Posted on 11/20/2004 7:15:28 PM PST by Ptarmigan
(11/19/04 - HOUSTON) — In the headlines these days, it seems children are becoming sex offenders at a younger age, and their victims are other children.
Amidst the slower pace of Montgomery County is a problem that's growing faster than the justice system could ever expect. "You have 10-year-olds who are preying on four-year-olds," said Judge Fred Edwards of the ninth district court. "You've got 12-year-olds who are preying on six-year-olds. It's a mess. It's an absolute mess."
Judge Edwards has been the juvenile judge in Montgomery County for two years. Every Monday, a handful of handcuffed and shackled children march into his courtroom to face their charges. And the number of sex offenders among them is on the rise.
"In the year 2000, there were 25 cases of sex offenders by juveniles and this year, the year's not over with, there are close to 60," he said.
It's almost triple the number in a few short years.
It's hit home for one mother we spoke with who we won't identify.
"He still has nightmares," she said of her son.
She says her six-year-old first grade son became a victim at school. He was in the bathroom at Palmer Elementary in Fort Bend County when another six-year-old, naked, crawled under the stall and sexually assaulted him.
"He got my son to stand up, pushed him against the wall and was rubbing himself on my son's backside," she told us.
No longer do parents have to be concerned just about adult sexual offenders. Child sex offenders are on the playgrounds and even in the classroom with your children. In fact, in Harris County, there are 163 juveniles attending school while on probation for felony sexual assault; some as young as grade school. So how are they already sex offenders?
Lonique Pritchett with The Children's Assessment Center said, "Most of the time when children are touching other children, it's because they have been victims themselves and they're only acting out what has happened to them on their peers."
Pritchett has treated children as young as three years old. Almost half of the center's caseload is juvenile sex offenders, the majority of whom have been victims themselves. For Judge Edwards, who tries to first rehabilitate these children, it's a vicious cycle that has to be broken in the home.
"If they've been raped since they were four years old, if they see this all their lives, see it on the Internet, see it from their older brother, then they're going to think that that's normal," said Judge Edwards.
What's not normal are these signs parents can watch for in their children to see if they've become another child's victim:
Unusually aggressive behavior Persistent sexual play Symptoms indicating evidence of physical trauma to the genital area Eating problems And sex talk inappropriate for the child's age The boy who assaulted the mother's son we spoke with is too young to be charged, though he is in counseling. Despite her protests, he's back in the same school and is now part of the younger face of sexual deviants, the face Judge Edwards sees too often.
"It has to be a change in our social values, family values," said Judge Edwards.
There are 163 juveniles in Harris County schools on probation for felony sexual assault. That's up from last year when there were 124 kids on probation. For a breakdown of where these juveniles go to school, click here
Authorities we've spoken with about this story tell us judges would not let a juvenile back into the school system if there was a concern he or she would be violent again.
I can tell you what I experienced at the hands of boys close to my own age wasn't 'youthful' experimentation. There ARE children who are rotten to the core, as much an unpleasant thought that may be.
Those kind of people are why people would be more willing to give up their freedom. What always amazes me is some people think free speech is absolute, especially on the loony left. Some of them go as far as abusing it. I think people are abusing the First Amendment and not thinking about it. Censorship only applies to the government, not private groups. Some people just don't get it. It is not absolute. The amendments of the Constitution were meant to limit the power of the government and a product of it is the freedoms we enjoy. Too bad they don't teach civics class.
Gee...I wonder how many of the offending children are being raised by two gay parents?
Perhaps someone needs to build a "weenie guilloteenie"?
Autumn calls them "bad girls who don't dress right".
I remember this summer when I went out shopping for a swimsuit for her. It took me three hours and 3 different stores before I found a suitable one-piece. Now that I have to shop for her in the "girls" department - it's even worse. Short skirts from the "Mary Kate and Ashley" collection, thongs, mid-riff shirts, hip-hugger pants. Makes me want to start a business of my own - manufacturing millstones.
Reminds me of something I read recently in our local paper.
Richard Hatch - the first Survivor winner - nototiously homosexual...this is the latest escapade with his adopted 14-year old son:
http://www.projo.com/news/content/projo_20041118_drphil18.309c7a.html
Newport's Richard Hatch, winner of the first edition of the reality hit Survivor, appeared last night on Dr. Phil, the syndicated therapy show, saying his 14-year-old adopted son, Chris, had become involved with a 28-year-old sexual predator.
Host Phil McGraw said he was doing the show to help parents protect their children.
According to a transcript of the program, which was taped in Los Angeles about 2 1/2 weeks ago, Hatch said his son met the alleged predator through a third man, a 64-year-old that Chris had encountered on his newspaper route.
Hatch said his son and the 28-year-old had a pair of long phone conversations over the next two days. The following day, they arranged to meet, and the 28-year-old drove away with his son.
Hatch said he called the police -- he did not specify which department -- who found Chris at the 28-year-old's house, hiding under the bed. Hatch said the police arrested the older man.
The commander of the Newport Police Department's detectives bureau was not available last night, so it was unknown whether the arrest occurred in Newport or elsewhere.
The state Department of Children, Youth and Families is not investigating the case. Stephanie Terry, administrator of child protective services, said because the incident did not involve allegations against a caretaker, it was a police matter.
Chris Hatch, who appeared on the show with his father and McGraw, said he never believed he was in any danger.
"Chris still seems interested in this relationship with this particular guy," Hatch said. "He thinks that these two are meant to be together, and he writes about how much he loves and misses him. And he took a knife and carved this guy's initials into his arm."
Hatch was not available for comment last night.
Chandler Hayes, a spokesman for Dr. Phil, said the show's producers had contacted Hatch previously about a project that didn't pan out.
Hayes said Hatch called a Dr. Phil producer on a Sunday and explained the problems he was having with Chris. "He said, 'I don't know what to do,' " Hayes said.
Shortly thereafter, McGraw decided to have both father and son on his show.
Hatch became a national figure after he won the first edition of Survivor in 2000. He also participated in last year's Survivor: All Stars.
In May 2000, Middletown police charged Hatch with abusing his son during an early-morning run, just two days after he returned from the South Pacific island that was the setting for Survivor.
The state Department of Children, Youth and Families removed Chris and placed him in foster care.
Hatch said the charges were false. On May 25, 2000, Family Court Judge Haiganush R. Bedrosian ordered Chris returned to his father.
Hatch sued the DCYF, alleging the agency had violated his civil rights. The lawsuit was dismissed in federal court, and the dismissal was upheld on appeal.
Sodom and Gommorrah were wicked. The details of that wickedness are not recorded. They did not have the technology to pervade a society with images and ideas which promote children as objects of sexual gratification. The MSM is rampant with softcore pornography and the internet has the hardcore stuff. The skit on Monday Night Football must be categorized as starter pornography. I grew up in rural America where my introduction to sex was in the barnyard. From this article and other things that I have read, it must be said that the barnyard has come to the schoolyard.
There was an article on FR (where else do I read?) not long ago about a young girl (adolescent aged) who was starting a clothing line of modest clothes for girls. Or something to that effect.
Modesty is a virtue that has all but disappeared. It's interesting - many men prefer to marry a woman who dresses modestly - in fact, I remember reading one "study" about it. Women and girls can dress with modesty and personal respect and STILL look very feminine and beautiful. In fact, more so.
Who wants to marry a woman who looks like she's up for hourly rent?
yes but I can tell you that the provactive dressing is about getting attention. I've found that even if you are plain looking and dress provacative guys will look at you no matter how busted your face looks.
More likely is that the adults in his life abused him and caused his abusive behavior.
I babysat a boy who could have turned into an abuser. It turns out some of his relatives were messing around with him, and he was caught in the middle of a very nasty divorce. My mom 'adopted' him after our next door neighbor was complaining he was getting too aggressive with her son. The boy is now a grown man today, very upstanding and attending college. Boys don't just arrive and become abusers. This society sidelines boys who suffer from sexual abuse a lot and I'm not sure why.
While I have no idea of the specifics of this case, I generally frown on the "musta-learned-it-from-somewhere" idea. Even Freud a hundred years ago described the psychosexual issues of young children as being innate.
There's various kinds of attention. Even homely women could walk around naked and they'd get a lot of attention. But what kind, and what kind of men?
Basically, our culture is way, way over sexualized to the point of extreme illness. The infection kind of spreads out everywhere, like oil on a mud puddle.
People may call me a prude or other names. They don't know me personally, so I don't care. There is a place for sexual enjoyment, and that place is between a husband and a wife in a committed, loving relationship. The more other varieties and venues of sex are either tolerated or what we see now, promoted - the more the cultural standards are demolished.
Result? Child sex abusers, more child abuse, rampant illegitimate and fatherless children, more and more divorce and broken homes, more sexual perversity ruining lives, more disease, more lonely old people, more abortion, more abandoned children and babies tossed in the trash, and on and on.
And more seriously miserable people who can't form relationships.
I have dressed very provacatively and very conservative at one point. I think at my old age of thirty, I preferred guys asking me 'gee do you go to church or something?' or when I wore floor length skirts and arm length blouses, I used to get asked if I was Jewish by orthodox Jewish dads looking for dates for their sons *LOL* At some point, if you expose yourself to the filth that is American advertizing, you will get sucked in. These days I'm amazed at how parents let their kids dress, esp. girls. I'm more worried about girls since we're the ones that bear the consequences of a sexualized society (sometimes literally!).
And Freud was an unstoppable coke freak, non-stop cigar smoker even after half his jaw was removed due to cancer, atheist, personally miserable, who speculated his entire psychological ideas from a small handful of miserable Vienna housewives.
Screw Freud and his idiotic theories, most of which have been proving totally wrong.
Of course all children have innate sexual desires - but usually don't experience much in the way of sexual interest until physically approaching adolescence. Of course there are always a few who are precocious. But extreme sexual interest in a very young children is a sign of having been abused or exposed to explicit sexual situations.
I'm surprised you keep saying it's normal. I've raised children and been around many children. It is not normal.
There's a certain allure to mystery - remember veils on hats in the 50s and 40s? I don't mean personally remember - but from photos and movies!
It's kind of like romance - how can a romantic or deep loving relationship develop when people "hook up" before they know each others' last names? It's cheap, demeaning, disrespectful, and worst of all, it really does have lifelong effects. And I wasn't even meaning the STDs.
Most of Freud's clinical theories of course have been proven false. However, that's not to say that there isn't some truth to gained from Freud or that his observations are completely worthless.
I'm surprised you keep saying it's normal. I've raised children and been around many children. It is not normal.
It depends on what you mean by normal. I'm not even defending the boy's actions here - all I'm saying is that the vast conclusions being drawn (he must have been molested/exposed to porn etc) are unsupported by evidence and in any event seem to me to be best handled by the parents involved rather than the legal system.
No one is saying that kid or any kid MUST have been exposed to this or that.
The point is that most children are not sexualized without being poisoned in some way. And since movies, TV, and media of all kinds are more and more explicitly sexual, there are large numbers of sexual predators who exploit and ruin children, it is very reasonable to assume that something likely happened to the boy to turn him into a predator himself.
And it may very well have been at home, so his parents may be implicated.
I am NOT a fan of CPS - in my limited experience they are tinpot creeps who can ruin peoples' lives. I'm more inclined to think a regular justice system is better than CPS. But if little kids are going around buggering other little kids, it's not enough for the parents to "take care of it". They may be the cause.
Should other little kids get buggered just so the gov't stays out of it?
How about burqas?
This I think is the essence of my disagreement - I don't think any "poisoning" is necessary - much of it is innate except in perhaps the most extreme circumstances where the behavior is fairly obviously a cry for help. I don't know if this particular instance qualifies - was is it repeated with other boys - did the boy display a wide range of other symptoms of trauma ?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.