I read the defense memo. Unlike the majority, I do not see this man as a "misguided" hero, although his actions did lead to evidence being generated. Why?
1. What 31 year old converses online with a minor child? I have a major problem with that. They had multiple conversations. Clearly she had developed a trust or friendship with this 31 year old adult in order to get to the point she was willing to reveal abuse to him and beg him for help. What adult man is having such indepth conversations with a minor child on the internet?
2. Yes. He suggested a couple other options in the conversation the defense laid out. But he didn't press those extremely viable options. Like going to the hospital to get a rape kit. He didn't urge her to do so and reassure her that with her word and her rapists' DNA inside her, she'd be rescued by police. To me, he suggested them as other options but he didn't seem serious about those options. He didn't cycle back to them. When she begged for help he didn't continually tell her she'd be safe with those options. What he really pressed was video evidence. He really wanted that video.
3. There was audio that, when coupled with her own words, would've been quite enough for her to go to the police and be rescued. He continued to insist on VIDEO.
4. After receiving the video, he didn't simply call the authorities. "Hey, this child sent me this video of her being raped." He didn't immediately call 911. He told her he wouldn't be in trouble for picking her up if she made a video with evidence. And once she made it, he picked her up. However, that shows he believed it was viable evidence. And it shows he believed that the presence of the video would protect him from legal trouble. In other words, he didn't know asking her to make it would be illegal if he could show he was doing it to help get evidence. So he had no reason not to call 911 immediately and give them what he had gotten her to produce.
5. After receiving the video, he picked her up and took her out of state. He has ZERO reason not to drive her to a local LE department immediately, with the video. Instead, he took her across state lines.
6. He waited over 10 days to send the evidence to LE while harboring this minor in his mother's basement. Why?
7. What's this about him saying the video was too blurry?
I find his actions quite suspect. I don't think he deserves a medal for not sexually assaulting her for the days he had her. He could've been quite happy with just the video e got her to generate. He could've been working up to further exploitation.
If he was an 18 or 19 year old young man his actions might be more excusable to me because they're still at that age when there's this magical divide between adults and kids. Where adults and authorities aren't totally trusted.
But this is a 31 year old man conversing with a minor child online for a lengthy time period and insisting she generate child *advertiser censored* before he can help her.
The reaction here and the fact that he appears not to have assaulted her makes me believe he might indeed prevail in mitigating the charge. But I believe the charge was and is viable and necessary.
Just think of the sordid avenues we would be opening up to child sexual exploitation if a defense to encouraging a child to video and send an adult a recording of herself being assaulted, would be viable, under the auspicies of trying to "gather evidence".
I believe the charge is merited.
Finally, I think
@MsFacetious mentioned a kidnapping charge would probably be dropped against BR. I didn't see any kidnapping charge. Only one charge - child exploitation. Am I wrong?
