- Joined
- Nov 12, 2014
- Messages
- 4,587
- Reaction score
- 43,461
Madison man charged with sexual exploitation of Tennessee girl, missing since Jan. 14
Rogers said he persuaded the girl to set up a camera so that she could get a video of an assault that could be used as evidence. He said she made the video and sent it to him, but he did not send it to police because it was blurry and “he thought it would not stand up in court,” the complaint states.
In a chat between the two that police found on Rogers’ phone, the girl at one point told Rogers that she couldn’t promise that she would get the video evidence for him.
“Then I can’t promise I can get you away from that I hate to say it but I can’t risk getting in trouble for you,” Rogers responded. “If you can get that video I can get you out of there.”
According to the chat, Rogers instructed the girl about how to get the video, and she begged him just to come and take her away, telling him he was “such an (expletive) if u don’t help me somehow.” She told him repeatedly that she couldn’t get the video, to which Rogers responded, “So I’m an (expletive) for not risking going to prison for someone I haven’t even met?”
Police found the video, which was created on Jan. 10, on Rogers’ computer. It graphically depicted the girl being sexually assaulted by a man.
So it was clear enough for LE (I guess, the article isn't clear) to see that it depicted her being assaulted, yet Rogers claims that it was "too blurry" for him to send to LE? Sure, Jan.
I'm also confused about how SHE made the video (presumably at home with her step dad assaulting her) yet the article states that it was "created" on BR's computer. Maybe they just worded it weird because, earlier, it says that she sent the video to him. If she sent it to him, then it wasn't "created" on his computer, it was found on his computer.