MO - Six Mohler family members for child sex crimes, Bates City 2009 #4

[Missizzy]

This also concerns me and is about Roland Mohler:

May 17, 2011

"Bond set at $80,000.00 and approved as 10% if a co-surety joins in the execution of the appearance bond in the full sum of $80,000.00. If defendant posts bond, he is to have no contact with children under the age of seventeen, unless defendant is attending church services. In that event, the defendant may not act as a teacher/instructor or in any other capacity for children under the age of seventeen, and defendant should not be in the presence of children under seventeen if he is the only adult present. L. Harman, Judge..."

A protective order was entered on the same day. So does this mean that the three who are still incarcerated are being offered a surety bond in order to walk free? This really worries me as it looks as if Roland also is being told he can attend church. I realize that he's ordered not to have contact with children but he's had many supporters who believe in his innocence. And who is the protective order for?

 

[Missizzy]

In the last couple of weeks, Burrell, Jr. has requested a bail reduction, a protective order has been entered, and he's requested and been granted a new judge....Judge Robert L. Koffman.

I wonder if his earlier docket entries are in another county? That's kind of weird. He's also the only one to have two case numbers.

 

[Missizzy]

Concerning David (who bonded out first, I believe), as of 3/18/11:

".....Conditions of bond modified eliminating the "no contact with persons under age seventeen..."

There's also discussion of records from "any agency in Independence, MO" being required to be disclosed by the State. And just as in a couple of others' cases, the GAL was deposed. I'm assuming this is the person who worked with a child who lived at the Mohler home. That child's father raised questions about the child in living with the child's mother at one of the Mohler men's homes.

 

[Wintergreen]

I wonder if his earlier docket entries are in another county? That's kind of weird. He's also the only one to have two case numbers.

BM Jr actually had more case numbers which have been removed and if you search by litigant name you will find 2-3 case numbers for each man, making a search pretty confusing!

 

[Wintergreen]

Concerning David (who bonded out first, I believe), as of 3/18/11:

".....Conditions of bond modified eliminating the "no contact with persons under age seventeen..."

There's also discussion of records from "any agency in Independence, MO" being required to be disclosed by the State. And just as in a couple of others' cases, the GAL was deposed. I'm assuming this is the person who worked with a child who lived at the Mohler home. That child's father raised questions about the child in living with the child's mother at one of the Mohler men's homes.

It's shocking to see the bond agreements change so close to trial and suddenly allowing them to socialize with children. Missizzy, I'm wondering if you could point me to the GAL info you just read--obviously I haven't read every entry--so much there. Thank you!

 

[Wintergreen]

In the last couple of weeks, Burrell, Jr. has requested a bail reduction, a protective order has been entered, and he's requested and been a new judge....Judge Robert L. Koffman. I wonder if his earlier docket entries are in another county? That's kind of weird. He's also the only one to have two case numbers.

BTW old docket entries would've been Lafayette County (in beginning) then Saline County (more recent) and both counties actively contribute to Missouri Casenet so missing case numbers and info from November 2009 on is a mystery to me.

 

[Missizzy]

I realized that after I posted and I agree, it seems very strange. I wonder what happened to those entries. Surely, there must have been numerous ones.

I get some sense that the men who are still jailed are being given some concessions concerning bonds. I'm wondering if that's because the court dates are so far out. I don't know enough about MO policy on bonds and bail to understand. It also sounds as if the other men, who have been free for a while, are having some of their restrictions loosened. That worries me to no end. If they are embraced by family members, friends, and church members who truly believe in their innocence, I can see them being able to easily access young children or to possibly speak to possible witnesses.

 

[gxm]

Thank you, Wintergreen. That's really helpful but also tremendously sad. So many things we worried about here on this thread, seem to be validated. How I hope this group of brave young adults are getting the support they deserve. I think about them often.

In checking on the Mohlers, I found another, similar article today:

http://www.kctv5.com/news/27983361/detail.html

Attorney: Jail Time Taking Toll On Eldest Mohler


I wonder where all the commenters are now? The ones who blamed this entire case on a vindictive former wife and who raved about how upstanding each of these men were? Where are they? Do they have the decency to admit that just possibly, they might have been wrong. Pedophiles don't just groom the victims. They groom the entire community.

I remember this case and I remember those commenters. One in particular was almost abusive in their criticism of repressed memories. I really had to bite my fingers and not respond to their posts!

Thank you all for following this case and providing the updates.

 

[Missizzy]

It's been a long and winding road. I have to admit that it consumed me for months. I'm very anxious to here the men's stories. I personally feel that only the tip of the iceberg has been released.

 

[Missizzy]

I must have missed a few posts on here. I'll have to track back and see where I saw the deposition of the GAL.

Also, today while I was checking out the custody status of Father Shawn Ratigan in the Clay County Jail, I noticed that Burrell Sr. is still locked up there. Roland is not. Burrell Jr. is at another jail. Roland must have come up with the 10% of the $80,000 surety bond which the judge offered him.

So he's out. And he's probably at church, amongst many of his supporters. That frightens me to the core.

 

[Missizzy]

Someone inquired upthread as to where I'd seen info concerning the deposition of the GAL, KR. I found it under David Mohler's case file, dated 5/17/11.

In looking over the cases tonight, I see that the State has agreed to drop some charges due to the SOL and that it looks like a woman who might be the children's mother (per some of the Topix comments we saw earlier) is set to be deposed in the next couple of days.

My prayers go out to this family. What a long and exhausting path they've undertaken. I'm so glad that they've got each other to lean on.

 

[Missizzy]

I'm confused. On 5/17, Roland was offered a surety bond of 10% of $80,000:

"...Bond set at $80,000.00 and approved as 10% if a co-surety joins in the execution of the appearance bond in the full sum of $80,000.00. If defendant posts bond, he is to have no contact with children under the age of seventeen, unless defendant is attending church services. In that event, the defendant may not act as a teacher/instructor or in any other capacity for children under the age of seventeen, and defendant should not be in the presence of children under seventeen if he is the only adult present."

On 6/01, there's this entry:

"Bond-Cash Bond Posted Full Amt"

Does this mean that Roland secured a loan or that there is a bail bondsman involved? By full amount, I'm assuming the entire $80,000?

To me, his restrictions seem ludicrous, given what the man is charged with.

 

[Missizzy]

Boy, you read those docket entries and they almost drip blood. Each one represents so much pain. I noticed an interesting entry for Burrell Sr. on 7/06:

"The Supreme Court requested to appoint the Honorable Michael J. Maloney, Senior Judge, for the sole purpose of presiding over depositions of the State's alleged victims and to conduct an in camera review of certain mental health and medical records of the alleged victims...."

Sounds like the State is not fooling around and that they're bringing in the big guns for the victims' depositions. Good.

I have to wonder why Roland was able to make his bail and yet Burrell Jr. and Sr. have not. Is it purely a financial hardship or are they safer where they are? We're coming up to three years of incarceration prior to trial.

 

[CHICANA]

I'm confused. On 5/17, Roland was offered a surety bond of 10% of $80,000:

"...Bond set at $80,000.00 and approved as 10% if a co-surety joins in the execution of the appearance bond in the full sum of $80,000.00. If defendant posts bond, he is to have no contact with children under the age of seventeen, unless defendant is attending church services. In that event, the defendant may not act as a teacher/instructor or in any other capacity for children under the age of seventeen, and defendant should not be in the presence of children under seventeen if he is the only adult present."

On 6/01, there's this entry:

"Bond-Cash Bond Posted Full Amt"

Does this mean that Roland secured a loan or that there is a bail bondsman involved? By full amount, I'm assuming the entire $80,000?

To me, his restrictions seem ludicrous, given what the man is charged with.

Maybe someone put up their house as collateral

 

[Missizzy]

Might be, Chicana, but it sure took a long long time. Remember how early on, family and church members were saying they were standing behind the men and were willing to help. Maybe they got wind of the absolute immensity of the evidence. Also, I have to wonder why no one has been willing to help out Burrell Jr. and Sr. They were also offered a lower surety bond back in May. They're still sitting tight, though, and their court dates are still months away.

I forgot to mention last night that I saw a number of warrants served on the men while in jail, listed in the docket entries. I wonder if that's how additional charges are handled. Anybody know?

 

[Wintergreen]

Someone inquired upthread as to where I'd seen info concerning the deposition of the GAL, KR. I found it under David Mohler's case file, dated 5/17/11. In looking over the cases tonight, I see that the State has agreed to drop some charges due to the SOL...

My ignorance is showing again but how can you tell by entry that charges were dropped? Still learning from you, Missizzy!

 

[Wintergreen]

....I forgot to mention last night that I saw a number of warrants served on the men while in jail, listed in the docket entries. I wonder if that's how additional charges are handled. Anybody know?

Again please educate, Missizzy--not finding it, but then I don't understand "legalspeak" very well! Thanks for the updates!

 

[Missizzy]

Hi Wintergreen--Let me go back and look. I recall seeing an entry that stated that both parties agreed to drop some charges due to a SOL issue. Reading through those entries is like quicksand. There's so much and once you get in, it's hard to crawl back out.

Having gone through this process, I know how a simple, benign sounding entry can really have extracted blood in the process.

I'll post when I find the exact entry.

 

[Missizzy]

Under Burrell Sr.'s docket entries, I found this:

6/29/2011
"Defendant with counsel. State by counsel. Defendant's Motion to Dismiss on Statute of Limitations on Counts 1, 2, 6, 7 and 11 called. State concedes the motion. Counts 1, 2, 6, 7 and 11 are dismissed as time barred."

 

[Missizzy]

I've followed this case from the day it first broke in the news. It's always rattled me. But there's something about reading the actual and official charges that always flattens me. To me, these charges represent alleged crimes which have been deemed to have merit by way of evidence--the charges that the State is actively pursuing. They also represent the validation that the State believes that a little child suffered from this crime. The words are "dry" but the pain is not.

Here's the charges against each Mohler as reported on CaseNet. I've put them in chronological order following each man's name:

Darrel:

3/19/86 Rape 566.030
3/19/86 Rape 566.030


Roland:

3/01/88 Use of a Child in a Sexual Performance 568.080
3/19/88 Sodomy 566.060
3/19/88 Rape 566.030


Jared

5/01/86 Use of a Child in a Sexual Performance 568.080


David

3/01/88 Rape 566.030
3/01/88 Rape 566.030


Burrell Jr. (New case#11PT-CR00576)

3/19/84 Rape 566.030
5/01/86 Rape 566.030
5/01/86 Use of a Child in a Sexual Performance 568.080
3/19/87 Rape 566.030
3/01/88 Use of a Child in a Sexual Performance 568.080
3/01/88 Use of a Child in a Sexual Performance 568.080
9/30/88 Deviant Sexual Assault 566.070


Burrell Sr.

1/01/87 Rape 566.030
1/01/87 Use of a Child in a Sexual Performance 568.080
3/01/87 Sex Abuse in the 1st Degree 566.100
5/01/87 Rape 566.030
3/19/87 Rape 566.030
3/19/87 Use of a Child in a Sexual Performance 568.080
3/19/87 Use of a Child in a Sexual Performance 568.080
3/19/87 Use of a Child in a Sexual Performance 568.080
3/01/88 Rape 566.030
3/01/88 Rape 566.030
3/01/88 Use of a Child in a Sexual Performance 568.080
3/01/88 Use of a Child in a Sexual Performance 568.080
3/19/88 Rape 566.030
3/19/88 Sodomy 566.060
3/01/91 Forcible Rape 566.030
8/01/87 Rape 566.030



Dear Lord. Please give this family strength to go forward.