+ + + 3 BRANDNEW NewsTickers for your Website! + + + easy configurable in less than 1 Minute + + + GET'EM NOW! + + +

   Home | Join | Submit News | MyShortNews | HighScores | FAQ'S | Forums 0 Users Online   
                 02/23/2018 01:29 PM  
  ShortNews Search
search all Channels
RSS feeds
  ShortNews User Poll
Are you excited about the holiday season?
  Latest Events
  5.659 Visits   10 Assessments  Show users who Rated this:
Quality:Very Good
Back to Overview  
01/11/2008 09:17 PM ID: 67610 Permalink   

Officer Rapes 16-Year-Old While in Custody, Gets Probation


Officer William D. Welch entered an Alford plea (no admission of guilt but concedes there is enough evidence to convict) and was sentenced to 10 years suspended prison and 3 years of probation and was forced to quit his job as a police officer.

Officer Welch is accused of raping the girl inside the station house. Crucial evidence in the case, the rape kit, the victims clothing, wet wipes containing DNA from the officer and the victim, mysteriously “disappeared” before the trial.

According to the victim’s testimony Officer Welch told the girl that a charge for marijuana possession would “disappear” if the girl preformed the sexual act. She said Officer Welch helped her dispose of the marijuana down the toilet in the station.

    WebReporter: Valkyrie123 Show Calling Card      
ASSESS this news: BLOCK this news. Reason:
  What a pig  
This article and another one about that aids patient getting ran over by cops then ticketed... Just makes me hate the police even more. I know there are good cops but these stories really show how corrupt our system is and how much power the police have over the people.
  by: slavefortheman     01/11/2008 09:38 PM     
Suppose she gets off on the charge of possession.
  by: allbets     01/11/2008 10:04 PM     
2nd paragraph needs to say Officer Welch not Officer Williams
  by: GZadmin   01/11/2008 10:22 PM     
  Police above the law?  
No matter where you are in the world you hear stories of the police committing crimes and getting away with it.

Sadly thats the way the world is going...
  by: shimoda   01/11/2008 11:16 PM     
It's not specifically narrowed down to police. You also hear a lot of ordinary citizens committing crimes and getting away with it as well. Should all citizens be labeled as abusing their freedoms and be put under a microscope? There will always be bad apples in any reasonably sized group you look at.
  by: bala_mt   01/12/2008 12:28 AM     
"You also hear a lot of ordinary citizens committing crimes and getting away with it as well."

One big exception however, 'ordinary citizens' are not responsible for enforcing the law, nor have they sworn an oath to 'Protect and Serve'. When a police officer breaks the law, they are doing so from a position of trust, power and authority. That is what makes it worse than a crime commited by an 'ordinary citizen'.
  by: StarShadow     01/12/2008 01:41 AM     
  god i hate cops  
i wouldn't pee on one to put his burning body out
  by: kross10c   01/12/2008 07:00 AM     
Well said.
  by: ichi     01/12/2008 07:27 AM     
Which is pretty ironic, since most would do their utmost to save your life under almost any circumstance.

You do realise there a several million police officers in the USA, right? It's less than 1% that that cause problems and abuse their power.
  by: soshi   01/12/2008 09:36 AM     
  I was going to give a bad rating  
Wanted to read the article first before I gave any rating, and I think this article crosses the line of unbiased summation, but not too badly so I gave it a moderate.

The girl was 16, not sure what age of consent is there, but the article indicates second degree rape.

Second, the article makes it pretty clear that the evidence was lost due to a bungle (it happens more often than you would think, more than it should, but theres nothing nefarious in it). It also points out that the loss of the evidence would definitely hurt the officer's case more than it would help it. Yet the summation makes it sound like the officer's mates managed to make it disappear to help his case.

While it's bad enough, these two elements make the case sound even worse. A bad summary.
  by: SoshiMaster   01/12/2008 01:28 PM     
  Nothing to see here.  
"When they returned to the interview room, according to court records, they had sex. The girl told authorities that she didn't express any objections."
You can't rape the willing. Now destroying evidence is a crime, but this clearly isn't rape. Possibly statutory rape depending on state law, but no one clearly was forced.
  by: insomniac   01/12/2008 04:35 PM     
Two types
Custodial Rape. It is illegal to have sex with someone you have a custodial relationship with.

Child Rape. Adults can't boink a 16 year old in almost all of the states.
  by: ichi     01/12/2008 06:23 PM     
  In which state/country  
is it legal to marry yourself?
  by: White Albino   01/12/2008 08:23 PM     
  StarShadow You got it mate.  
And at the top we have the guys that set the sentencing; they are involved too. Any sex crime on kids or vulnerable people gets bottom of the box sentences.
  by: captainJane     01/12/2008 09:16 PM     
I disagree.

While Valk isn't necessarily unbiased, the summary doesn't deserve a "bad summary" label.

First of all, regardless of the age of consent in the state of Maryland--this is an issue not only of rape by means of coercion, but of moral turpitude. Yes, the age of consent is 16 in that state; however, in the case of a party in custody of a city, county or state, age of consent and right to consent itself no longer apply.

Also, the source does NOT clearly state that the evidence was lost in a bungle--from the source: Brown has said there was nothing corrupt in the disappearance of the evidence, calling it "a blunder."

Brown was the defense attorney for former Officer Welch. It is a direct quote.

I find your assessment of Valk to be a bit harsh. Just opinion.
  by: vanillaskye   01/13/2008 06:32 AM     
Blunder, Bungle, same thing.

Moral turpitude is a far cry from non-consensual sex/forced rape.

He's lost his job as a police officer, and has a criminal conviction and a suspended sentence hanging over his head.

I agree with the article in that the loss of the evidence hurts the defence far more than it could hurt the prosecution - in fact, in front of a jury that loss would probably help the prosecution as much as if the evidence had been available.
  by: SoshiMaster   01/13/2008 07:58 AM     
  I've said it before...  
..castrate all rapists. Anyone who takes advantage of an authorative position to take advantage of a vulnerable person deserves even more of a harsh punishment.
  by: BikerDude   01/13/2008 09:58 AM     
  Read the original article  
"Police learned that there was an open warrant charging her with prostitution in Baltimore County."

He was merely seeking her professional services.
  by: Pyronius     01/14/2008 03:14 AM     
The cop should have -for a little while, at least- a Guillotine blade suspended over his neck.

He abused his authority, dishonored the government, and is himself a perverted perpetrator. His defalcations besmirch us all, and injure someone he is not entitled to punish in that way.

No sympathy for him.

The system seems broken.
  by: LeePIII   01/14/2008 08:04 PM     
Who said anything about sympathy? For a long time I've campaigned for some sort of equity in crimes and sentences and I think what this officer received was appropriate for the crime.
  by: SoshiMaster   01/14/2008 11:22 PM     
Copyright ©2018 ShortNews GmbH & Co. KG, Contact: