Published 04/16/10

A Crofton teenager was sentenced Thursday to life in prison with all but 50 years suspended for luring a 7-year-old girl off a playground last year and raping her in his bedroom.

Courtesy photo David Benjamin Raszewski

The final sentence was twice as long as state sentencing guidelines recommended for David Benjamin Raszewski, who was 17 and a junior at South River High School at the time of the March 20, 2009, attack.

Circuit Court Judge William C. Mulford II said that while no sentence will restore the victim’s innocence, an extended sentence will prevent Raszewski, now 18, from hurting any other children for the foreseeable future.

“Part of me fears she was just the first,” the judge said Thursday in the county courthouse in Annapolis.

Members of the victim’s family declined to comment about the sentence and Mark Raszewski, David’s father, left the courthouse without speaking to reporters.

Assistant State’s Attorney Sandra Howell said she was “pleased” with the outcome of the case, even though she went into court asking Mulford to give Raszewski a life sentence with no time suspended.

She said the final sentence showed Mulford recognized the seriousness of the case and the “very high probability” that Raszewski would do it again if allowed back onto the streets.

“That simply can’t be permitted,” she said, calling it “every parent’s worst nightmare.”

Defense attorney James Crawford Jr. said he was “disappointed” by the sentence and was considering an appeal. He said the sentence will do little more than “warehouse” his client, who he felt should have been incarcerated for about 10 years and then allowed to get help from a mental health facility.

Raszewski pleaded guilty Dec. 8 to one count of first-degree rape as part of a plea agreement with the state. In exchange for the plea, prosecutors agreed to drop 17 related charges.

According to prosecutors, Raszewski walked up to the victim at about 3:30 p.m. while she played on a swing set behind his townhouse on Granite Court. The girl was alone while her baby sitter took her little brother to a nearby home to use the bathroom.

Howell said Raszewski asked the girl to help him move something and the girl followed him to his home.

Inside the house, Raszewski pushed her into his room and assaulted her in several different ways. After about five or 10 minutes, he stopped, gave her a few dollars and let her go.

Howell said the victim gave police a detailed statement and that Raszewski eventually confessed to detectives.

Crawford argued in September that Raszewski, who turned 17 three days before the attack, should be tried in juvenile court.

Psychologists paid by both the state and the defense, as well as a social worker from the state Department of Juvenile Services, testified at the time that Raszewski suffers from an autism-spectrum disorder. They said he would be best served in the juvenile system, where he could get intensive counseling and intervention.

Judge Philip T. Caroom ultimately decided that the case should be handled in adult court. In his ruling, he noted the victim’s age, the nature of the crime and pretrial testing that indicated there was a high probability Raszewski would do it again.

If Raszewski had been tried in juvenile court, he could have been held only until his 21st birthday.

The victim’s mother - who covered her ears Thursday as the attorneys recounted some of the more graphic details of the crime - told the court Raszewski has changed her daughter forever.

She recounted how the now 8-year-old girl will occasionally get quiet and tell her she is thinking about “the bad man.” She recalled how she caught her daughter last week looking at a pornographic Web site.

“He has corrupted a poor, innocent child,” she said.

State sentencing guidelines recommended Raszewski serve between 15 and 25 years in prison. The maximum sentence possible was life in prison.

In an odd quirk of state law, however, the final sentence of life with all but 50 years suspended could actually require Raszewski to serve more time in prison than if he had received the maximum sentence.

Under the final sentence, Raszewski will be eligible for parole when he is 42 - 25 years after the date of the offense.

Under a life sentence, he would have been eligible for probation when he is 32 - 15 years after the offense.

The final sentence, however, guarantees Raszewski will eventually be released in 30 to 50 years - depending on how many “good time” and other credits he earns behind bars.

By SCOTT DAUGHERTY, Staff Writer

Published 04/06/10

A county judge yesterday ordered a former office manager of a Glen Burnie home-restoration business to serve the next 10 weekends in a county jail on charges she stole $70,000 from her former employer.

Circuit Court Judge Paul A. Hackner said he was lenient on Rachel Gorzo, 32, of Glen Burnie, because she was the “sole custodian” and apparent “sole provider” for her 18-month-old son.

He offered to let Gorzo serve a consecutive 10-day sentence at the Ordnance Road Correctional Center in Glen Burnie, but she chose the longer, more convenient sentence in order to better take care of her child.

Joseph Seubott Sr., Gorzo’s former boss at J.R.S. Restoration in Glen Burnie, did not attend yesterday’s hearing and did not return calls for comment.

Gorzo, who walked out of the Annapolis courtroom in tears after learning her fate, declined to comment about the sentence, as did prosecutors. Defense attorney James Crawford called it “fair,” stressing his client just wants to serve her time and start rebuilding her life.

“She is happy it is over with,” he said.

According to prosecutors, Gorzo forged her boss’ signature on more than 80 company checks between Jan. 1, 2007, and April 30, 2008.

Assistant State’s Attorney Michael Cogan said she used the money to pay bills and credit card charges. Some of the checks were sent directly to her dentist and insurance company, he said.

Crawford argued the theft scheme was not so clear-cut. He noted that Gorzo and Seubott were close friends until 2008, that she worked for him for more than five years, and that her sister is married to his son.

The problem, Crawford said, was that Seubott was an “absentee owner.” He said Seubott basically let Gorzo run the business while he dealt with several unspecified “personal issues.” He argued Seubott gave his client permission to write the checks to her insurance company and that it was a “bonus.”

Cogan disputed that Seubott approved any of the checks.

And in the end, Crawford acknowledged, his client “obviously went too far.” He said she now realizes she crossed the “nebulous line” that existed in the company between what she thought she was allowed to do and what she actually was allowed to do.

As part of a plea agreement with the state, Gorzo entered an Alford plea yesterday to one count of perpetrating a felony theft scheme. In exchange for the plea, prosecutors dropped several related charges and agreed to not seek a specific sentence at sentencing.

An Alford plea allows a defendant to maintain her innocence while admitting that prosecutors have enough evidence to convict her. It carries all the consequences of a guilty plea.

While she did not legally admit any wrongdoing, Gorzo did acknowledge that she “took advantage” of her relationship with Seubott.

“I do believe I have learned my lesson,” she told the court.

Hackner sentenced Gorzo to five years in prison, but suspended all but 20 days to be served on weekends. He also ordered Gorzo to pay $70,000 in restitution - an amount prosecutors and defense attorneys negotiated prior to sentencing.

The sentence came 10 days after Hackner exercised similar lenience against another mother charged with stealing thousands.

On March 26 he sentenced Stacy Taylor, 36, of Gambrills, to five years in prison, but suspended the entire sentence because she has three children and no one at home to watch them if she was incarcerated.

Taylor was convicted of stealing a large portion of her children’s $100,000 inheritance.

 Teen could face life in prison for the rape of 7-year-old girl

By E.B. FURGURSON III, Staff Writer

Published 09/15/09

A 17-year-old boy accused of raping a young Crofton girl will stand trial in adult court, Circuit Court Judge Phillip T. Caroom ruled yesterday.

Courtesy photo
David Benjamin Raszewski, 17, is accused of raping a young Crofton girl and will stand trial in adult court.

David Benjamin Raszewski, a junior at South River High School, was charged as an adult with first-degree rape after a March 20 attack on a 7-year-old girl he allegedly lured into his Crofton home.

If convicted in adult court, Raszewski could face life in prison.

The defendant confessed to the crime shortly after the attack. He told police he approached the girl on a playground after her baby-sitter took her brother to the bathroom. After he took her to his home he took her upstairs into his bedroom, where he assaulted her.

The incident occurred three days after his 17th birthday. Because of his age, Raszewski’s attorneys filed a motion to move the case into the juvenile court system.

Psychologists hired by both the defense and prosecution recommended that Raszewski be tried in the juvenile court system, as did a social worker from the state Department of Juvenile Services.

They said the defendant suffers from some form of autism, would be best served by an environment in which he could get intensive counseling and intervention, and would likely respond well to such therapy.

But the defendant’s mental state and his amenability to treatment are only two of the factors to be weighed under Maryland law when considering transfer to juvenile jurisdiction.

Caroom noted that the other three factors - the victim’s age, the nature of the crime and concern for public safety - outweighed the psychologists’ recommendation that Raszewski’s case be handled in juvenile court.

“This is a heinous and a shocking crime,” Caroom said.

He noted that pretrial testing indicated there was a high probability of a repeat offense, although psychologists listed a number of factors that could mitigate those odds.

The decision weighed heavily on Caroom, who said he wished there were some other way to handle the case rather than the choices he faced under the law.

He could have returned the case to juvenile court, where the defendant could get the necessary counseling but would be released at 21. Caroom’s other choice was to have the defendant prosecuted in the adult system, in which, if convicted, Raszewski would be incarcerated and kept from repeating the crime, but would likely have to wait years to get the counseling.

In adult prison, there are 1,700 inmates on a counseling waiting list. In the juvenile system, a residential counseling facility, New Directions, had already agreed to take the defendant.

“The court has to weigh what is in the best interest of the child and society,” Caroom said.

He said ideally there would be a hybrid of the adult and juvenile systems, in which Raszewski could get the treatment available in the juvenile system until he turned 21, followed by probation and mandatory counseling.

But no such choice exists under state law.

“I am not happy about it,” Caroom said before rendering his decision to deny the juvenile motion.

Defense attorney James Crawford, who took nearly 30 minutes to make a case for his client to be tried under juvenile jurisdiction, said there could be an appeal of the judge’s decision.

“I have to talk to his parents, and we’ll see,” he said. That decision will have to be made quickly, as trial is scheduled to start Sept. 29.

Raszewski’s father declined comment on the decision, but the victim’s family was glad to see the case remain in adult court.

“He won’t be around to do any others harm,” the victim’s mother said.

The family hoped their daughter’s horrible trauma will help prevent future crimes of this nature.

“This is about all children,” the victim’s aunt said. “Not just about us or her. Maybe this happened so we can shine a light” and keep this from happening.

YOUR COMMENTS

Detective says 17-year-old admitted attack on girl, 7, in Crofton neighborhood

By Andrea F. Siegel Baltimore Sun reporter

September 9, 2009

Prosecutors and defense attorneys argued Tuesday over whether a 17-year-old who police say admitted raping a 7-year-old in his Crofton neighborhood March 20 should be tried as a juvenile or an adult.

The distinction is crucial for David B. Raszewski of the 1700 block of Granite Court, who was charged as an adult with second-degree rape, assault and related charges. If convicted as a juvenile, he could be held for treatment until he turns 21. If convicted as an adult, he could be sentenced to life in prison.

Citing public safety, Anne Arundel County prosecutors want him tried as an adult. Two psychologists and a county social worker have said his best chance to obtain treatment is through juvenile court.

Jennifer Beard of the Department of Juvenile Services told Anne Arundel Circuit Judge Philip T. Caroom on Tuesday that the teen could receive intensive therapy in a locked youth facility on the grounds of the former Hickey School.

“There is certainly a possibility that he may not cooperate with those services,” said Assistant State’s Attorney Sandra Howell.

“I don’t think that is going to happen,” Beard replied.

Last week, two psychologists - one hired by the defense and one court-appointed - said the youth has an unspecified autism disorder and recommended that the case be heard in juvenile court. The teen has received help in school for learning disabilities, said his lawyer, James Crawford Jr.

Caroom is expected to decide next week whether the case will be tried in juvenile or adult court.

The youth initially told Anne Arundel Detective David Wood that he had not gone outside on the afternoon of March 20. Wood said that when he asked the teen what he would think if the 7-year-old said he had assaulted her, he replied that “he would think she had a really good imagination.”

But Wood testified that the teen soon admitted to the attack. As Wood described it, a few of the girl’s relatives left the room.

The girl was at a playground with her brother and their sitter. The sitter took the boy to the bathroom, and the teen told police he asked the girl to help him move furniture. Inside the house, the teen twice prevented the girl from running away and assaulted her, Wood said. “He realized what he was doing was wrong and stopped.” He gave her $2 and let her leave, Wood said.

The detective said the youth told him: “I practically destroyed her for a long time.”

Copyright © 2009, The Baltimore Sun

Crofton teen who admitted raping

girl, 7, to be tried as adult

Judge says sending defendant, 17, to juvenile system would be too risky, wishes he had other choices

By Andrea F. Siegel Baltimore Sun reporter

September 15, 2009

A 17-year-old boy who told police that he raped a 7-year-old girl in his Crofton neighborhood will be tried as an adult - though the judge who made that decision Monday said he wished he had another option.

Anne Arundel County Circuit Judge Philip T. Caroom said David B. Raszewski would be better helped by intensive treatment until the age of 21 in a locked juvenile facility, which has tailored programs for youths like him, than in a prison where programs are less specialized and geared toward older offenders.

But the judge said the public safety risks of sending the teenager through the juvenile system, from which he would be released without monitoring at the age of 21 even if he did not complete treatment, were too great. He said David admitted that he knew it was wrong to have lured the youngster into his home from a playground and sexually assaulted her after her babysitter took her brother to the bathroom, but he did it anyway.

“From society’s point of view, it would be unforgivable for a second crime to occur when the courts … had an opportunity to prevent it,” Caroom said.

He said he wished Maryland offered a tiered system that would start with juvenile treatment, followed by aspects of adult court once the offender is pushed out of the juvenile system at age 21.

David will face 19 charges at an adult court trial scheduled for Sept. 29. The most serious is first-degree rape, for which the maximum punishment is life in prison.

Defense lawyer James E. Crawford Jr. was considering an appeal.

“We have three people here, three experts, telling us that [a youth facility] is the best place for David to be,” Crawford said. He said New Directions, on the grounds of the former Hickey School, also could address his client’s autism disorder and learning disabilities, and that David could be victimized in an adult prison.

But Assistant State’s Attorney Sandra F. Howell said “it was the only decision to make about these difficult events.”

The victim’s family, some of whom left the courtroom as the March 20 crime was detailed, appeared relieved.

“This is about all kids, all children. Hopefully, this will never ever have to happen to another child,” her aunt said.

Copyright © 2009, The Baltimore Sun

17 years old knows better…he should be punished as an adult for destroying that poor childs innocence. ANYONE that hurts a child should be castrated!!! I hope that poor little girl can learn to deal with and get over that traumatic experience…it will affect her for the rest of her life. He deserves what he gets.

kab1018 (09/16/2009, 10:28 AM )

Why is this guy now the victim? Stop worrying about his well-being. Put him in the worst prison and hope that he gets raped. Then let him tell his story to the media. Statistics have shown that there is a very high probability that he will commit another similar crime in the future. Hopefullly, his experiences will be a deterrent to some other pervert.

dilogdp (09/16/2009, 6:27 AM )

Maryland needs to toughen up on crime. In Texas 17 yrs old is considered an adult in criminal cases regardless of severity.

MK482 (09/16/2009, 12:47 AM )

Seventeen years old is old enough to know right from wrong. If he were eighteen he would go away to prison for life. Ihope he “enjoys” whatever time they give him.

davidwayneosedach (09/15/2009, 7:14 PM )

Cut it off at the base and sew it in his mouth. Then put him in general pop at supermax they can take care of thingas the right way. Deserves no ones simpathy.

MJH5150 (09/15/2009, 5:37 PM )

Maybe he’ll come into contact with a samurai sword.

Baltesquire (09/15/2009, 1:46 PM )

I’m glad the 17 year old is going to be tried as an adult. Do the crime do the time. He should not have been allow to be tried as a juvenile in the first place.Some bleeding heart judges let these criminals off much too easy. Men who rape innocent little kids should be castrated.

Tweety50 (09/15/2009, 12:56 PM )

Who cares what this judge “wishes”. Just apply the law..with concern for the child victim, not the rapist animal.

tdmarylandz (09/15/2009, 12:13 PM )

I hope he needs soap on a rope!

Monkeysmasher43 (09/15/2009, 11:58 AM )

This punk should be hung from the nearest tree! I’ll get the rope! LOL

RT
www.web-privacy.de.tc

woodomomo (09/15/2009, 10:06 AM )

“He said New Directions, on the grounds of the former Hickey School, also could address his client’s autism disorder and learning disabilities, and that David could be victimized in an adult prison.” WTF? What an assbackwards world.

elyh (09/15/2009, 9:53 AM )

Why do we always feel sorry for the perpetrator? That is why we have so many of them in the first place. He needs to go to “big boy” prison as it specifically states that he knew he was wrong, but did it anyway. He will know just how she felt soon enough.

krs0117 (09/15/2009, 8:55 AM )

Why don’t we send him to the Middle East and let them determine his punishment?

blaqbullet (09/15/2009, 8:41 AM )

Good. Let’s see how “bad” he is once his sorry behind is sentenced to serve time in an adult prison. It will only be then that he’ll realize the horror of what he put that poor, innocent child through. It would be even better to send him to a prison out of state.

Cassie723 (09/15/2009, 8:00 AM )

 

Maryland Counseling Centers, Inc.

20 Courthouse Square

Suite 202

Rockville, MD    20850

301/424-6955   ·   1-800-622-4544

1517 W. Patrick Street, B-6

Frederick, MD   21702

301/662-0855   ·   1-800-622-0668

Mount Airy Law Center

1512 Ridgeside Drive

Mount Airy, MD   21771

301/831-7800

——————————————————————————————

http://maryland-adaa.org/ka/index.cfm

The Alcohol and Drug Abuse Administration (ADAA) is the single state agency responsible for the provision, coordination, and regulation of the statewide network of publically funded substance abuse prevention, intervention and treatment services. The ADAA serves as the initial point of contact for regulatory interpretation for all Maryland Department of Health and Mental Hygiene (DHMH) prevention and certified treatment programs and provides technical assistance to publically funded entities.  ADAA also serves as a resource for information about new trends in services and provides a Resource Directory for finding substance abuse services locally. “Frequently Asked Questions” offers information for consumers and providers on resources related to the ADAA.   

 ——————————————————————————————————-

http://www.addictionsearch.com/treatment/MD/maryland.html http://alcoholism.about.com/od/tx_md/Maryland_Treatment_Centers.htm-This site has a good breakdown of several centers http://www.theagapecenter.com/Treatment-Centers/Maryland.htm 

http://www.drug-alcohol-rehabs.org/maryland-rehab-centers.html

http://www.choosehelp.com/maryland

http://www.edrugrehab.com/drug-rehab-centers-treatment/maryland

http://www.co.ho.md.us/Health/HealthMain/AddictionsServices/AddictionsServices_Main.htm

http://www.rightturnmd.com/

JAMES E. CRAWFORD JR.  represents clients facing all types of sex crime charges, including:

• Sexual assault and rape
• Aggravated sexual assault
• Child molestation
• Indecency with a child
• Indecent exposure
• Online solicitation of a minor
• Possession of Child Porn

Are you  under investigation for a rape, sexual assault, or a child sex crime? Contact us immediately for a free confidential consultation.

Fighting For the Rights and Freedom of Those Accused

At the Law Office of JAMES E. CRAWFORD JR. & ASSOCIATES, we focus our practice on protecting the rights of our clients to give them every opportunity to be successful. As an experienced sexual assault and child sex offense lawyer, JAMES E. CRAWFORD JR.  has successfully defended many clients facing these serious charges. In some cases, we have even stopped the State or Federal Government’s investigation, resulting in no charges being filed. In other cases, we have obtained mitigated charges and reduced penalties, and in still other cases, we have won the cases themselves via jury trials.

These cases are treated differently and a conviction carries long sentences and life-long registration. You need an attorney that is motivated to help you. Unfortunately, many people feel that a person accused of a sex crime does not deserve a good defense. If the person is responsible, some attorneys feel that he or she always deserves to go to prison.

Maryland sex offense lawyer James E Crawford Jr., knows that the state/Federal Government must  prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt, and in sex cases, the state/Feds often has a case resting on one person’s word against another’s.

Dedicated to Your Defense

Unfortunately, many times people confess to committing sex crimes such as rape, sexual assault or child abuse. Even in cases where the confession may not be admissible at trial, an experienced lawyer has his work cut out for him keep his client from going to prison. If you hire attorney James E Crawford Jr., he will fight to help you avoid lifetime  registration as a sex offender and avoid a prison sentence. James Crawford Jr.  has handled many  thousands of  criminal cases. He has defended clients against many different kinds of sex offenses in courts all over the State of Maryland.

With a Skilled Attorney on Your Side, You May Avoid Criminal Charges

From the very beginning, defense lawyer   James E Crawford Jr examines the evidence against you and provides thorough investigation to uncover the truth. Our goal is to make sure that the prosecutor or grand jury hears the truth and the consistent evidence of your innocence.

If you have been wrongfully accused - either by mistake or by a person who wants to hurt you - Jim  will often have you take a lie detector test.(Not in every case). Because of the value of this test, if you pass, the prosecution may decide not to pursue charges at all. Also, our private investigator will meet with witnesses and your accuser, if possible, to uncover any inconsistencies or evidence of malice in the accusation.

Continued Defense throughout Your Case

If our careful investigation does not result in dismissed charges at this point, we will continue to collect all evidence favorable to our client and work to suppress any evidence that was part of an illegal search - all to convince a grand jury of the truth. A prosecutor may let this special jury decide whether there is enough evidence to charge our client.

Cross-Examination of Child Witnesses

Attorney James E Crawford Jr. believes that in order to cross examine a child witness, the attorney needs to find out as much about that witness as possible. Normally most lawyers try and ask leading questions that they know the answers to. Unlike an adult, child witnesses are unpredictable and this technique may not work as well. James E Crawford Jr also believes that this technique is overrated in general. In these types of cases, Jim believes that it is important to have a discussion with a child witness. After all, the jurors are especially critical if an attorney tries to scream at a child who says they were a victim. So rule one with child witnesses is to go slow and be friendly. If you go slow and are friendly then the child may end up giving you valuable information during their testimony.

It is always best to find out as much about the child as possible. Knowing what kind of activities the child likes may soften the child up and also shows the jury that you are not a bad person. Also, by finding out more information about the child one can sometimes catch discrepancies in their videos or discrepancies in the offense report.

It also important to understand the family history. An attorney needs to try and understand what the child gets in trouble for. Normally, a child lies for the same reason that an adult lies. Children lie to get out of trouble or perhaps to get attention.

Often times, when you ask the child whether they remember this or that, the child will say they do not remember. One of the primary defenses in these types of cases is that the parents or Social Services asked leading questions and drilled these allegations into the child’ mind. If the attorney asks leading questions then it is difficult to tell the jury that the questions posed to the child by her parents or by Social Services were inappropriate. The key in cross-examining the child is to get as much good information from them as possible without alienating the jury.

The first thing an attorney should do in preparing to cross-examine a child witness is to obtain as many records on them as possible. Normally, this would include medical records, school records, and CPS records. Many attorneys assume that the offense report which the state has in its possession contains all of the allegations. Once you obtain the CPS records there are often times multiple allegations. Some of these reports show that when the child was first interviewed she did not disclose any allegations of sexual abuse. Obviously, it is best to try and interview the child or the child’s parents personally, but most of the time these witnesses are not willing to talk.

If the child is very young, a defense attorney can challenge his or her competency to testify. Then the court will have to have a competency hearing to determine whether or not the child can testify. The child must be intelligent enough to respond to the questions which are asked. Normally, this means that the child must know the difference between the truth and a lie.

If you think you are under investigation for sexual assault, child pornography or rape, don’t hesitate. Talk immediately with a defense lawyer who can fight the accusations. For a free confidential consultation, please call defense attorney James Crawford Jr.

We know that being accused of a sex crime can be embarrassing and that being convicted is far worse than embarrassing. For a free confidential consultation, please contact us at 443 709 9999 or after hours at 443 8291446.

It’s Not What You Think

The advertisement may read, “Masseuse”, “Personal Escort”, or “Call Girl”, but it most likely should read, “Prostitute for Hire!” Regardless of whether you are providing sex in exchange for money or receiving sex in exchange for payment, you are participating in a criminal offense punishable by California law! If you are found guilty of prostitution in Maryland , you could face stiff penalties and end up with a criminal record.

In the Maryland cities, law enforcement agencies have been making numerous prostitution arrests using any number of undercover methods, including:

• Sting Operations - Wearing provocative clothing and posing as prostitutes, police officers use this roadside method to lure would-be customers off the street and into the bedroom, only to be arrested for prostitution.
• Prostitution Ring Breakups - Using the reverse tactic from sting operations, police officers pose as customers seeking to find sex for hire. Once inside the supposed massage parlors or with the personal escort, the police will make arrests upon determining the falsehood of the organization.
• Sex Online - Websites galore offer services for companionship as a cover up for prostitution. Acting as potential customers for these Internet-based sites, law enforcement agencies are able to distinguish the legal from the illegal and make prostitution arrests accordingly. In Los Angeles, law enforcement is especially targeting online personal profile ads, such as those seen on Craig’s List.org. With increasing Internet usage, sex-oriented websites are under close scrutiny for suspicious illegal sexual activities.

Who Gets Arrested
In Maryland, both the prostitute and the “John” are aggressively prosecuted for prostitution and solicitation. Innocent citizens with no criminal history can find themselves accused and arrested of one of these crimes simply by being at the wrong place at the wrong time.

PENALTIES
The range of penalties for a Solicitation or Prostitution charge can include:

• Community Service
• County Jail
• Probation
• AIDS Testing
• Fines
• Counseling (court-enforced)
• Embarresment
• Loss of employment for those with licenses or government / security clearances
• Jail Enhancements: Additional jail time for defendants with prior related criminal charges

Sex Matters
Prostitution charges apply to individuals of either gender, regardless of whether the sexual acts are performed by heterosexuals or homosexuals. However, the majority of Maryland prostitution cases involve female prostitutes with male clients. Illegal in most parts of the country, prostitution, pandering, and solicitation are legal in a handful of states with few condoning licensed houses of prostitution.

In some states, because of overwhelming pressure from the public many prosecutors will stop at nothing to get a conviction. It is important to secure an experienced criminal attorney in preparation for a solid defense.

PROSTITUTION DEFENSE
There are many defenses available to the crimes of prostitution, solicitation, pandering, and loitering. Each case is different and defenses to these crimes depend on what type of evidence is available. The prosecutor must prove at least one the following elements existed to successfully obtain a prostitution conviction:

• Solicit (strongly urge or entice) for an act of prostitution
• Agree to engage in an act of prostitution
• Engage in an act of prostitution

The prosecution will attempt to prove there was an agreement to engage in an act of prostitution. This is usually achieved by means of a recording device during conversations between an undercover cop and the accused. If a record of the conversation cannot be produced, the agreement may be difficult to prove. If the accused has no money on them, the prosecution may have a difficult time proving the specific intent to engage in an act of prostitution.

Your first line of defense is to contact a skilled Maryland criminal attorney right away. Your lawyer will evaluate the evidence and witnesses, question the appropriate persons, and work with you on building your case. The criminal defense attorneys at James E Crawford Jr. & Associates will act immediately to preserve any evidence favorable to the defense.

CONTACT AN EXPERIENCED CRIMINAL ATTORNEY
The Maryland solicitation and prostitution defense lawyers at the law office of James E Crawford Jr. & Associates  provide criminal defense for those individuals accused of solicitation, prostitution, and other sex crimes in all Maryland Counties. If you have been arrested or charged with an act of prostitution or solicitation please contact our office as soon as possible at (443)7099999.

Call us for a FREE CONSULTATION

Two young, enterprising undercover investigative journalists posed as a pimp and a prostitute and sought the help of ACORN’s Baltimore office to set up a brothel.

They told ACORN employees that 13 underage girls from El Salvador were waiting offshore and ACORN was only too happy to help them figure out how to launder money, commit tax fraud, and commit who knows how many other crimes.

Officials with the controversial community organizing group ACORN were secretly videotaped offering to assist two individuals posing as a pimp and a prostitute, encouraging them to lie to the Internal Revenue Service and providing guidance on how to claim underage girls from South America as dependents.

The videotape was made public Thursday on BigGovernment.com, a political blog launched by Andrew Breitbart as a companion site to his BigHollywood.breitbart.com blog.

In the videotape, made on July 24, James O’Keefe, a 25-year-old independent filmmaker, posed as a pimp with a 20-year-old woman named “Kenya” who posed as a prostitute while visiting ACORN’s office in Baltimore. The couple told ACORN staffers they wanted to secure housing where the woman could continue to maintain a prostitution business.

On the videotape, “Kenya” can be seen telling an ACORN staffer that she earns roughly $8,000 a month. The ACORN employee then suggests to “Kenya” that ACORN could submit a tax return for 2008 showing that she made $9,600 for the entire year — instead of $96,000 — and that ACORN would charge “Kenya” $50 instead of the usual $150 fee for preparing her taxes.ACORN offers tax preparation and benefits application services free of charge during tax season; it charges nominal fees during non-tax season.

The ACORN staffer can also be seen suggesting that the prostitute list her occupation as a freelance “performing artist.”

“It’s not dancing, trust me,” the “pimp” says.

“But dancing is considered an art,” the ACORN staffer replies. “[Exotic dancers] usually go under performing artists, or yeah, they usually go under performing arts, which will be what you are — a performing artist.”

The “pimp” later says that he and “Kenya” plan to bring up to 13 “very young” girls from El Salvador to work as prostitutes. Although an ACORN staffer points out their plans are illegal, she also suggests that the girls can be claimed as dependents.

“What if they are going to be making money because they are performing tricks too?” the pimp says.

“If they making money and they are underage, then you shouldn’t be letting anybody know anyway,” the ACORN staffer says, and laughs. “It’s illegal. So I am not hearing this, I am not hearing this. You talk too much. Don’t give up no information you’re not asked.”

The “pimp” then asks ACORN staffers to “promise” not to discriminate against his sex worker because of “who she is and what she does,” according to the audiotape.

“If we don’t have the information, then how are we going to discriminate?” the ACORN staffer replies. “You see what I am saying?”

If the girls are under age 16, the ACORN staffer says on the tape, then they are not legally allowed to work in the state, regardless of what they do.

“So it’s like they don’t even exist?” “Kenya” asks.

“Exactly,” the ACORN staffer replies. “It’s like they don’t even exist.”

The staffer goes on to suggest that as many as three of the underage girls can be listed as dependents at the home, but a “flag” will be raised if as many as 13 are listed.

“You are gonna use three of them,” the staffer says. “They are gonna be under 16, so you is eligible to get child tax credit and additional child tax credit.”

A second ACORN employee can be heard on the audiotape suggesting that the couple join the organization for an annual cost of $120 prior to attending one of its first-time homebuyer seminars, which are underwritten with taxpayer funds.

Later, when the “pimp” asks what would happen if the organization is somehow connected to the scheme, the ACORN staffer replies, “First of all, it’s not gonna damage us because we not gonna know. And with your girls, you tell them, ‘Be careful.’ Train them to keep their mouth shut.”

“These girls are like 14, how can we trust them?” the pimp asks.

“Just be very, very careful,” the ACORN staffer says. “Whatever you do, always keep your eyes in the back of your head.”

If the country has ever produced a government sanctioned ongoing criminal enterprise it is ACORN.

So what happens when a prostitute and a pimp walk into the ACORN office at 16 W. 25th Street in Baltimore and ask for help in renting a brothel for a dozen or so underage El Salvadoran prostitutes and how to evade legal scrutiny?

In these episodes, filmed by Andrew Breitbart’s biggovernment.com you find out that prostitution is “performing arts” under the tax code, that you can claim child tax credit for the underage prostitutes, and the perfect place to launder illegal income is by donating to political candidates along with a lot of other sure fire tax tips your accountant wouldn’t let you in on.

The videos are long but have to be seen to be believed.

  DUI Laws & Info  -   POSTED: 2009/07/17 09:22

The Supreme Court in Washington state on Thursday unanimously reinstated a $14 million award to a family who sued a tavern and a bartender after one of the bar’s customers drove away from the establishment and collided with their car, leaving a 7-year-old-boy a paraplegic.
Under state law, bartenders who serve visibly intoxicated customers are liable for damages to potential victims. At question was the type of evidence needed to prove “negligent overservice.”

Most states have so-called “dram shop” laws that can make taverns or bartenders — and in some states, even social hosts — liable for damages if they serve intoxicated customers who leave the premises and harm themselves or others.

Washington state’s justices noted that a forensic consultant found that the bar patron — Hawkeye Kinkaid — likely drank the equivalent of either 21 12-ounce beers or 30 ounces of 80-proof alcohol, and probably had a blood alcohol content of 0.32 at the time of the collision. The legal threshold in Washington state is 0.08.

Kinkaid was drinking at the Bellingham Moose Lodge, about 90 miles north of Seattle, just before the April 2000 accident. Kinkaid’s girlfriend, Alexis Chapman, was a bartender at the lodge and served him the night of the accident.

After Kinkaid left the lodge, he drove his car across the center line of a road in nearby Ferndale, striking the car of Bianca Faust of New York City, who was driving with her two children and infant grandchild. Kinkaid was killed and everyone in Faust’s car was injured, including 7-year-old Christopher.

Faust and her family members sued both the lodge and Chapman, and won in Whatcom County Superior Court. The award was later overturned by the state Court of Appeals, which said Faust had to present “specific point-in-time evidence” that Kinkaid seemed drunk when Chapman served him alcohol.

But the Supreme Court disagreed, noting Thursday that in statements to others, Chapman said Kinkaid was too “tipsy” to be driving and that he was so drunk that night that she eventually refused to serve him.

  Breaking Legal News  -   POSTED: 2009/07/20 10:56

U.S. officials should have given a Muslim scholar a chance to show he was no supporter of terrorism before barring him from the country, a federal appeals court ruled Friday.
Tariq Ramadan, a professor sympathetic to Palestinian resistance to Israel, had his U.S. visa revoked in 2004 as he was about to take a tenured teaching job at the University of Notre Dame in Indiana.

His subsequent applications for a new visa were denied on the grounds that he had donated $1,336 to a charity that gave money to Hamas, which has been designated a terrorist organization by the U.S.

The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Friday that it was legal for the government to bar Ramadan from the country, but said it had an obligation to inform him of the concerns about his donations and give him a chance to prove he didn’t know his money would go to Hamas.

The three-judge panel said it was possible that a consular official had, in fact, given him that opportunity, but there was no record of it before the court.

The case will now return to a lower court and the government will be given a chance to figure out more about the exact details of the conversations between Ramadan and the consular staff in Bern, Switzerland that handled his visa application.

Ramadan could also reapply for the visa, the court said.

Jameel Jaffer, the American Civil Liberties Union lawyer who argued Ramadan’s case before the appeals court, said he was hopeful the Obama administration would allow the professor to enter the U.S. without further litigation.

“Over the next few weeks, we’ll be encouraging the administration to take a new look not only at Ramadan’s case but at the cases of other foreign scholars and writers who were excluded by the Bush administration on ideological grounds,” he said.

Jim has been a god send for me. My story starts with three (3) Dwi”s. His caring about me sent me on a trip that I will never forget. April 1 st of this year marked 7 yrs of sobriety. Something that I did not think was in me!  With a balanced attack of  AA, denial  and Right Turn, I have put together something special.

If you want to hear more , contact Jim and he will get a hold of me and  I will  be glad to tell you everything about my story.

Once again,  Jim thanks for everything.

Your buddy, Bill  G.

Jun 14, 7:13 PM —

Article

Maryland attorneys donated more than a million hours of pro bono legal services in 2003.

A new report by the Administrative Office of the Courts also found that 63.7 percent of the state’s full-time lawyers volunteered for pro bono services in 2003.

The term “pro bono” comes from the Latin phrase “pro bono publico,” meaning “for the public good,” and describes legal services donated to those who cannot afford to pay for them.

Maryland attorneys also donated $3.8 million in cash to support legal services in 2003, the report found.

The report, titled “Current Status of Pro Bono Service Among Maryland Lawyers,” actually showed a small decline in pro bono participation from the previous year. Among all 31,575 attorneys in the state, 47.4 percent volunteered for pro bono services in 2003, a decline of less than half a percent. The Administrative Office of the Courts attributed the decline to lawyers moving to other states and a decrease in pro bono service among part-time lawyers.

In 2002, the Maryland Court of Appeals began requiring attorneys in the state to report their pro bono hours to help them assess the availability of volunteer legal services for the poor and direct resources where they are most needed.

Lawyers

“All the extravagance and incompetence of our present Government is due, in the main, to lawyers, and, in part at least, to good ones. They are responsible for nine-tenths of the useless and vicious laws that now clutter the statute-books, and for all the evils that go with the vain attempt to enforce them. Every Federal judge is a lawyer. So are most Congressmen. Every invasion of the plain rights of the citizens has a lawyer behind it. If all lawyers were hanged tomorrow, and their bones sold to a mah jong factory, we’d be freer and safer, and our taxes would be reduced by almost a half.”
–H.L. Mencken (1880-1956), “Breathing Space”, The Baltimore Evening Sun, 1924 Aug 4. Reprinted in A Carnival of Buncombe.
Not that I agree with this statement in Toto, but there may be a grain of truth in there somewhere………….

What I am endeavoring to do with the publication of this message board is to shed some of my experiences and knowledge to individuals who may happen to be in a predicament where the reading of my written word may have some valued effect on their outlook of their case or situation. In other words, I hope it helps some people by comparing their situation with what I have written.

I invite everyone to post their stories, comments, opinions, outlook, and any other characterization of my written words. Lets see what happens……………..
Jim Crawford Jr.

1. (TO POST A COMMENT CLICK ON ” COMMENT BUTTON BELOW-YOU MUST FIRST REGISTER BEFORE A COMMENT CAN BE POSTED–CLICK REGISTRATION ON THE SIDE BAR)