Mr Holder,
I have been unwilling to waste my time in replying to your posts. However after some thought, I think it is the right thing to do.
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.
That is a matter of opinion. In my opinion I do not see that as a problem with James' story at all. I have explained this before so we are running around in circles. However, again;
The action warranted by James that evening was to tent to his family. He did. If I was in that situation with the mind of a adolescent child I believe I would have done the same. Because YOU wouldn't have done so, does not it any way make him guilty of raping his sister.
Remember, James first tended to his brother and had the older brother tend to his sister who reported she was bleeding. James asked for her to be bathed, it wasn't until THEN that is was found she had actually been raped. Then with the girl in his arms he went straight to find help as he did not have a phone. For all we know, this whole time-fame from return to the room to seeking help could have been only a few minutes or maybe even seconds.
Yes, he should have been forthcoming with authorities. He just went along with what the older brother said (who knows, maybe he was protecting something ? Younger brother perhaps ?) and wasn't until later that night that he told his story. For goodness sake, remember, he is a child in a stressful, confusing, unimaginable situation. Children say and do stupid things, especially in the moment. Its a scientific fact.
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.
Again, in your opinion which, again, does not make him guilty. Again, HE IS A CHILD, WITH THE MIND OF A CHILD. Without understanding the enormity of the situation, being that age and anticipating the beating of a lifetime from the stepfather for leaving his kids and this happening whilst James was supposed to be babysitting,- I may well have done the same.
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 Mr Holder, It does not place him at the scene of the crime at all. That was proven with the content of the drawing verses the professional testimony of Dr Larkin with regard to how the girl received her injuries.
It doesn't indicate anything. He was a bored incarcerated boy with a lot on his mind.
Initially lying to the authorities is NOT evidence that he committed the crime.
He did not scrub away evidence. The girl was hardly bathed as proven by the state she was in when help arrived.
The girl is by no means the only source of DNA evidence. There was the bath tub, clothes, towel and the BED LINEN where she was raped. Nothing that was collected matched James.
Having said that, (re the girl) I'm sure you are aware that when rape victims are examined for DNA they also have to collect samples of DNA for all the people that the the victim recently had consensual sex with. This is to eliminate them as suspects. I therefore find it hard to believe that there would be nothing left after a very short bathing. Remember, it only takes a few cells to get a positive ID.
His little brother was 6 when he was recently videoed (reason for delay for the trial as the prosecution had nothing, so the got that) and was not allowed to be cross examined. He could have said anything. Anyway I have doubts at his memory from that 18 months or however long ago it was that it happened. Goodness, he wasn't even in the room when it happened !
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.
Adam admitted to the court. That further gives his story more credibility.
His character ? You're joking right ?
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.
That statement can be reversed quicker than it was written. There is nothing to suggest or support your far fetched theories. They are nothing more than a dream. Just because this child initially went along with a lie should not mean all his credibility is lost. They way I read it, the known evidence supports his story increasing his credibility.
It's not a matter of faith. There was NO, ZERO, NONE WHAT SO EVER forensic evidence against him and plenty to support his story. There is just nothing to support your changing stories.
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?
We don't know that there was less evidence against them, apart from an admission,- which is more than the evidence against James.
Advocating for Adam is not the point. The point is James. However if Adam did fully admit to the crime, I do not believe that as a child he should be also thrown to the wolves being tried as an adult. The same as every other nation on this planet except USA south Sudan and Somalia. He needs help, not a practical death sentence.
It ends with saving the suffering and life of a child, - James.
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.
Again, Your opinion. James has made his admission, told his story. It's just just not the story that you want to hear because it doesn't match any of your far fetched and changing theories.
You fail to realize the situation at the time and his possible lack of judgment may be attributed to the fact he is a child in an overwhelming situation. You also fail to realize that it wasn't until the very short bathing took place that the extent of the injuries was realized and immediate help was sought.
That DNA he washed away, intentionally or neglectfully, could have exonerated him. Being forthright with the police would have deprived the prosecution of a key piece of evidence - his false testimony.
As I said above, the DNA was not washed away. It's a certain impossibility.
We all agree (I'm sure James does too) he should have been forthright with police. Hands down. He did later that night though.
I believe he is not a sadist. He does appear to be a sociopath. Whether he was present at the time of the crime or not his actions subsequent are cold and calculating. His primary concern seemingly the reaction others might have towards him. I am better knowing that at least some minimum justice is being served. I am not devoid of compassion for James but he does need to be separated from society for a period of time and a careful evaluation is warranted before he is released.
How can you possibly accuse him of being a sociopath when you have nothing what so ever to support those claims ?
Those close to him and know him best claim impeccable character incapable of committing this crime.
James has been separated from society for the last two years. His model behavior, success, special privilege and belief of his innocence from those holding him further solidifies his harmless, loving character.
However, it must be noted that your sadistic, far fetched, desperate baseless theories being used in your continued justification for the impending violence, raping and certain death that this child is about to suffer, - is of concern to me.
I came across new (to me) information that forces me to retract the accusation of sadist or sociopath. Per the document linked to below, the Scheulin boys were taking percocet. I assume James also was using percocet.
It still takes a certain personality to twist right from wrong to the extent that happened in that residence. You would have had to form in your mind some reason why that toddler merited the treatment she received - that she had somehow wronged you or posed a threat. I can't speak to what was in the mind of the Scheulin boys but James may have harbored some natural resentment towards his sister.
Please provide facts on this case to support this new theory. The dating of the document is prior to the time of the incident. Those who are around him and know James best verify that he does not have this type of personality. It has always been said that he has always very much loved his sister dearly.
Also of interesting reading are the documents on that site about the brothers sexual abuse. Though a shame these are posted to full view public. Not very fair on them in my opinion.
We can't excuse criminal activity because a person is on drugs, whether thse are legal drugs like alcohol or the abuse of prescription drugs or illicit drugs. There is some link to drugs in over 80% of all crime.
While drugs can in some part account for the behaviour that evening it doesn't offer a defense to these boys.
I can agree with that paragraph.
what doesn't make any sense at all is to suggest that James is 100% innocent. If there were a few bad apples that is by definition a gang. Two of the perpetrators (Micah and Noah) are free or soon will be. James was no more railroaded than Noah was. Noah stands convicted - you don't seem to have a problem with this.
Well it's a shame it doesn't make any sense to you. But can you believe that James is 100% guilty of solely beating and raping his sister ? With out a shred of doubt ? Because that's what he has been convicted for.
The brothers are free to live the rest of their lives. James has an unimaginable fate waiting for him. There's quite a difference.
These two things cannot be explained away.
1. The bathing cannot be explained away when it was clear the child required immediate medical attention. She was screaming and crying. She was bleeding profusely in three areas. Her face was distorted and swollen. Her hair was red. His reaction does not show concern for his sisters wellbeing. Only concern about how the situation would be percieved.
2. He fabricated a story rather than be straightforward with the authorities when they arrived. His sister had just been victimized - he should have been anxious to assist in the investigation to apprehend those that would inflict such cruelty upon her. His only concern was how he might be percieved.
Of course they can.
1) As I have already explained with the minimal bathing and as per the story from James: he was tending to his brother while the older of the brothers Tended and initially bathed the girl where the extent of her injuries was discovered.
2) He's a child in an unimaginable situation with a great deal going through his head and probably still under the influence of some drugs (as admitted by him).
This is not defense of his actions, rather some explanation.
I would add that it is impossible to explain away the drawing found in his room and the statement by his little brother. His father didn't fabricate that drawing and although small children can be coerced, they are easily broken and in general tend to be much more honest than older kids or adults.
I think you may be confusing the drawing found in his cell and the alleged drawing found by his stepfather ?
I would love to know how you (with the certainty of your statement) know that the step father did not fabricate the drawing found in his room ?
You do realize what kind of piece of work this man is ? As explained by both James AND his mother, also his actions during the trial....
That drawing allegedly found by the stepfather was only found NOW, in time for the trial. Not when police investigated the scene nor in any time in the last two years. AND, by the man who is no longer living there, has been divorced !! That wasn't the only new piece of convenience he pulled out now for the trial as well...
COME ON !!! TELL ME YOU'RE NOT SERIOUS ?!?!?!
Of course small children can be coerced, and yes easily broken. Was the defense given this opportunity to ask the boy ? NO !
As I said before, he could be told anything and it was a fair time ago for such a young mind to remember in detail. It was most likely he wasn't in the same room anyway.
Accusing cops and judges of framing people is not a defense. Our system of laws and those that enforce them is the only thing standing between civilization and anarchy. Fabricating a story about misconduct by these officials is no different than what James and his cohorts did and just as unconvincing.
Of course because the legal system in the United States is so perfect right ? Every single person who's been convicted and locked up have been guilty as charged and thats the end of that. None have ever been exonerated or found innocent later right ? (apart from the 2000 odd in the last 20 years...)
Nice little piece of conflict of interest. Judge and Prosecutor... Look like great friends
http://wandervogeldiary.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/carter-l-and-nicholls-r.jpgOK - I can understand a little of the confusion here.
I'm working off the story James puts forth in June of 2011 - this would be the third and last version of events.
However. some of you are working from the second story James fabricated.
The only fabrication going on here Sir is YOU fabricating the story that James fabricated a second story.
That account is NOT James' story. It was written by the author of that blog very early in his interest in the case. It was obviously based of 3rd had information from a variety of sources, NOT JAMES. Ever heard of Chinese whispers ?
He states in his post about that letter from James (providing his story) that it is clarification of events, from James.
I would have thought that would be obvious to all. Obviously not.
Me reading between the lines.
The second story likely most reflects what happened that night - a gang of boys beating and raping a 23 month old little girl. James either sat by and / or endorsed the rape or he actively took part in the brutal assault. I suspect the latter - it is when he took his turn on his sister that the x-box was stolen. As they clean up the girl and themselves the rest of the boys split with the money and the gun. James and Noah go out after the weapon and the cash and leave Micah in charge of the younger siblings. Upon their return - everyone panicks about the condition of the toddler and a flurry of calls go out to 911.
I'm sorry, that is not you reading between the lines.
That is YET ANOTHER fabricated, baseless, far fetched feral piece of imagination bearing not one piece of credibility, evidence or even anything what so ever to support it.
You have made a choice to believe James, but this belief is a matter of faith - it is not based on any exculpatory evidence and none of his stories adequately mesh with the circumstances of that evening.
Unbelievable. It's because his story DOES adequately mesh with the circumstances of that evening that he has so many supporters. There is lots of evidence (or supporting accounts) to support his story and his story explains a lot.
There is a clear lack of inculpatory evidence to prove otherwise.
All disinterested parties have come to the same conclusion.
Rubbish Sir, RUBBISH ! Who ? You ? I would believe that the majority of those who actually go to do research into this case learn of his situation and support James ! That is why his support base is growing !
The haters are basing off one page single sided poorly researched media reports at face value. This is understandable to a degree.
If you, James or anyone can produce a convincing story and timeline that puts James away from the scene - I would like to hear it and would carefully consider it.
There is a convincing story, the only story. You just choose not to believe it.
This is the travesty - with support that most criminal defendents don't get, he had an oppoortunity up to the point he was convicted, almost 2 years after the crime, to produce an honest and full accounting of what happened that evening. As I said in my first post - he would have been well served to tell that story however belatedly and at the risk of being harshly cross examined.
He has produced an honest and full accounting of what happened that evening. That is why he has so much support.
I believe it is because this full accounting does not match up with any one of your different changing fantasies that you choose not to believe it.
James' story was never told to the jury. He wasn't even afforded the opportunity to speak.
His primary concern that evening was his x-box and his new gun, Since that evening his primary concern has been to place himself away from the scene. Once Noah was convicted, he had no choice but to tailor his story again - this time placing the already convicted Noah (and Micah) away from the scene as well.
Yet another baseless theory.
James is very troubled - he is very conniving - he is clearly complicit. I appreciate your good nature and faith in James, but unfortunately James does not or he would be more forthcoming.
That last paragraph makes me so wild I will not respond to in the full manner for fear of saying something I might regret. All I will say is; do some more f**king research.
For Christ's sake Mr Holder, have a heart. You have obviously dived into this with the assumption and mindset that a loving teenage brother committed those terrible acts against his sister. You are desperately making up changing, baseless theories in order to justify the cruel terrible fate which lies ahead for this child. That in it self is scary.
The fact remains; there is not one piece of indisputable evidence that proves this boy raped his sister. Nor is there any slightly plausible motive.
Thats it. I've had enough.
