Why Would Somebody Tell You to Stop Contacting Them

[bobmf1]

cdwjava,
I don't know if it matters but the "accuser" was actually a six-year-old girl too upset to repeat her story so the Judge allowed her mother to speak for the child.
The internet account of the situation said he was not given a cross-examination privilege due to the current law.

[cdwjava]

cdwjava,
I don't know if it matters but the "accuser" was actually a six-year-old girl too upset to repeat her story so the Judge allowed her mother to speak for the child.

Then your "friend" fed you a line of crap! THAT would not happen in the USA!

The internet account of the situation said he was not given a cross-examination privilege due to the current law.

Please provide a link. If we saw the story, we might be able to make some sense of it. If he was unable to cross examine the witness, then the case would have built in grounds for appeal.

I worked juvenile and molest cases for more than half of my 25+ year career, and NEVER had I heard of a situation such as you describe. Never.

Oh, yeah ... and I am IN California where you claim your friend is.

[Mark47n]

He was convicted of child abuse on testimoney of the childs mother and was given no opportunity to cross-examine his accuser.
My friend was given a life sentence but is now out on parole.

To both points:
Who told you that he didn't get to cross examine his accuser? Him?
Child abuse and...what? Child abuse alone doesn't equal a life sentence.

[bobmf1]

hr for me you and free9man both think he has asked me for, or wanted me to give, him something. The opposite is true, he has offered to give me something. He offered to send me round-trip tickets, not money, tickets to visit him if I wanted to. Does that sound like a scam?

By the way how long does it take to get permission to move to another state. He wants to go back to his home state where he has an address and a job waiting for him to come home.

[Mark47n]

hr for me you and free9man both think he has asked me for, or wanted me to give, him something. The opposite is true, he has offered to give me something. He offered to send me round-trip tickets, not money, tickets to visit him if I wanted to. Does that sound like a scam?

In a word, yes.

[hr for me]

hr for me you and free9man both think he has asked me for, or wanted me to give, him something. The opposite is true, he has offered to give me something. He offered to send me round-trip tickets, not money, tickets to visit him if I wanted to. Does that sound like a scam?

By the way how long does it take to get permission to move to another state. He wants to go back to his home state where he has an address and a job waiting for him to come home.

I have to agree with the poster above that I doubt that the mother testified FOR the child in any court. Possibly a therapist who interviewed the child could give his/her expert opinion, but the other parent -- that would be very very odd?

Something is really rotten. I don't know what his game is, but he's got one such that he has you willing to defend him to on a forum of strangers. (You know your gut is telling you something in the fact that you are even asking these questions) He's probably playing a LongTerm scam. If you live in an area he is trying to come back to -- his "home", possibly he is looking for a "soft" spot to land where he doesn't have to pay rent, etc especially if that "waiting job" falls through.... I don't know that many employer who would re-hire a felon of child abuse. Definitely not one who is around the public at all. I hope you don't have grandkids or neighbor kids....

[cdwjava]

The whole scenario sounds fake to me. NO molest or rape offense grants a sentence of LIFE in prison, by itself. To get that, there would have to be some serious aggravating factors, additional offenses, or priors. If he is out on parole, he will have likely been in for well over a decade before minimally being eligible for parole. Additionally, there is no circumstance in CA where he could be convicted based upon the testimony of the mother of a victim and not any statement by the victim. It would not happen ... not if the victim is alive, anyway. There are ways to conduct a testimony and cross examination outside the courtroom if that is a legitimate concern, but the manner you describe - hearsay testimony by mom as testimony - simply would not happen.

Well, it is possible that the state did not have the victim testify, but their other evidence would have to be rather compelling. The state might get away with not calling the victim if the other evidence was damning, but, if the defense had wanted to, they could likely have called the victim to the stand ... if they wanted to deal with the issue of a terrified 6-year-old before a jury.

I don't buy this. Not at all. This would be unlike any case I have been a part of.

Bobmf1, either you are BEING played, you are withholding key pieces of the tale, or you are the one doing the playing (of us).

[bobmf1]

I am not playing you. I am telling all I know, but I will not give up the name of my friend or his court cases and appeals. I think he is in enough trouble now without my possibly making it worse. I have no idea why I believe him but I do believe him and will unless something absolutely positively proves me wrong. I am not alone in my beliefe because his attorney, a public defender of many years, has made the public statement that he is one of the defendents that she believed was innocent.

[Mark47n]

I am not playing you. I am telling all I know, but I will not give up the name of my friend or his court cases and appeals. I think he is in enough trouble now without my possibly making it worse. I have no idea why I believe him but I do believe him and will unless something absolutely positively proves me wrong. I am not alone in my beliefe because his attorney, a public defender of many years, has made the public statement that one of the defendents that she believed was innocent.

No one asked for anyones name.

If what you've presented to us is representative of what you've been told then you're a fool.

What the PD says is completely immaterial. If your bestest buddy was handed a life sentence for a child abuse conviction then you're not even getting half of the story.

[cdwjava]

Then you are most likely misinformed or you are in error on your relating of the facts, because the events/circumstances you describe simply cannot happen in the way you have described it. He would have been permitted to cross examine any witnesses against him, no direct testimony of a 6-year-old victim would have come in via mom, he would not be out on parole after serving a little time on a life sentence, and a life sentence is NOT the penalty for a first time offense for child molestation or even forcible rape.

Something is not right. And since you are unwilling to provide any info to allow us to verify whether or not what he has to say is true, there is no way any of us can "positively" prove you wrong.

But, the bottom line here is that while YOU cannot get in trouble for his parole conditions, HE can get in trouble for violating them. So, if you contact him directly or indirectly, and he is not allowed to have contact with you, then HE could suffer the penalties.