GUILTY CA - Kevin Rojan-Nieto for raping 3yo girl, Santa Ana, 4 June 2014

JanetElaine

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2007
Messages
5,960
Reaction score
4,021
[h=1]Judge says mandatory sentence for man convicted of raping toddler too harsh, cuts prison time[/h]
http://q13fox.com/2015/04/06/judge-...of-raping-toddler-too-harsh-cuts-prison-time/


“Although serious and despicable, this does not compare to a situation where a pedophiliac child predator preys on an innocent child,” (Judge Marc) Kelly told the Orange County Register. “There was no violence or callous disregard for (the victim’s) well-being.”


I can't even. Whiskey. Tango. Foxtrot.
 
There are several links within the comments of this story. One is a petition to have the rapist serve the mandatory minimum sentence. The other petition is to have the Judge removed from his position.
 
So he raped a 3 YEAR OLD GIRL but didn't "consciously intend to harm her" and didn't have "callous disregard" for her? :thud:
Was this offender mentally disabled in some way?
Because most children would know that would hurt a 3 year old!

How did he know this child? Where is her family?
I would be absolutely livid if this was my child. :twocents:
 
It says in one of the articles that she is related to him and wandered into his garage where he was playing videogames. He then shut and locked the garage. The girl's mom was frantically searching for her. When she tried the garage door, the perp stopped raping her and held his hand over the girl's mouth to keep her from screaming. Then when the mom moved on to look for her, he had the girl 'fondle' him.

However, in looking at the facts of Mr. Rojano's case, the manner in which this offense was committed is not typical of a predatory, violent brutal sodomy of a child case,” Kelly said. “Mr. Roiano did not seek out or stalk (the victim). He was playing video games and she wandered into the garage. He inexplicably became sexually aroused but did not appear to consciously intend to harm (the victim) when he sexually assaulted her.”

http://www.ocregister.com/articles/girl-656753-bokosky-child.html

Somebody needs to do something about this judge. This can't be legal.
 
So it's the 3 year old's fault that she wandered into the garage.
Thanks for clearing that up for us Judge. :tantrum:
 
I was outraged when I first read this as a Patch article on Facebook. Now there are change.org petitions to have this judge removed and a Facebook page dedicated to it. I have signed the petition and vow to help get this judge recalled. How dare he say that the perp didn't harm the little girl simply because she wandered into his garage??? And was the judge aware that the perp resumed sexual activities as soon as the mother left???
 
I don't know why he wasn't charged with kidnapping and or at least unlawful restraint, also. He has a 3 year old girl in a locked garage and he is actively (gag) raping her, sodomizing her, while her mom is rattling the door to see if she's maybe in there. He then restrains the girl and puts a hand over her mouth to stop her from yelling out to her mom. He was probably restraining her the whole time... In what universe does that not land him with any charges besides rape?! And then the judge doesn't even want to give the mandatory sentence... can even more people fail this little girl??
 
I want to see her family come out and get angry.
If they do, people might actually respond and something might get done.
When family doesn't show outrage other people don't feel they need to either.
 
I want to see her family come out and get angry.
If they do, people might actually respond and something might get done.
When family doesn't show outrage other people don't feel they need to either.


Perhaps they are not wanting to be identified to prevent further victimization of this little person down the road?
I would hope that someone would screech out on their behalf.....
 
http://abc7.com/news/orange-county-...entence-for-man-who-sodomized-toddler/638845/


the incident occurred June 2014 and he was convicted December 2014 - according to this he led/let child back into house where mother was located

''The judge said while looking over the facts of Rojano-Nieto's case there were no indications that the attack was intentional. He added that the defendant "almost immediately" stopped and "realized the wrongfulness of his act."

The judge also cited a doctor's report that stated Rojano-Nieto had a difficult and abusive childhood that made him an "insecure, socially withdrawn, timid and extremely immature young man."


just wanted to add this link as there seems to be so little I can find - there is also a photo of the perp at that link
 
''The judge said while looking over the facts of Rojano-Nieto's case there were no indications that the attack was intentional. He added that the defendant "almost immediately" stopped and "realized the wrongfulness of his act."


No indications the attack was INTENTIONAL???? He was raping a child. That shows full well his intentions. How can a man unintentionally rape a toddler? This judge is disgusting, imo. :furious:
 
something in that link ((to me at least)) seems to lend the idea that there is a close 'familial' link ((extended family member?)) w/r/t the victim so am wondering if there was some family pressure KWIM? to alleviate the harsh -- family members/friends putting pressure on the victim's parents??? Just a thought there.
 
LINK to Petition

Tricia might be interested in highlighting this case-it is very relevant given some of the special focuses we have on the forum.
 
And I thought it was absurd when a cheating husband said "I didn't mean to..."
You know the whole "Oh so you just slipped?"
But this is even more absurd than that.
 
And I thought it was absurd when a cheating husband said "I didn't mean to..."
You know the whole "Oh so you just slipped?"
But this is even more absurd than that.
More like the perp couldn't control himself. So that makes it okay in this judge's eyes.
 
Being born with a penis doesn't mean you have no control over when you use it.
Just because a guy gets aroused doesn't mean he has to penetrate something.

That is basically what this judge said... that once he became "aroused" he couldn't control himself.
Well we appear to be teaching our boys they don't have to control themselves.
This judge just reaffirmed that for them I guess.
I wonder what the judge does in his spare time that he finds this acceptable?

I know damn well MY son will be taught that he can and will control himself. :twocents:
 
Being born with a penis doesn't mean you have no control over when you use it.
Just because a guy gets aroused doesn't mean he has to penetrate something.

That is basically what this judge said... that once he became "aroused" he couldn't control himself.
Well we appear to be teaching our boys they don't have to control themselves.
This judge just reaffirmed that for them I guess.
I wonder what the judge does in his spare time that he finds this acceptable?

I know damn well MY son will be taught that he can and will control himself. :twocents:

I hope you don't think I thought that. It was my "sarcasm" of what the judge and perp think.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
142
Guests online
2,537
Total visitors
2,679

Forum statistics

Threads
590,021
Messages
17,929,125
Members
228,039
Latest member
shmoozie
Back
Top