James Prindle 15 year old

[Bryan]

Tweet

No justice at all is the least, but the comparision to a certain Nazi judge hits the doctrine of one losing an arguement when they compare some person or group with a Nazi.

I am waiting forward for the real doer committing another blatant sex act to rub in the noses of the Memphis DA and his pathetic band of thugs. "See the guy hurt another little girl and you could have stopped him, but no, you had to put someone else in prison for that crime." No one will be laughing then. They would want to lynch said DA and many of his followers like they did not so long ago to anyone for the flimsiest of reasons. Lucky we no longer live in the 1890's.

Prindle will be set free and the real rapist put behind bars. Let's hope a few more scumbags follow that real rapist to the same prison. One big happy jailbird family!

[William Holder]

Tweet

Hopefully I won't upset too many people if I present how this case came accross to me. Based on what I've read about James he was a pretty troubled individual - it's fair to say some significant part of the blame lies with his parents and the boys who chose to befriend him. His use of drugs was a personal decision. He was at the time of the rape, not a very good person and certainly not thinking clearly.
He had a responsibility that day - a responsibility appropriate for a young man of his age. He was to watch his little brother and toddler sister. In addition to choosing drugs that day he chose to permit his friends inside the residence - according to him, many friends, in defiance of his mothers' wishes and what should have been common sense given the types he was associating with.


James says he watched these juveniles enter into his sisters bedroom on various occassions that day and in fact heard an unusual noise from that room. He maintains he left his sister and brother alone with one of his associates later - this to chase down a .22 pistol.

James said he returned to a sister with a cut in her mouth and attempted to bath her, later noticing she was bleeding from her vagina.

I suspect in the same way James minimized the injuries to her sister - we know this because trial testimony is quite clear that the child had ongoing bleeding in at least three areas: the mouth, the vagina and the head, the head so badly that the attending nurse thought she was a redhead - he minimized the activities of his associates that afternoon.

If indeed he did not participate in the rape and beating, he certainly knew and possibly even endorsed what happened that afternoon - making him as guilty as anyone there.
If he had a consistent (with the evidence) and convincing story to tell, he would have been well served to tell that story however belatedly and at the risk of being harshly cross examined in the face of his previous lies.

His two younger friends are more culpable as they surely took part and likely initiated the event.
Adam surely was involved to some extent and possibly other boys there that day as well.

This is just my read of the events based on the information James has given us.

However the fact that James did not recieve the support of his mother and was implicated by his little brother is very damning. The fact that James lied about the event to police when they questioned him is also very damning - this is his baby sister. The fact that he chose to bath her ahead of calling for help given the condition we know she was in - per testimony referred to above, is very damning.   

Her big brother was the only person she could hope to recieve assistance from that day and he either disregarded her torment or he was as sadistic as the verdict suggests. Either way - justice has been served.

[Bryan]

Tweet

He did not rape that little girl. He was framed by a bunch of kids and by cops who acted in a state of denial. James Prindle must have all his charges thrown out. The person who really did these crimes should be brought to justice. Now let me step aside for there are a number of fellow members who tend to agree with me. What is happening in Memphis is a Miscarriage of Justice.

[gloria]

Tweet

James did not rape his sister and he did not participated on anyway on the abuse. He was not in the home when the rape happened. He can be guilty of lying to the police and acting irresponsible but I do believe James never thought for a second his friends would rape his sister. He left her sister for a while at the care of one of the kids on the room, I am sure he did Not think  (and he should not have allowed)her sister was going to be raped. And about the so called testimony of his little brother, looking into james life and his stepfather is so obvious the little boy was coerced into a false statement. The so called confession of the little brother just come out  a few months before the trial started. So I have my doubts about the veracity of that statement.


On the second day of the trial, after the jury left the courtroom, Judge Carter said that the state had failed to prove at least two of the charges”—presumably the rape charge and the child abuse charge—“ and that he was considering adding more sub-charges to the two charges the state could prove”—presumably the child endangerment and false police report charges.


In that home there were many troubled kids not just James, actually 2 of those kids have been sexually exploited for years since they were toddlers themselves. The abuse that james's sister suffered that day, those 2 boys lived it for years. I only can hope the little girl is helped because the scars from sexual abuse last for ever. Let's just hope she gets the help she needs. 

James was a troubled kid due to the terrible abuse he endured for years at the hands of his stepfather. Let's hope the little girl doesn't grow up next to that man or that woman who calls herself her mother and end up as troubled as James.

Besides all the abuse James went through he is a good kid. Yes, James did many stupid things that day but he is NOT a rapist. he is NOT a sadistic. and most of all he should never have been tried as an adult.

Either way- Justice was NOT SERVED.

[William Holder]

Tweet

I know this group has among other goals a mission to prevent the wrongful conviction of minor children. This is laudable.

However, there is no justification for James to have lied that day to police and no justification for not reaching out to emergency services immediately upon returning to his residence.
Fear of his parents reaction to allowing friends in the unit is not in the least credible given his past and ongoing poor behaviour. Obviously his parents were uncaring and unconvincing.


For me the only reason for the way James acted the way he did was because he was complicit in the assault - one way or the other. Obviously, if he were an active participant his actions are easy to understand. Similarly, If he permitted or endorsed the assault on his sister - one would expect him to tailor his actions and statements that evening.

Why do you think this behaviour was justified?

[Melissa]

Tweet

Lying to the police out of fear, or because a teenager is scared of what might happen, does not equal being complicit in the assault. DNA was taken and analyzed and it did not match James. I personally do not know what happened the day the assault took place. I do know that multiple people were alone with that child and the scientific evidence does not support that James committed the crime. I find that extremely problematic.

It's a problem that he's the only one to have stood trial and that the evidence suggests someone else raped a baby and nothing has or will be done about it.

The mission of this site - my site - is to prevent injustice as it pertains to juvenile children. This includes, and is not limited to, preventing egregious sentencing for children and teenagers charged with crimes that they may or may not have committed. As evidenced by the Supreme Court's most recent ruling children are different from adults. Age and other mitigating factors need to be considered when children are charged, tried, and sentenced for crimes. Preventing wrongful conviction is important to me and to others. However, I also believe it is wrong to place a child in prison for life who has committed a crime and is proven amenable to rehabilitation. This statement does not pertain to James Prindle's case because he is claiming innocence. It does, however, pertain to a number of other cases discussed on this site. I wanted to clarify the purpose of this site because the position taken here is in light of scientific evidence that a child/teen's brain is different than an adults and that a child is much more amenable to rehabilitation.

Going back to James' case. A child was sexually assaulted and the only person held accountable is James. If someone else did this, as the evidence suggests, it means they are free to do it again. There will be no accountability, no treatment, and no real justice.

Please give that some thought.

[William Holder]

Tweet

Melissa - it seems the fear of lying is far outweighed in this instance by the trauma to his baby sister. I agrre that others were involved and as I have said - it's possible that James did not play an active roll.

This leads me to my perspective on especially violent crime. My research into crime suggests that certain individuals are born with a defective set of genes. These individuals are referred to as sociopaths. Sociopaths are unable to empathize with a victims' suffering - it is because of this inherent lack of sensitivity that they are cabable of sometimes being unimaginably brutal or uncaring. I believe this is the case for James. In the best case scenario, he was simply unable to respond in an appropriate way to the viciousness inflicted upon his baby sister that afternoon. This does not make him any less guilty than his cohorts.

Few soieties have ever been able to deal appositely with individuals exhibiting mental defects and ours is no exception. The debate is not wether James is guilty, he is obviously complicit, but what do we as a society do in these situations. I don't believe the correct response is to fabricate a defense in an attemp to insert a dangerous individual back in to society.
Unfortunately for those that commit particularly heinous crimes, there is little tolerance for debate or adequate solutions.   

[gloria]

Tweet

James is not a sociopath and I think is too late about inserting a dangerous individual back in to society. You seem not to want to understand that evidence show others perpetrated the assault. And they are free so a little bit late to not let a dangerous individual back in society don't you think?. And yes, of course the debate is about James being guilty or not among other things like the one you just wrote about.

As Melissa very well said A child was sexually assaulted and the only person held accountable is James. If someone else did this, as the evidence suggests, it means they are free to do it again. There will be no accountability, no treatment, and no real justice.

Please give that some thought.

That he couldn't stop the rape of his sister doesn't make him guilty or as you say "obviously complicit." or even a sociapath.

[William Holder]

Tweet

The evidence suggest James and two younger cohorts brutally beat and raped a toddler girl. This is the conclusion of the investigating officers and a jury of his peers. James was afforded an adequate defense and had the opportunity to relate a credible and consistent (with the evidence) account of what happened that evening at any time up to the point he was convicted.

His two younger accomplices were apprehended but the youngest was released for lack of evidence and likely in deference to his age. Noah was charged and convicted of facilitation - should have been agravated assault and rape.

Saying he's not guilty and ignoring the arrest of his accomplices - doesn't make him innocent except in your mind.

He is obviously complicit for the reasons I outlined in my above posts - I don't need to repeat the reasons here. However I have yet to hear a legitimate justification for his lies.

Was justice fully served - no. But that's the way our system works. While I personally would have liked to lock up every individual that was there that evening, we simply can't bring a case unless there is enough evidence to convince a jury. In this case there was only enough evidence to bring James to trial.

I suspect James is a sociopath but he may be just a sadist. Neither of James' stories are consistent with the facts that evening. He is unable or unwilling to be honest about what happened - that is for me the single most damning fact of this case.

[BenC]

Tweet

Hi William

I would like to respond to some of the content in your posts.

He had a responsibility that day - a responsibility appropriate for a young man of his age. He was to watch his little brother and toddler sister. In addition to choosing drugs that day he chose to permit his friends inside the residence - according to him, many friends, in defiance of his mothers' wishes and what should have been common sense given the types he was associating with.

This was not the first time that James had been giving the responsibility of babysitting his brother and sister. He had done so many times before. With out any trouble what so ever. Given the working situation of his parents, looking after his siblings was common practice for James.
I do not believe that James wanted these "friends" to be there. Understanding the type of people they are, I can easily see how they were there anyway despite his (and his mothers') wishes. This may be reinforced by the testimony of the upstairs neighbor who said that James was in fact dissociating him self from the other kids.

I suspect in the same way James minimized the injuries to her sister - we know this because trial testimony is quite clear that the child had ongoing bleeding in at least three areas: the mouth, the vagina and the head, the head so badly that the attending nurse thought she was a redhead - he minimized the activities of his associates that afternoon.

Do you believe the was intentionally minimizing the activities of the perpetrators ? I most certainly do not. If I was in that situation of coming home to find my baby sister bleeding and in a state, I would at least try and clean her up and look after her, first and foremost. I would not leave her like that. I would think it rather poor of someone (especially given his age and not knowing any better, also at this point not knowing that she had in fact been raped) to leave her as she is.

If indeed he did not participate in the rape and beating, he certainly knew and possibly even endorsed what happened that afternoon - making him as guilty as anyone there.
If he had a consistent (with the evidence) and convincing story to tell, he would have been well served to tell that story however belatedly and at the risk of being harshly cross examined in the face of his previous lies.

I think he knew of the rape and beating his sister received. One would find that rather obvious with the state he found her in. That DOES NOT make him guilty though. Hell, even I know she got raped and beaten, just from reading the reports. That doesn't make ME guilty does it ?
You think he endorsed it ? How ? Why ? What evidence is there to support that ? Everything I see point so the contrary.
His story IS consistent, with the evidence, or complete lack of.

His two younger friends are more culpable as they surely took part and likely initiated the event.
Adam surely was involved to some extent and possibly other boys there that day as well.

Given their history I agree with you. Also especially given the fact that Adam admitted to police that when he was alone with the toddler, he took the girl's temperature with a rectal thermometer. For no reason.
Now to me, that really rings alarm bells. Yet why has all of this fallen on James ?

However the fact that James did not recieve the support of his mother and was implicated by his little brother is very damning. The fact that James lied about the event to police when they questioned him is also very damning - this is his baby sister. The fact that he chose to bath her ahead of calling for help given the condition we know she was in - per testimony referred to above, is very damning.

Such a terrible thing for a child to not have the support of his own mother. Though she has stated that she has her doubts about his guilt. Was even considering reconciling with James, though she never turned up.
Yes, he lied and he is guilty of that. Though, he is a child, WHAT child has never lied before. I know I'm guilty. Though the punishment of certain death and much worse in an adult prison; is that a fitting punishment for a child lying ? I think not.
Yes, she was bathed but from a loving brother reasoning; to clean her up ! It wasn't until then that it was determined she was raped and the call for help was made.
In fact, if he is guilty, why the hell did he even call for help at all
Even then that bathing was pretty poor as she was still covered when the examined her. I read (though for the life of me I can't find the source, so not sure how true) that they extracted DNA, though of course, not James'. Given the fact of the state she was in when she was examined, I would be very surprised if they didn't manage to find anything linking anyone.

Her big brother was the only person she could hope to recieve assistance from that day and he either disregarded her torment or he was as sadistic as the verdict suggests. Either way - justice has been served.

Completely disagree. She received all the assistance from James. As can be heard clearly in the 911 call both the girl AND James crying together and James holding her in his arms trying to comfort her. Do you possibly think if he had done this, the girl would allow James to do this ? Or would she be fighting him, pushing him away yelling 'No' like she was doing in the examination ?

However, there is no justification for James to have lied that day to police and no justification for not reaching out to emergency services immediately upon returning to his residence.
Fear of his parents reaction to allowing friends in the unit is not in the least credible given his past and ongoing poor behaviour. Obviously his parents were uncaring and unconvincing.

No, there is no justification for lying to the police, obviously in hindsight for James.
As I said, the first thing he did upon returning was tend to his sister. I would do the same.

William, I think what you don't realize here is that James him self is a CHILD. Children thing and do "silly" things as interpreted by an adult. Such as the fear of his parents reaction to this happening while on his watch. I applaud you if you were the perfect child and always had the mind of a grown adult, but for the most of us; unfortunately this is not the case.

For me the only reason for the way James acted the way he did was because he was complicit in the assault - one way or the other. Obviously, if he were an active participant his actions are easy to understand. Similarly, If he permitted or endorsed the assault on his sister - one would expect him to tailor his actions and statements that evening.

Why do you think this behaviour was justified?

William I don't believe that anyone here thinks that behavior is justified simply because nobody here believes that what you state was in fact what happened.

This leads me to my perspective on especially violent crime. My research into crime suggests that certain individuals are born with a defective set of genes. These individuals are referred to as sociopaths. Sociopaths are unable to empathize with a victims' suffering - it is because of this inherent lack of sensitivity that they are cabable of sometimes being unimaginably brutal or uncaring. I believe this is the case for James. In the best case scenario, he was simply unable to respond in an appropriate way to the viciousness inflicted upon his baby sister that afternoon. This does not make him any less guilty than his cohorts.

OK then William. How about we do something different. Why don't we turn the spotlight from James and point it on to you.

Now you talk of Sociopaths being unable to empathize with a victims' suffering.

Empathize...

Please do me a favor for a moment and consider this CHILD is completely Innocent. He did not commit this crime, there is nothing to prove he did, his mother has abandoned him and he has very little support from others. He knows he didn't do it. He has been locked up for the past two years and now as a child (and not a big one at that) is about to be thrown to the wolves in an adult prison. Considering the nature of why he is incarcerated and his lack of ability to defend him self; this child will be continually, viciously beaten, tortured, raped and killed. By that time he will have an ass hole the size of a clown's pocket.
A fate worse that what is sister went through. For what ? Something he didn't do ? Loving his sister ? Lying to police ? Effectively sentenced to worse than death, by the state, he knows it and there is nothing he can do about it. Completely helpless.

So, William, just for a moment, put your self in those shoes in the above situation. Put yourself in James' shoes. Put YOUR OWN SON in those shoes !


Will he be a victim, will he suffer ?

Do you emphasize with his situation ? Compassion ?


No ?


Then out of curiosity Mr Holder,

What does that make you ?




I'll leave you with a quote from James' cousin:

“The James I knew loved family above all else. He is not capable of committing such a crime. He would not do that to his sister, or anyone else. He does not have the mindset to do that.”

Sociopath ? Give me a break





Regards.




P.S. Please, I mean no offense in the above post.

[William Holder]

Tweet

I've noted he was befriended by a bad bunch. I understand his predicament, I remember being in the same place at his age. He made the choice to do various drugs that day and to purchase a .22. As hard as it is to avoid a bad crowd they don't get particularly upset if you don't use their drugs. Similarly, there was no pressure to purchase a pistol - by his own admission everyone wanted that piece. I mention these things because they serve to show he was at this point very caught up in this clique - behaving poorly and hard to differentiaite from his more ruthless associates.

Either the toddler was assaulted while he was there and he ignored it or she was assaulted after he left the property - likely both times.

For me Noah makes most sense as a perpetrator but James' account appears to offer him a defense.

James doesn't even seem able to speculate on what happened that evening, just that she must have been raped.

His story seems contrived to offer a way out for himself, Micah and Noah.

When do you believe the assault was commited and by who - testimony suggests at least two individuals were involved?

And yes - if that were my baby sister bleeding and crying with obvious signs of trauma, the first thing I would do is to scoop her up and run for help.

[gloria]

Tweet

Thank you BenC for your support to James. I agree on every single thing you have say. You know, word is going on now in Memphis  regarding James. It seems there is been talk about a retrial.

mosquito buzz 28/06/2012
 
http://wandervogeldiary.wordpress.com/2012/06/28/mosquito-buzz/

Strange things are happening in Memphis.
 
We have still not heard from the judge about our offer of a solution to his problems. That’s no surprise.
 
“Shouldn’t we be communicating with the judge through James’ attorney?” you may ask. Ideally, yes… unfortunately Claiborne Ferguson is not returning our phone calls. The other day, according to James, Ferguson said he was going to try to get this case moved back to juvenile court “where they can’t help you”—“they” meaning us. Ferguson has told James that he filed a motion to accomplish this. Today we heard there’s rumor of a re-trial.

[BenC]

Tweet

William,

I've noted he was befriended by a bad bunch. I understand his predicament, I remember being in the same place at his age. He made the choice to do various drugs that day and to purchase a .22. As hard as it is to avoid a bad crowd they don't get particularly upset if you don't use their drugs. Similarly, there was no pressure to purchase a pistol - by his own admission everyone wanted that piece. I mention these things because they serve to show he was at this point very caught up in this clique - behaving poorly and hard to differentiaite from his more ruthless associates.

Yes I can agree with this statement, in general. At the time of the crime, I don't believe so. I believe he was more divided from the group as a whole like he said and backed up by the upstairs neighbor.

For me Noah makes most sense as a perpetrator but James' account appears to offer him a defense.

His story seems contrived to offer a way out for himself, Micah and Noah.

When do you believe the assault was committed and by who - testimony suggests at least two individuals were involved?

I definitely believe it took place while James was out. Not just because of James' version of events but to me it makes more sense. He had gone to the neighbor with the girl in his arms, he was all upset and crying (this can be confirmed on the 911 call) it seems more like reactive shock. Shock and reaction to coming home and finding his sister had been raped.


I would prefer not to speculate on who committed the assault, especially on a public forum. I think it's more important getting the facts straight as to who did not commit the assault, - James.

However having said that, if I were to put my money anywhere; I would look in the direction of the boy (15 years old) who was left to look after her. The admission of the reticle thermometer incident when he was alone with the girl really rings the alarm bells to me. Also, he had done a runner by the time James returned.
Also if I were to look anywhere else as well, - how about the younger of the two brothers ? He had gone into the room (where the girl was sleeping) both alone and with the above 15 y/o boy. James also heard a spanking sound.
According to James' account, this boy was not there (no one was except James' brother and sister) when he arrived back though he did show up only minutes later,- he can't have been far away...


Mr Holder you state in your post previous to your last:

The evidence suggest James and two younger cohorts brutally beat and raped a toddler girl. This is the conclusion of the investigating officers and a jury of his peers. James was afforded an adequate defense and had the opportunity to relate a credible and consistent (with the evidence) account of what happened that evening at any time up to the point he was convicted.

I really need to know what exactly this evidence you mention is ? They had no evidence that actually linked him to the assault. And there's enough to suggest his story is true. The trial was delayed due to the prosecution's lack of evidence, even the judge said towards the end of the trial "the state failed to meet its burden of proof on two counts out of four".

The excuse that he washed the girl therefore washing away the DNA evidence is mediocre at best. Or, what does that say about the investigation ?
As per James' story, the girl was hardly bathed, not washed. Why ? Because she was still covered when she was examined.  There would have been plenty of traces of anything left to provide DNA. Semen ? There still would have been plenty traceable on/in her. What about in the bath tub ? Down the drain ? Clothes ? Hands ? Underwear ?
What about blood splatter on James from the injuries ? Or even any blood patterns on him inconsistent with him holding her afterwards ?
If they really wanted to get DNA evidence, they would have. We know these guys are cleaver and can get samples in the most extreme situations. As I read, (but can't find, somebody find for me !) they DID find DNA, it just didn't match to James.


The problems I see with James being guilty is that; There is no actual evidence to suggest or prove he is the perpetrator and there is absolutely no reason what so ever for him to do this. (the same can't be said for some of the other boys though)

No proof, no motive. Why was he found guilty then ?


The consequences of this conviction for James are beyond comprehension. It is a sentence for this CHILD to almost certain death,- in a far worse manner than the lethal injection.

One would think that with sending this child to such a terrible fate, you would want to be damn sure he was guilty. With all irrefutable evidence to back it up.

James' case ? Nope.

[William Holder]

Tweet

The behaviour of Adam Mathews is extremely troubling - he's as guilty as anyone that evening by his own admission.

The problem with James' story are his actions following his return to the residence. His sister is bleeding profusely in three areas, she is screaming and crying. The only action warranted here is to seek assistance and be as forthcoming as possible when authorities arrive.

As I indicated previously, it is not credible that he feared the reaction of his parents to his having others over - certainly not ahead of the visible trauma to his sister.

Evidence.
The drawing retreived from James' bedroom indicates some animosity / unnatural thoughts towards his sister. He was placed at the scene of the crime. He lied to authorities and appears to have attempted to scrub away evidence or at the least act in an irregular way to the visible injuries and obvious trauma to his sister. His little brother has implicated him in the crime.

No one can corroborate his assertion that he left Adam in charge of his siblings, together with not a single witness to support his character means he has little credibility.

The best one can say about James is that he failed his sister that evening - the worst that can be said is that he is a sadistic individual who led a beating and gang rape of his toddler sister. I think the jury felt that in this case there was very little to differentiate between one act and the other. With no aliby and no credibility it was difficult for the jury and disinterested observers like myself to find any other way. A belief in James here is a matter of faith - while there is little forensic evidence against him, there is nothing to support his story either.

If the jury knew Noah was convicted together with James having offered a defense to Noah - a jury would certainly find this to be damning. Did the jury know Noah was convicted?

Finally, if we assume Adam (or Adam and Micah) was responsible - you realize there is even less evidence against him (them), other than his own admissions - would you then just as forcefully advocate for him? And if so where does this end?

It's clear James was complicit - he may or may not have actively participated. His story is self serving and aspects of it are not credible. Until and unless James makes a fuller admission it won't be possible to know the extent of his involvement. I am sure James is familiar with the term evidence and dna and that he has watched crime dramas on tv. How he chose to use this knowledge has determined his future - he chose to bath his traumatized sister instead of immediately seeking assistance. If his story is to be believed that error in judgement was his undoing.

[Melissa]

Tweet

William,
Adam testified he was left alone with the baby and Hunter. It's on record. What are you talking about it can't be corroborated? HE admitted it.

http://wandervogeldiary.wordpress.com/2012/06/20/trial-recap-day-1/