SC - Kenneth Hinson for abduction, rape of 2 teens, Darlington, 2006

[txsvicki]

None of this makes any sense. The guy was a live in, kept pot in the dungeon where the girls could probably partake any time they wanted, if they willingly had sex they could do it again even in exchange for pot or to pay back the amount that they supposedly stole. It would have been a mutually beneficial arrangement. Why on earth would they want to steal it unless it was a large amount to try and sell? The guy has raped a 12 year old and the guy who squealed was a doper who was probably caught and thought he could get off easy by saying something. I'd say the girls are much more believeable.

 

[Taximom]

No matter what, he had sex with minors so why isn't he in jail for that at least?!

Me-->:slap:<-- Jury

 

[cheko1]

No matter what, he had sex with minors so why isn't he in jail for that at least?!

Me-->:slap:<-- Jury

Its over my head to Taximom!!!!
Why would any jury let him off??? Sex with a minor is sex with a minor. :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

 

[SUPI]

A few years from now we'll probably hear he was arrested again only for murder the next girls won't be so lucky!

When he is arrested again that jury won't hear about this case. I'd be willing to bet that when he is arrested the media will not pick this up and we won't hear about his next bout with the law. I have to believe that there are too many in LE as well as jurists who have reason to protect this kind of scum. Too many states need Jessica's law and it makes me wonder why anyone would protect these guys. We all know of quite a few cases where these guys get off only to do much worse later, but Why?

 

[SewingDeb]

I have a dungeon. Lots of people have them - but they are used (supposed to be used) strictly for CONSENSUAL fun. Nothing else. Anything non consensual is criminal.

This dungeon did not have any available air. It's a little different from yours, I am sure.

 

[SewingDeb]

A few years from now we'll probably hear he was arrested again only for murder the next girls won't be so lucky!

Hopefully not. He is also facing a charge of possession of firearms by a convicted felong. He could get almost a life sentence for that alone.

 

[SewingDeb]

No matter what, he had sex with minors so why isn't he in jail for that at least?!

Me-->:slap:<-- Jury

The two girls were both 17 years old. I'm not sure what the age of consent is in SC, but it may be 16.

 

[SewingDeb]

The main problem in this case, IMO, is that the jury did not hear his previous convictions.

 

[s_finch]

The two girls were both 17 years old. I'm not sure what the age of consent is in SC, but it may be 16.

I live in SC and haven't even heard about this case. You are correct SD, age of consent in SC is 16 and USUALLY here in SC the girls would be believed and the guy would be convicted. We're not a liberal state as you all well know so I can't imagine what evidence was used to get this guy off and the state attorney general was the prosecutor no less! I'm wondering if there was evidence of duct tape residue, etc... that backed up the girls' allegations. Course, being a felon in possession of a firearm and also confessing to drug dealing, he'll do time just wonder what in the world the defense used to get him off of this charge. I bet McMaster is so mad he lost this case he'll make darn sure the guy gets the max time for his parole violations and drug charges!

 

[southcitymom]

It would be interesting to hear the jurors points of view.

Yes, it would be. With rare exception, I have faith in the jury system. I kind of wonder if the Judge and Prosecution flubbed the case. Wonder if the press will talk to the jury?

 

[Masterj]

This dungeon did not have any available air. It's a little different from yours, I am sure.

Exactly. It was a hole dug into the ground and was the size of a midsize car.

 

[GlitchWizard]

Exactly. It was a hole dug into the ground and was the size of a midsize car.

Yeah, my dungeon has a/c and a refrigerator for cold sodas. But, I've seen girls cry rape alot. With the first lie, they get deeper and deeper into it and have to keep lying to keep their head above water.

I don't know many people who are 17 that are into THAT serious of bdsm where they'd want to be in a hole in the ground. Some people, yeah, but it takes years to develop that kind of desire (in my opinion) and to have two girls at 17 into that at the same time in the same location is a bit of a stretch for me. (Oh, were the guy to be so lucky!)

Who knows what the jury heard?

I do know that I don't care if he hurt them or not - if he was sexually with a 12 year old at ANY point in his life, he's on my list of bad guys. That's probably why they didn't tell the jury. If the girls lied, he'd still be convicted based on that previous thing... especially if I were on the jury.

I thought OJ should be locked up, too. Not because I felt he was or was not guilty of murder, but because he used to beat his wife to begin with.

I'm on the fence as to consensuality vs. lies of the girls - but I don't defend a child molester, no matter how distant past the crime. Not ever.

 

[mrsjonnob]

I do know that I don't care if he hurt them or not - if he was sexually with a 12 year old at ANY point in his life, he's on my list of bad guys.

- but I don't defend a child molester, no matter how distant past the crime. Not ever.

I agree 100%

If he has ever sexually touched a 12 yr old girl, he should have been locked up FOREVER. He never, ever should have been out to have consensual or non consensual sex with anybody, child or not.

Sick pig, I hope he gets shot.

 

[Ang50]

The unique thing about this case is that the guy took the stand - highly unusual. Without seeing the trial, I would conclude that the prosecution probably didn't do a very good job of cross exam. Cross exam is a very specialized skill, and prosecution never has to do a lot of it, so they don't get good at it like defense attorneys do.

Plus, when these defense attorneys got at these girls in cross exam - well, it can't be that hard to cast a bad light on teenage girls... and they apparently got confused with some of the testimony.

Also, I do wonder about the sex assault conviction not coming in. Sex offense conviction are the ONLY prior crimes that are allowed in, but it has to be relevant. If the prosecution wanted it in, they would have had to prove that raping a 12 year old 10-15 years ago was similar enough to kidnapping and raping these two teenagers. That all depends on the skill of the argument and the judge.

BUT - even if it didn't come in, the prosecution is still allowed to ask if the defendant has ever been convicted of a crime and how many times. That's all. UNLESS - the defendant lies or gets the wrong number, and then the prosecution can march through all of the convictions. Again, we have to assume here that he got the number right.

 

[s_finch]

Just had a crazy thought---prosecution must have known this was going to be a tough case to win ( for what reasons I have no idea) since the state Attorney General was brought in to do the prosecuting---first case he's tried since election in 2002 if what I read in the paper is correct. Wish we had more info, like how long the girls waited before claiming to being abducted, if they called LE right away then they should have been tested for duct tape residue on their wrists, etc...since that is supposedly what they were restrained with. There should have been evidence in the dungeon that they had been restrained. Either way you look at it, something doesn't add up.

 

[PSUfan]

Yes, it would be. With rare exception, I have faith in the jury system. I kind of wonder if the Judge and Prosecution flubbed the case. Wonder if the press will talk to the jury?

Several days ago, I googled the guys name. After everything I read, I expected him to be convicted for sure. But it disturbed me that the one girl was the creeps girlfriends daughter, and the other girl lived next door, piggybacking in on the electric next door. Doesnt sound like the mothers were protecting these kids very well.

Like you, I have faith in the jury system. He was judged by a jury of his peers, without an OJ dream team defending him.

 

[SUPI]

There will be a look at this case on O Riley in about 2 min on Fox.

 

[Taximom]

There will be a look at this case on O Riley in about 2 min on Fox.

I missed it! Rats.

 

[cheko1]

Hopefully not. He is also facing a charge of possession of firearms by a convicted felong. He could get almost a life sentence for that alone.

I sincerely hope he does get the book thrown at him.
Couldn't happen to a nicer fella in my eyes. That would be sweet justice for the girls!

 

[cheko1]

When he is arrested again that jury won't hear about this case. I'd be willing to bet that when he is arrested the media will not pick this up and we won't hear about his next bout with the law. I have to believe that there are too many in LE as well as jurists who have reason to protect this kind of scum. Too many states need Jessica's law and it makes me wonder why anyone would protect these guys. We all know of quite a few cases where these guys get off only to do much worse later, but Why?

:clap: :clap: :clap: Very well stated SUPI!!!