This seems really weird to me. I can understand that after the trial, or at some point when the prosecution and defense reach an agreement, that the records might be sealed from further view. But how on earth was he arrested and it not have been public knowledge? Something about this whole mess stinks in a really bad way. Is it just another example of one set of rules for the elite, and another for the rest of us? Or maybe he was being blackmailed? The latter would explain maybe his flip-flop on Iraq.
Good point about the blackmail, hadn’t thought of that.
By the way, here’s a link to an Albany Times-Union article on the matter.
Once thing that really bothers me about this article is this
A “minor sex charge”? This is the first time I see this type of crime characterized as “minor sex charge”.
“minor”, meaning he was attempting to have sexual relations with a minor. And since it was just a class B misdemeanor that only carried a max 90 day jail term, i guess it is minor in the other meaning as well.
However that brings up another question or two. First, is anyone caught soliciting teenagers online only charged with a B-misdemeanor, or did he get special treatment (or were there extenuating circumstances that might have limited the charges)? Second, if that is all the charge is worth, then why are the police bothering to create sting operations for what is considered a minor offense? Shouldn’t they be focused on preventing or solving felonies?
Bolding mine.
It may be that a 16 year old is taken as a borderline adult :dubious:
The max. sentence isn’t high at all and it’s called a class b misdemeanor so that’s why it’s called a “Minor sex charge”
Oh and as per the blackmail idea. I really don’t see it at all. How about he just changed his mind.
Exactly! The whole thing just kinda stinks, IMO.
Police: Let’s set up an elaborate online sting operation, to lure potential sexual predators and pedophiles, so that we can charge them with a “minor sex crime”, type B misdemeanor.
It’s entirely possible that you’re right, and until I heard about these charges I thought the same thing too. Now, however, I have more variables to add to the equation.
My guess would be that they weren’t particularly trying to set up a prosecution for attempted endangerment of a child. They may have been hoping to find - indeed, they may have found - information about more serious crimes, about conspiracies, about child sex rings, etc. Ritter may have been a relatively minor aspect of the operation (which might be why they agreed to a plea bargain - their resources could be more profitably employed than in a contested prosecution of Ritter).
Just because this sting operation led to this prosecution, you can’t assume that that was the goal, or the only success, of this sting operation.
I’m more concerned that Assistant District Attorney Cynthia Preiser, a 15 year veteran, was canned over this. How does that happen?
She was canned because Ritter’s arrest and prosecutions was kept secret from the DA. He said that she was way out of line in keeping a high profile case secret from him. I’m sorry, I just don’t see why he was supposed to be kept a secret. Anyone else who is busted for a crime, it is a matter of public record.
Just a note on the law. In New York, an ACD (adjournment in contemplation of dismissal) is a common resolution for a misdemeanor charge for someone with a fairly clean criminal record. A class B misdemeanor with a 90 day maximum sentence is the lowest classification of crime in the state. Also, in New York, if you are acquitted, your case record is sealed automatically under the law, and I believe that the sealing provision applies to an ACD as well.
It seems to me that this was a case where Ritter got swept up in a net and treated just like any other non-notable person would. The arrest would be a matter of public record (at least until acquittal), and available for the press in the police blotter. The trial would be open. It sounds Ms. Preiser didn’t bring it up with the DA because she didn’t realize that this was a “big story” rather than an ordinary misdemeanor arrest.
Ok, I would almost buy that except for this other quote from the article
Now, the June arrest was then the second one, for exactly the same kind of crime, only that time it was a 14-year-old girl.