Aransas County Judge William Adams (Mercedes: felony, legal, charge)

[getmeoutofhere]

I was wondering because I was going to strongly advise against it based on your responses in this thread.

[Topaz]

Originally Posted by getmeoutofhere

The SOL has not run. There are different rules when talking about minors. I believe it is reaching the age of majority (18) + either 7 or 10 years.

"District Attorney Patrick Flanigan said the statute of limitations has expired because the events in the video happened seven years ago."

also...

"Rockport Police Chief Tim Jayroe said charges of injury to a child likely would have been filed against Judge Adams had the statute of limitations not expired. He said the investigation is essentially over unless new evidence emerges, although his department is checking to make sure no federal laws were violated."

Judge William Adams will not be prosecuted » Corpus Christi Caller-Times

[JayBrown80]

Originally Posted by Topaz

"District Attorney Patrick Flanigan said the statute of limitations has expired because the events in the video happened seven years ago."

also...

"Rockport Police Chief Tim Jayroe said charges of injury to a child likely would have been filed against Judge Adams had the statute of limitations not expired. He said the investigation is essentially over unless new evidence emerges, although his department is checking to make sure no federal laws were violated."

Judge William Adams will not be prosecuted » Corpus Christi Caller-Times

The judge has another daugher, so I would be very surprised if he was not abusing her as well.

Regardless, the loss of reputation is what really hurts him here. In Texas, almost all Judges are elected to their position, and I would imagine this video will be quite the albatross come election season.

[getmeoutofhere]

Originally Posted by Topaz

"District Attorney Patrick Flanigan said the statute of limitations has expired because the events in the video happened seven years ago."

also...

"Rockport Police Chief Tim Jayroe said charges of injury to a child likely would have been filed against Judge Adams had the statute of limitations not expired. He said the investigation is essentially over unless new evidence emerges, although his department is checking to make sure no federal laws were violated."

Judge William Adams will not be prosecuted » Corpus Christi Caller-Times

They aren't looking hard enough. There's plenty of charges in the criminal code he could be hit with that toll the SOL until the minor reaches 18, then starts running.

[L210]

While I think there are better ways to discipline your child besides corporal punishment (the overwhelming majority of the incarcerated regularly received corporal punishment as children), I don't think any investigator would look further into this case if it were within the statute of limitations. The state of Texas allows you to discipline your child however you want just as long as the child does not develop serious injuries. When you're dealing with police officers and judges who have some backwards views on punishment, your case really doesn't stand a chance. A San Antonio police officer once told me that you could throw your child down the steps and you won't be charged with anything as long as the child didn't have to go to the hospital. Another San Antonio police officer said that he hits his son in the face all the time and it's perfectly legal. Of course, Child Protective Services would investigate someone throwing his or her child down the steps or hitting the child in the face, but they would most likely quickly close a case where a child was being whooped with a belt. CPS is overburdened with cases and will give priority to the ones where children are being burned with cigarettes, bitten, scalded with boiling water, given broken bones, starved, neglected, etc.

[blkgiraffe]

Originally Posted by L210

While I think there are better ways to discipline your child besides corporal punishment (the overwhelming majority of the incarcerated regularly received corporal punishment as children), I don't think any investigator would look further into this case if it were within the statute of limitations. The state of Texas allows you to discipline your child however you want just as long as the child does not develop serious injuries. When you're dealing with police officers and judges who have some backwards views on punishment, your case really doesn't stand a chance. A San Antonio police officer once told me that you could throw your child down the steps and you won't be charged with anything as long as the child didn't have to go to the hospital. Another San Antonio police officer said that he hits his son in the face all the time and it's perfectly legal. Of course, Child Protective Services would investigate someone throwing his or her child down the steps or hitting the child in the face, but they would most likely quickly close a case where a child was being whooped with a belt. CPS is overburdened with cases and will give priority to the ones where children are being burned with cigarettes, bitten, scalded with boiling water, given broken bones, starved, neglected, etc.

The line has to be drawn somewhere; throwing your child down the steps is definitely abuse. Whuppin with a belt is not [imo]. I think what makes this so bad is the verbal abuse and the fact that this girl was disable and the extent of the lashings. Those looked like some pretty soft hits though. I'm a little suspicious that she waited 7 years to release; something isn't right about that. You don't videotape something and than wait years later to release it.

She should have went to the police with this instead of displaying the video publicly. I know people might think I'm defending the judge, but I'm not. I just look at situations from all sides.

[Stu8912]

Originally Posted by blkgiraffe

I'm a Criminal Justice Major and we happened to discuss this in class. My professor [who also work for HPD] said while the video was pretty shocking; most investigators wouldn't consider any criminal act within it. I think this is more about subjective morality than criminality.

I see where the judge is coming from when he states it looks worse than it is.

The statute of limitations has ran out but the Police Chief said ""We believe that there was a criminal offense involved and that there was substantial evidence to indicate that and under normal circumstances a charge could have been made"

People like you and this judge have no business in law enforcement. Pathetic little punks who got picked on to much in HS. So you beat on kids or want a badge to protect you when trying to dominate others. Because you know you wouldn't stand up to a guy like me normally. I detest child abusers and those that sympathize with them. You will not be successful as a police officer, your weak moral fiber will put you in the same place eventually as this guy. Just save us all the trouble and start digging ditches now.

[blkgiraffe]

Originally Posted by Stu8912

The statute of limitations has ran out but the Police Chief said ""We believe that there was a criminal offense involved and that there was substantial evidence to indicate that and under normal circumstances a charge could have been made"

People like you and this judge have no business in law enforcement. Pathetic little punks who got picked on to much in HS. So you beat on kids or want a badge to protect you when trying to dominate others. Because you know you wouldn't stand up to a guy like me normally. I detest child abusers and those that sympathize with them. You will not be successful as a police officer, your weak moral fiber will put you in the same place eventually as this guy. Just save us all the trouble and start digging ditches now.

[LilyLady]

Originally Posted by blkgiraffe

The line has to be drawn somewhere; throwing your child down the steps is definitely abuse. Whuppin with a belt is not [imo]. I think what makes this so bad is the verbal abuse and the fact that this girl was disable and the extent of the lashings. Those looked like some pretty soft hits though. I'm a little suspicious that she waited 7 years to release; something isn't right about that. You don't videotape something and than wait years later to release it.

She should have went to the police with this instead of displaying the video publicly. I know people might think I'm defending the judge, but I'm not. I just look at situations from all sides.

Sometimes the police or the authorities don't (or won't) listen.

[blkgiraffe]

Originally Posted by LilyLady

Sometimes the police or the authorities don't (or won't) listen.

That's what the tape is for.