« Awww, Shaddup | Main | Neener, Neener »
February 06, 2005
Inaccurate FoxNews Report
FoxNews is running this report about a Springdale developer who is suing a sex offender.
NGI Rental filed the $2 million lawsuit Friday against Randall Dee Collins and his wife, as well as the real estate company that arranged their new home purchase.
Randall Collins, 39, was convicted of molesting young girls and is listed on the Arkansas Crime Information Center Web site. According to the lawsuit, his wife hired a real estate company to sell her old home, saying she had married a sex offender and that her home was too close to a school.
A day after the couple bought a home in a new subdivision, the police department distributed fliers detailing Collins' case.
The article goes on to state that the developer is suing because he now can't sell houses in the subdivision (he has to notify potential buyers about the sex offender) and present residents are threatening to move if the sex offender stays. It also includes the lawsuit's allegation that
Collins called the developer and offered to move for $250,000, "or he would stay there and kill their subdivision." (For reference, houses in that subdivision are currently listed for $132,900 to $172,900. They're also advertised as being "convenient" to the new elementary & jr. high schools BTW.)
Before you get your drawers in a wad about this poor mistreated pervert's constitutional right to live around little girls, here's the stuff FoxNews left out. One, Collins is rated as a Level 3 sex offender......the second-highest ranking of risk of re-offending. Which is why he isn't allowed to live within 2000 feet of any school. Two, it doesn't disclose why the realtor who handled the sale is also being sued.
After the home sold, [realtor] Rodriguez-Iarrain showed new property to the couple, with the criteria their home be at least 2,000 feet from a school, the suit stated.
When the couple decided to purchase the home on Grainger Circle, they drafted the offer so Randall Collins' name would not appear -- thus no credit report or disclosure statement would be required, the suit stated.
A third party, who co-signed the loan for the purchase, is also included in the lawsuit.
The lawsuit is primarily based on the alleged fraud of the parties in concealing the fact that a sex offender was purchasing the property. The part about the alleged financial harm is only relevant to proving damages.
A little different when you know the entire story, isn't it?
Posted by Rita at February 6, 2005 06:50 AM