Quote Quoting ValerieMerkes
View Post
My question involves criminal law for the state of: Washington

Question is: Why doesn't the Prosecuting Attorney and the State of Washington see that being "Friends" on a victim's Facebook as a violation of a no contact order?

Adult accused is 48 y/o.male. Victim is relative, now age 16. Crime (rape) charged current, but was committed in 1999-2000.
and...
Adult has been accused of attempting to molest in 2009. Victim was a child not related age 13.

Facts: Adult was charged with contact with a minor for immoral purposes 2 years ago.
He was in a position of trust as a social worker. He asked a 13 year old to exchange sex for favors. He was tried and found not guilty. 13 y/o was the only witness.

More facts: Adult is now currently charged with rape and molest for his crime in 1999 and 2000. Victim was 6 and turned 7 y/o. The two victims do not know one another. This witness is more "credible" in that she is a good student, lives far away (moved after a year of being subjected to having to perform oral sex, and various other activities in similar nature.

He refers to her (victim) by name in his posts, he has invited her to join a "Family Tree" and makes all sorts of comments quoting the Bible about forgiving. He makes comments about how his other children/boys have already forgiven him for whatever sins he has committed and that he is now born again. Of course he does not start posts by saying, "Dear Victim..." but is sure looks like he is directing his posts to her. His trial date for this latest crime is a few months away, and I think he is amping up the pressure on her. She will be testifying. This must be painful for her.

Why doesn't Washington State include Social Networking contact as a violation? Per the Prosecuting Attorney, "being facebook friends with Victim is not a direct violation of a no contact order".

Comments? Thanks.


Why doesn't everyone simply block him?

I'm not sure what your legal question is - if the prosecuting attorney says it's not a violation, then it's not a violation.