WI: Man who had sex in park with 13-year-old girl to serve 90 days in jail

Source: yahoo.com 9/5/22

Sep. 5—CHIPPEWA FALLS — A 21-year-old Fairchild man accused of having sex with a 13-year-old girl at a park in Chippewa Falls in July 2021 will serve 90 days in jail.

Dylan J. ____ pleaded no contest Friday in Chippewa County Court to an amended felony count of third-degree sexual assault. He was originally charged with three counts of second-degree sexual assault of a child under age 16.

Along with the jail sentence, Judge Steve Gibbs ordered _____ to complete a sex offender treatment course, serve three years of probation, and have no contact with the victim. _____ also will have to register as a sex offender and pay a $518 fine. He also must submit a DNA sample.

_____ declined to address the court before being sentenced.

Chippewa County District Attorney Wade Newell told Gibbs he agreed with the recommended sentence.

“This recommendation is based on the nature and the background of what occurred,” Newell told Gibbs. “I believe it is fair based on the totality of the circumstances.”

Read the full article

 

Related posts

Subscribe
Notify of

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...

 

  1. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  2. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  3. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t and a**
  4. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Use person-first language.
  5. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  6. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  7. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  8. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  9. We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address that are not personally identifiable.
  10. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  11. Please do not post in all Caps.
  12. If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links. Posts that include a URL may take considerably longer to be approved.
  13. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  14. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  15. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people.  Do not use your real name.
  16. Please do not solicit funds
  17. No discussions about weapons
  18. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), Person Forced to Register (PFR) or any others, the first time you use it in a thread, please expand it for new people to better understand.
  19. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  20. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  21. We no longer post articles about arrests or accusations, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest or accusation article we will not approve your comment.
  22. If addressing another commenter, please address them by exactly their full display name, do not modify their name. 
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  
 

21 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

I’m not proud of what the young man has done. (Yes, he is young, and it probably is his first offense!)

On the other hand… again…. that registration requirement… ***Sighs and smacks shaken head, as always***

One victim but multiple charges daam that sucks
He’s young, I hope his family stands by his side for the next 20 years, or he some how manganese to buy a house, so he doesn’t have to live like a fugitive for the rest of his life

Let’s be real here. 13 year olds know what they’re doing when it comes to sex at least some of the time. They’ve got hormones, and they’ve got high sex drives. Hence, the sentence. I’m certain the judge is well aware of these facts.

I didn’t touch or have sex with anyone and I am a Tier 3 ! Outrageous isn’t it? Makes Zero sense. I lost 2 jobs just because im on the registry, I thought it wasn’t punishment. I thought it was like a Costco membership. 😡🤪

“This recommendation is based on the nature and the background of what occurred,” Newell told Gibbs. “I believe it is fair based on the totality of the circumstances.”

In other words, Either the DA or the judge is a friend or associate of the defendant’s dad. Or he can make a pretty significant campaign contribution.

Last edited 1 year ago by Dustin

You know what is sad, in the same state I served time with a man that had sex with a 12 year old when he was 13 and got sentenced 13 in 12 out. This guy has to know somebody to get that sentence.

During my legal career, I recall reading a California appellate court decision in which similar circumstances existed. The girl/victim, in that case, was just 11 (eleven) years of age. In the written unanimous opinion of the appellate court, each and every judge agreed (after viewing photographs of the ‘victim’) that the young lady looked as if she was at least 18 years of age, and that she displayed physical characteristics and an apparent maturity that was not consistent with that of a typical 11-year-old girl. They also agreed that the defendant (an adult male) had no awareness of the girl’s age, and was ‘duped’ by the “sexual adventuresome and aggressiveness” exhibited by the young lady, but nevertheless, was guilty according to the law. (The law is often ‘an ass’).

I’m speculating that similar circumstances existed in this case.

This makes me sick. And the part that makes me sick is not so much what he did, but the fact that the same cesspool state of Wisconsin has sentenced 100s of people to a mandatory minimum 3 years in prison for simply viewing a picture of someone performing an act on minor, often times much older than the victim described in this article!

I so badly wanted to comment on what everybody is saying here using science,biology, history, good research and spiritual reasoning to remind myself that i am supposed have a moral compass to make the right decisions but i wont because for most of the Americas none of that exists anymore!