"This has been a complex situation," a Youngstown State statement read. This is a case about Ma'lik being given all the opportunities afforded a student of good standing." "What is most important is that Ma'lik moves on," said Susan Stone, one of Richmond's attorneys, in a statement obtained by the Associated Press. Attorneys for Richmond argued that the school could not bar him from playing so long as he followed school rules. As such, Richmond cannot bring forward the same complaint. This decision was reached when lawyers representing Richmond and Youngstown State filed a motion to dismiss the federal lawsuit filed by Richmond against the school. Ma'lik Richmond, the Youngstown State football player who was convicted in the Steubenville High School rape case of 2012 in Ohio, will be allowed to remain on the roster and play football for the program. And play he has, though just a little.Ĭonvicted rapist Ma'lik Richmond remains at Youngstown State as school settles suit Kennedy wrote that juvenile court rules do not give judges the authority to dismiss a formally filed charge and that cases can be screened by judges for alternative treatment prior to the filing of formal delinquency charges. Justice Sharon Kennedy wrote the dissent, joined by Patrick DeWine and Judith French. “As we have recognized in the past, holding a formal proceeding to determine whether a child was motivated by innocent curiosity or by culpable sexual gratification may be as bad or worse for the children involved - and for society - as was the act itself,” his opinion said.Ĭhief Justice Maureen O’Connor and Justices Terrence O’Donnell agreed with O’Neill. O’Neill wrote that a juvenile court’s concern may not always center on determining if a crime was committed. In the majority opinion, Justice William M. The judge found that the two boys were close in age and that since no threat of force or violence was involved, it would be arbitrary to pursue charges against one child, but not the other.įranklin County Prosecutor Ron O’Brien appealed the ruling to the court of appeals, which reversed the judge, leading to the Ohio Supreme Court ruling. The 2013 case involved a 12-year-old boy charged with three delinquency counts of gross sexual imposition for conduct with a boy who was nearly 10 years old.Ī Juvenile Court judge dismissed the charges, finding that court rules gave him discretion to end prosecution and order treatment in lieu of taking formal action. The court was divided on the Franklin County case, voting 4-3 to overturn a decision by the Franklin County Court of Appeals. Juvenile court rules empower judges to dismiss some sex charges against children under age 13 charged with molesting a child close to their age, the Ohio Supreme Court declared Wednesday. Ohio judges can dismiss sex charges against kids under 13, justices rule The Ohio Supreme Court makes another good ruling.
0 kommentar(er)
