kid. Him being a multisport athlete doesn't make me jump to the conclusion he would never do anything wrong.
All I know is he plead guilty to it. Yes he did so because being found guilty would carry a harsher sentence. Criminals do it all the time. They also declare their inocents. Im not going to jump to conclusions baised on a pro puff piece artical either.
It stands to reason that the chance someone/s like you might end up on the jury is why they decided to take the plea. If the victim herself got on the stand and recanted you'd still vote guilty.
Don’t get personal. Don’t attack someone else’s opinion. The thread will go downhill quickly. It’s possible to disagree without getting personal.
SomeBaseballDad posted:Scotty83 posted:Kyle Boddy posted:Some of you should read the updated information rather than jumping to conclusions from hit pieces.
I've read all that information but a mother wanting custody doesn't make me jump to the conclusion she tried to frame someone for molestation. The kids parents being involved in the church doesn't make me jump to the conclusion there's nothing wrong with the kid. Him being a multisport athlete doesn't make me jump to the conclusion he would never do anything wrong.
All I know is he plead guilty to it. Yes he did so because being found guilty would carry a harsher sentence. Criminals do it all the time. They also declare their inocents. Im not going to jump to conclusions baised on a pro puff piece artical either.
It stands to reason that the chance someone/s like you might end up on the jury is why they decided to take the plea. If the victim herself got on the stand and recanted you'd still vote guilty.
"pro puff piece artical". Really, 90% of the quotes in the article were from court appointed individuals. So he's implying they're all pro Luke Heimlich? The article raises questions and presents facts the are contrary to his feeling about the case, so he dismisses it out of hand. Not really someone I'd want judging my guilt or innocence.
SomeBaseballDad posted:SomeBaseballDad posted:Scotty83 posted:Kyle Boddy posted:Some of you should read the updated information rather than jumping to conclusions from hit pieces.
I've read all that information but a mother wanting custody doesn't make me jump to the conclusion she tried to frame someone for molestation. The kids parents being involved in the church doesn't make me jump to the conclusion there's nothing wrong with the kid. Him being a multisport athlete doesn't make me jump to the conclusion he would never do anything wrong.
All I know is he plead guilty to it. Yes he did so because being found guilty would carry a harsher sentence. Criminals do it all the time. They also declare their inocents. Im not going to jump to conclusions baised on a pro puff piece artical either.
It stands to reason that the chance someone/s like you might end up on the jury is why they decided to take the plea. If the victim herself got on the stand and recanted you'd still vote guilty.
"pro puff piece artical". Really, 90% of the quotes in the article were from court appointed individuals. So he's implying they're all pro Luke Heimlich? The article raises questions and presents facts the are contrary to his feeling about the case, so he dismisses it out of hand. Not really someone I'd want judging my guilt or innocence.
He's doing the exact opposite of what you are saying, but okay...
Matt13 posted:SomeBaseballDad posted:SomeBaseballDad posted:Scotty83 posted:Kyle Boddy posted:Some of you should read the updated information rather than jumping to conclusions from hit pieces.
I've read all that information but a mother wanting custody doesn't make me jump to the conclusion she tried to frame someone for molestation. The kids parents being involved in the church doesn't make me jump to the conclusion there's nothing wrong with the kid. Him being a multisport athlete doesn't make me jump to the conclusion he would never do anything wrong.
All I know is he plead guilty to it. Yes he did so because being found guilty would carry a harsher sentence. Criminals do it all the time. They also declare their inocents. Im not going to jump to conclusions baised on a pro puff piece artical either.
It stands to reason that the chance someone/s like you might end up on the jury is why they decided to take the plea. If the victim herself got on the stand and recanted you'd still vote guilty.
"pro puff piece artical". Really, 90% of the quotes in the article were from court appointed individuals. So he's implying they're all pro Luke Heimlich? The article raises questions and presents facts the are contrary to his feeling about the case, so he dismisses it out of hand. Not really someone I'd want judging my guilt or innocence.
He's doing the exact opposite of what you are saying, but okay...
Sorry, my reading comprehension isn't that bad.
That said my point stands. People tend to be predisposed to certain conclusions. After which they are hard pressed to change even when the facts may paint a different picture. The article raises questions. To dismiss it as pro Luke is an attempt to discredit it.
Going back to the original thread there were no small amount of posters who concluded the kid was guilty as soon as they read "child molestation". If I knew for a fact my kid wasn't guilty I'd have still taken the plea just based on replies here. So saying he's guilty because he plead guilty doesn't convince me he is.
His lawyer gave him excellent advice.
SomeBaseballDad posted:SomeBaseballDad posted:Scotty83 posted:Kyle Boddy posted:Some of you should read the updated information rather than jumping to conclusions from hit pieces.
I've read all that information but a mother wanting custody doesn't make me jump to the conclusion she tried to frame someone for molestation. The kids parents being involved in the church doesn't make me jump to the conclusion there's nothing wrong with the kid. Him being a multisport athlete doesn't make me jump to the conclusion he would never do anything wrong.
All I know is he plead guilty to it. Yes he did so because being found guilty would carry a harsher sentence. Criminals do it all the time. They also declare their inocents. Im not going to jump to conclusions baised on a pro puff piece artical either.
It stands to reason that the chance someone/s like you might end up on the jury is why they decided to take the plea. If the victim herself got on the stand and recanted you'd still vote guilty.
"pro puff piece artical". Really, 90% of the quotes in the article were from court appointed individuals. So he's implying they're all pro Luke Heimlich? The article raises questions and presents facts the are contrary to his feeling about the case, so he dismisses it out of hand. Not really someone I'd want judging my guilt or innocence.
You don't have to say he. You can address me directly. I'm a big boy. I have no problem with your comment. It's just your opinion. I think you misunderstood me though.
I said pro puff piece because the artical had a whole lot of information about how good of people his parents were and how good of a person he is and good of people his family are. Like that somehow means he can't do something like this Oh and by the way the accuser was a mom wanting custody. It sounded pretty slanted to me. Maybe I'm wrong.
I have no idea if he's innocent or guilty. All I have to go by is that he himself plead guilty. From that point wether he is actually a child molester or just for what ever reason plead guilty to being a child molester. I don't believe child molestation is a second chance offense. Please keep in mind I didn't say he was a child molester his lawyer and he did.
RJM posted:
There are two lessons to be learned. One relates to the follow up story. Don’t go cheap on a lawyer. Get the best one available.
The second relates to the original issue. Follow all the rules. Had Heimlich registered in the state of Oregon when he started college chances are none of this would have become public.
According to the second story — "Shortly after his 21st birthday — Feb. 3, 2017 — he received a citation from Benton County for failure to re-register. Oregon officials had incorrectly determined him to be a resident of the state. Washington state rules do not require re-registration on a 21st birthday. Heimlich's attorney, Stephen Ensor, took the case to court, and the citation was dismissed."
Here's what I think all of us as parents should take from this story, and instill in our sons. Be careful. Whether you are guilty or innocent, just an accusation will do more than ruin your career, it will ruin your life.
Iowamom23 posted:RJM posted:
There are two lessons to be learned. One relates to the follow up story. Don’t go cheap on a lawyer. Get the best one available.
The second relates to the original issue. Follow all the rules. Had Heimlich registered in the state of Oregon when he started college chances are none of this would have become public.
According to the second story — "Shortly after his 21st birthday — Feb. 3, 2017 — he received a citation from Benton County for failure to re-register. Oregon officials had incorrectly determined him to be a resident of the state. Washington state rules do not require re-registration on a 21st birthday. Heimlich's attorney, Stephen Ensor, took the case to court, and the citation was dismissed."
Here's what I think all of us as parents should take from this story, and instill in our sons. Be careful. Whether you are guilty or innocent, just an accusation will do more than ruin your career, it will ruin your life.
+1
Scotty83 posted:SomeBaseballDad posted:SomeBaseballDad posted:Scotty83 posted:Kyle Boddy posted:Some of you should read the updated information rather than jumping to conclusions from hit pieces.
I've read all that information but a mother wanting custody doesn't make me jump to the conclusion she tried to frame someone for molestation. The kids parents being involved in the church doesn't make me jump to the conclusion there's nothing wrong with the kid. Him being a multisport athlete doesn't make me jump to the conclusion he would never do anything wrong.
All I know is he plead guilty to it. Yes he did so because being found guilty would carry a harsher sentence. Criminals do it all the time. They also declare their inocents. Im not going to jump to conclusions baised on a pro puff piece artical either.
It stands to reason that the chance someone/s like you might end up on the jury is why they decided to take the plea. If the victim herself got on the stand and recanted you'd still vote guilty.
"pro puff piece artical". Really, 90% of the quotes in the article were from court appointed individuals. So he's implying they're all pro Luke Heimlich? The article raises questions and presents facts the are contrary to his feeling about the case, so he dismisses it out of hand. Not really someone I'd want judging my guilt or innocence.
Pease keep in mind I didn't say he was a child molester his lawyer and he did.
Again what choice did he have? Go to court? From go it would be the word of a "monster" vs a sweet little girl. Hell I could have won that case drunk, high on Xanax, and with a severe brain injury. My dog could have convicted him.
Like I said, I'd have told my son to do the same thing
SomeBaseballDad posted:Scotty83 posted:SomeBaseballDad posted:SomeBaseballDad posted:Scotty83 posted:Kyle Boddy posted:Some of you should read the updated information rather than jumping to conclusions from hit pieces.
I've read all that information but a mother wanting custody doesn't make me jump to the conclusion she tried to frame someone for molestation. The kids parents being involved in the church doesn't make me jump to the conclusion there's nothing wrong with the kid. Him being a multisport athlete doesn't make me jump to the conclusion he would never do anything wrong.
All I know is he plead guilty to it. Yes he did so because being found guilty would carry a harsher sentence. Criminals do it all the time. They also declare their inocents. Im not going to jump to conclusions baised on a pro puff piece artical either.
It stands to reason that the chance someone/s like you might end up on the jury is why they decided to take the plea. If the victim herself got on the stand and recanted you'd still vote guilty.
"pro puff piece artical". Really, 90% of the quotes in the article were from court appointed individuals. So he's implying they're all pro Luke Heimlich? The article raises questions and presents facts the are contrary to his feeling about the case, so he dismisses it out of hand. Not really someone I'd want judging my guilt or innocence.
Pease keep in mind I didn't say he was a child molester his lawyer and he did.
Again what choice did he have? Go to court? From go it would be the word of a "monster" vs a sweet little girl. Hell I could have won that case drunk, high on Xanax, and with a severe brain injury. My dog could have convicted him.
Like I said, I'd have told my son to do the same thing
You are overestimating the ease of a prosecution in cases like this. That's just a little bit of experience talking.
Matt13 posted:SomeBaseballDad posted:Scotty83 posted:SomeBaseballDad posted:SomeBaseballDad posted:Scotty83 posted:Kyle Boddy posted:Some of you should read the updated information rather than jumping to conclusions from hit pieces.
I've read all that information but a mother wanting custody doesn't make me jump to the conclusion she tried to frame someone for molestation. The kids parents being involved in the church doesn't make me jump to the conclusion there's nothing wrong with the kid. Him being a multisport athlete doesn't make me jump to the conclusion he would never do anything wrong.
All I know is he plead guilty to it. Yes he did so because being found guilty would carry a harsher sentence. Criminals do it all the time. They also declare their inocents. Im not going to jump to conclusions baised on a pro puff piece artical either.
It stands to reason that the chance someone/s like you might end up on the jury is why they decided to take the plea. If the victim herself got on the stand and recanted you'd still vote guilty.
"pro puff piece artical". Really, 90% of the quotes in the article were from court appointed individuals. So he's implying they're all pro Luke Heimlich? The article raises questions and presents facts the are contrary to his feeling about the case, so he dismisses it out of hand. Not really someone I'd want judging my guilt or innocence.
Pease keep in mind I didn't say he was a child molester his lawyer and he did.
Again what choice did he have? Go to court? From go it would be the word of a "monster" vs a sweet little girl. Hell I could have won that case drunk, high on Xanax, and with a severe brain injury. My dog could have convicted him.
Like I said, I'd have told my son to do the same thing
You are overestimating the ease of a prosecution in cases like this. That's just a little bit of experience talking.
Of course l'm being somewhat flippant. That said I don't care if you're F. Lee Bailey you aren't going to convince me that kids chances were slim and none.
SomeBaseballDad posted:Matt13 posted:SomeBaseballDad posted:Scotty83 posted:SomeBaseballDad posted:SomeBaseballDad posted:Scotty83 posted:Kyle Boddy posted:Some of you should read the updated information rather than jumping to conclusions from hit pieces.
I've read all that information but a mother wanting custody doesn't make me jump to the conclusion she tried to frame someone for molestation. The kids parents being involved in the church doesn't make me jump to the conclusion there's nothing wrong with the kid. Him being a multisport athlete doesn't make me jump to the conclusion he would never do anything wrong.
All I know is he plead guilty to it. Yes he did so because being found guilty would carry a harsher sentence. Criminals do it all the time. They also declare their inocents. Im not going to jump to conclusions baised on a pro puff piece artical either.
It stands to reason that the chance someone/s like you might end up on the jury is why they decided to take the plea. If the victim herself got on the stand and recanted you'd still vote guilty.
"pro puff piece artical". Really, 90% of the quotes in the article were from court appointed individuals. So he's implying they're all pro Luke Heimlich? The article raises questions and presents facts the are contrary to his feeling about the case, so he dismisses it out of hand. Not really someone I'd want judging my guilt or innocence.
Pease keep in mind I didn't say he was a child molester his lawyer and he did.
Again what choice did he have? Go to court? From go it would be the word of a "monster" vs a sweet little girl. Hell I could have won that case drunk, high on Xanax, and with a severe brain injury. My dog could have convicted him.
Like I said, I'd have told my son to do the same thing
You are overestimating the ease of a prosecution in cases like this. That's just a little bit of experience talking.
Of course l'm being somewhat flippant. That said I don't care if you're F. Lee Bailey you aren't going to convince me that kids chances were slim and none.
So, when presented with ideas contrary to your opinion, you dismiss them out of hand...
Matt13 posted:SomeBaseballDad posted:Matt13 posted:SomeBaseballDad posted:Scotty83 posted:SomeBaseballDad posted:SomeBaseballDad posted:Scotty83 posted:Kyle Boddy posted:Some of you should read the updated information rather than jumping to conclusions from hit pieces.
I've read all that information but a mother wanting custody doesn't make me jump to the conclusion she tried to frame someone for molestation. The kids parents being involved in the church doesn't make me jump to the conclusion there's nothing wrong with the kid. Him being a multisport athlete doesn't make me jump to the conclusion he would never do anything wrong.
All I know is he plead guilty to it. Yes he did so because being found guilty would carry a harsher sentence. Criminals do it all the time. They also declare their inocents. Im not going to jump to conclusions baised on a pro puff piece artical either.
It stands to reason that the chance someone/s like you might end up on the jury is why they decided to take the plea. If the victim herself got on the stand and recanted you'd still vote guilty.
"pro puff piece artical". Really, 90% of the quotes in the article were from court appointed individuals. So he's implying they're all pro Luke Heimlich? The article raises questions and presents facts the are contrary to his feeling about the case, so he dismisses it out of hand. Not really someone I'd want judging my guilt or innocence.
Pease keep in mind I didn't say he was a child molester his lawyer and he did.
Again what choice did he have? Go to court? From go it would be the word of a "monster" vs a sweet little girl. Hell I could have won that case drunk, high on Xanax, and with a severe brain injury. My dog could have convicted him.
Like I said, I'd have told my son to do the same thing
You are overestimating the ease of a prosecution in cases like this. That's just a little bit of experience talking.
Of course l'm being somewhat flippant. That said I don't care if you're F. Lee Bailey you aren't going to convince me that kids chances were slim and none.
So, when presented with ideas contrary to your opinion, you dismiss them out of hand...
No, I'm just not stupid.
I'll edit to add this. If it were a bench trial then I might be more inclined to have my day in court. Jury, no way.
SomeBaseballDad posted:Scotty83 posted:SomeBaseballDad posted:SomeBaseballDad posted:Scotty83 posted:Kyle Boddy posted:Some of you should read the updated information rather than jumping to conclusions from hit pieces.
I've read all that information but a mother wanting custody doesn't make me jump to the conclusion she tried to frame someone for molestation. The kids parents being involved in the church doesn't make me jump to the conclusion there's nothing wrong with the kid. Him being a multisport athlete doesn't make me jump to the conclusion he would never do anything wrong.
All I know is he plead guilty to it. Yes he did so because being found guilty would carry a harsher sentence. Criminals do it all the time. They also declare their inocents. Im not going to jump to conclusions baised on a pro puff piece artical either.
It stands to reason that the chance someone/s like you might end up on the jury is why they decided to take the plea. If the victim herself got on the stand and recanted you'd still vote guilty.
"pro puff piece artical". Really, 90% of the quotes in the article were from court appointed individuals. So he's implying they're all pro Luke Heimlich? The article raises questions and presents facts the are contrary to his feeling about the case, so he dismisses it out of hand. Not really someone I'd want judging my guilt or innocence.
Pease keep in mind I didn't say he was a child molester his lawyer and he did.
Again what choice did he have? Go to court? From go it would be the word of a "monster" vs a sweet little girl. Hell I could have won that case drunk, high on Xanax, and with a severe brain injury. My dog could have convicted him.
Like I said, I'd have told my son to do the same thing
All of our views on things are formed from our experience. A large portion of my family are lawyers and a few judges. I spent most of my life hearing cases and judgements. It wouldn't be hard to get a specialist that would easily prove a child lying in cross-examination. His lawyer would have known this. So the only way I can see him pleaing out is if there was some proof. However since there was a plea that proof will never come to life. I even asked my sister who said every case she has sat on like this it was pretty easy to show the child was lying. She thinks it even happens when children are telling the truth. That's how easy it is for an adult lawyer to make a child look like they are lying.
And last thing I'll say on it. If he didn't and chose to say he did the. He chose to deal with those consequences.
And last thing I'll say on it. If he didn't and chose to say he did. He chose to deal with those consequences.
This is the most accurate point stated in this thread. You don’t get to plead guilty and avoid the consequences with an asterisk. There will be a time where Heimlich will have to explain himself to future employers whether it’s baseball or not. At that point he will have to explain his plea deal with conviction. Then he will have to accept the results. The recent news cycles don’t work in his favor.
He was 15 when he took the plea deal, on the advice of his parents who also wanted to prevent their grand daughter from having to be questioned in court. Huge conflict of interest. I don't know if he did anything or not, but I can see how all involved could be convinced that taking the plea deal was the best path. And at 15 and with the advice he was getting from the adults around him, how could he have understood the consequences?
>It wouldn't be hard to get a specialist that would easily prove a child lying in cross-examination. His lawyer would have known this. So the only way I can see him pleaing out is if there was some proof.<
>This is the most accurate point stated in this thread. You don’t get to plead guilty and avoid the consequences with an asterisk. There will be a time where Heimlich will have to explain himself to future employers whether it’s baseball or not. At that point he will have to explain his plea deal with conviction. Then he will have to accept the results. The recent news cycles don’t work in his favor.<
"They were were concerned that, if Luke contested the charges, it would require aggressive questioning to break down their granddaughter's story. They weren't comfortable with putting her through that."
Thing is they were all related you boobs. None of you actually read the link did you? Like I said, with people like this as potential jurors who would advise this kid to go to trial.
I can't judge what happened but I find it hard to believe that a healthy family would allow his teenage son to plead guilty for something he didn't do. His life is basically over now, no pro team or company will ever give him a job. If the family knew he was innocent they are terrible people. A charge for a sex crime doesn't automatically mean you get sentenced.
I'm sceptical of this story, who makes his underaged kid admit raping a kindergarten kid when he didn't do it?
Btw I don't see how anyone would think pleading guilty on this was juristically smart, even if he had gotten 3 years of prison the situation would hardly be worse than it is now, the worst thing is not the legal punishment but being publicly brandmarked as a child molester.
But of course there is a chance his family did that to him. In that case I would feel really sorry for him.
Dominik85 posted:I can't judge what happened but I find it hard to believe that a healthy family would allow his teenage son to plead guilty for something he didn't do. His life is basically over now, no pro team or company will ever give him a job. If the family knew he was innocent they are terrible people. A charge for a sex crime doesn't automatically mean you get sentenced.
I'm sceptical of this story, who makes his underaged kid admit raping a kindergarten kid when he didn't do it?
You can't see that the family patriarch would want to protect his grand daughter and "make this go away" by having his son plead guilty as a minor and take probation?
Iowamom23 posted:RJM posted:
There are two lessons to be learned. One relates to the follow up story. Don’t go cheap on a lawyer. Get the best one available.
The second relates to the original issue. Follow all the rules. Had Heimlich registered in the state of Oregon when he started college chances are none of this would have become public.
According to the second story — "Shortly after his 21st birthday — Feb. 3, 2017 — he received a citation from Benton County for failure to re-register. Oregon officials had incorrectly determined him to be a resident of the state. Washington state rules do not require re-registration on a 21st birthday. Heimlich's attorney, Stephen Ensor, took the case to court, and the citation was dismissed."
Here's what I think all of us as parents should take from this story, and instill in our sons. Be careful. Whether you are guilty or innocent, just an accusation will do more than ruin your career, it will ruin your life.
I wonder if there is a civil suit pending. His records are now sealed. Benton County incorrectly cited him which brought his juvenile case to public light. Without the citation his quilty plea would have never impacted Heimlich's career or his potential earnings.
1. I've seen some Crazy things in family court. It is 100% possible that a mom with secondary custody would lay false accusations, happens every day.
2. Going to church has zero bearing on what kind of person you are.
3. Given the parental strings to the victim I do wish the state would have given the kid a child advocate so he had another adult in his head.
4. Given the choice between throwing a 15 year old under the bus that will be totally cleared in 5 years or having their other son loose custody over what could be a false accusation....yup, I can very much understand how a 15 year old would be thrown under the bus.
5. I was on a jury for multiple counts of child molestation. Turned out it was a witch hunt by local parents, he was found innocent. His life was still altered forever.
Accusations have a lot of power. The #METOO movement should have shown us that. Some are true some are not, but we can't judge from afar.
SomeBaseballDad posted:>It wouldn't be hard to get a specialist that would easily prove a child lying in cross-examination. His lawyer would have known this. So the only way I can see him pleaing out is if there was some proof.<
>This is the most accurate point stated in this thread. You don’t get to plead guilty and avoid the consequences with an asterisk. There will be a time where Heimlich will have to explain himself to future employers whether it’s baseball or not. At that point he will have to explain his plea deal with conviction. Then he will have to accept the results. The recent news cycles don’t work in his favor.<
"They were were concerned that, if Luke contested the charges, it would require aggressive questioning to break down their granddaughter's story. They weren't comfortable with putting her through that."
Thing is they were all related you boobs. None of you actually read the link did you? Like I said, with people like this as potential jurors who would advise this kid to go to trial.
Now we’re back to name calling and personal insults. I read the article. I stand by my opinion. It doesn’t matter one bit to me if a name calling arsehole disagrees with me. I know something you haven’t read, Dale Carnegie’s How To Make Friends and Influence People.
You will NEVER convince anyone to agree with you by insulting their intelligence, you moron.
Smitty28 posted:Dominik85 posted:I can't judge what happened but I find it hard to believe that a healthy family would allow his teenage son to plead guilty for something he didn't do. His life is basically over now, no pro team or company will ever give him a job. If the family knew he was innocent they are terrible people. A charge for a sex crime doesn't automatically mean you get sentenced.
I'm sceptical of this story, who makes his underaged kid admit raping a kindergarten kid when he didn't do it?
You can't see that the family patriarch would want to protect his grand daughter and "make this go away" by having his son plead guilty as a minor and take probation?
After the fact he was told their were better legal options. I would have consulted several lawyers and spent whatever it cost for a better result even if it meant taking a loan out against my house.
This is a very polarizing topic.
Most people have formed an opinion, one way or the other, and no one person on this forum is going to change another person’s opinion. That’s been pretty consistent in the two short years that I’ve been a part of this forum.
Unfortunately, SOME will always think that others are idiots for not thinking the way that they do.
The ONLY thing that is absolute about this situation is that absolutely 100% of us don’t know what really happened.
RJM posted:Smitty28 posted:Dominik85 posted:I can't judge what happened but I find it hard to believe that a healthy family would allow his teenage son to plead guilty for something he didn't do. His life is basically over now, no pro team or company will ever give him a job. If the family knew he was innocent they are terrible people. A charge for a sex crime doesn't automatically mean you get sentenced.
I'm sceptical of this story, who makes his underaged kid admit raping a kindergarten kid when he didn't do it?
You can't see that the family patriarch would want to protect his grand daughter and "make this go away" by having his son plead guilty as a minor and take probation?
After the fact he was told their were better legal options. I would have consulted several lawyers and spent whatever it cost for a better result even if it meant taking a loan out against my house.
What if, hypothetically, they had nothing to spend and no equity in the house? Then what?
Sometimes people gets the short end of the stick because they simply don’t have the means to afford any lawyer, much less a good one.