« Pull My Solar Finger | Main | Home At Last »
October 30, 2003
Perverts Are Not Just Males
Child molesting perverts are not just males.
First she was arrested and charged with raping a child, now she's accused of attempting to take a child from a Springdale church daycare facility.
Kathleen DeChant was arrested for child rape in September. She was scheduled to go to trial on that charge Wednesday, but the trial was postponed because of a pending mental evaluation. DeChant found herself behind bars at two different jails in the same day, for different violations.
That would be Springdale, Arkansas....a city that I can see clearly from my front porch. This pervert was released on bond and immediately went out to find another victim. You'd think our local judge might want to reconsider his automatic catch & release policy in these cases.
Parents should always remember that perverts come in all shapes & sizes...and gender.
And they're everywhere.
Posted by Rita at October 30, 2003 09:01 AM
Comments
I had a similar post yesterday on another child rapist. What is wrong with our judicial system? Do these judges have no morals? How is it that they can put these predators back on the streets to victimize another innocent child? I'm completely dumbfounded... I'm all for eliminating them from the gene pool - The predators & the idiots that let them free... Hmmm, maybe someone should pass a law or something.
Posted by: Psycho Dad at October 30, 2003 03:55 PM
This judge normally grants bail unless it's a capital case. I don't know if that's his personal policy or he is required to do that by some procedural rule. I don't practice criminal law.
But I disagree with that policy. This lady should've never been out on bond, IMO.
Posted by: Rita at October 30, 2003 04:17 PM
I agree with Psycho Dad.
Not the first time I've used that phrase.
Posted by: Steve H. at October 31, 2003 01:37 PM
That story is sorely lacking detail. "Rape of a child" could be anything from consensual sex with a 17-year-old to ... well ... something really bad.
If this is the former, the newspaper is attempting to spread hysteria by telling the story in a way that might scare people. If it's the latter, well ... they could have been more clear.
Let's hope they're not trashing a woman's reputation to sell papers.
Posted by: Aaron Butler at October 31, 2003 08:14 PM
Doh ... meant "TV station" and "gain viewers" not "newspaper" and "sell newspapers."
Posted by: Aaron Butler at October 31, 2003 08:15 PM
Aaron, if the child had been a teen-ager the story would've said so....at least they've always done so in the past when that's happened. That, combined with the allegations that the lady tried to get another child from a daycare makes it pretty clear that young children were her alleged preferred victims.
And I think they were just trying to warn everyone in case the judge cut her loose again.
Posted by: Rita at November 1, 2003 08:19 AM