Tuesday, August 02, 2011

Homeless Guy Scores Jailbait

What am I missing here? Tony Barboza reports at LATimes.com.
A registered sex offender living in a tent in Moreno Valley has been arrested on suspicion of having sex with two underage girls, police said Tuesday.

James Russell Watkins, 29, was arrested Saturday after police responded to a tip about a possible sexual assault of two teenage girls near Alessandro Boulevard and the Old 215 Freeway.

He was arrested, essentially, for statutory rape. He's not being charged with forcible rape, or kidnapping, or unlawful detention.
After interviewing Watkins, police said, they determined he had had intercourse with the girls at various times throughout July.

So, not twice, as in once with each girl. Various times.
Watkins, a parolee and registered sex offender who told police he lived in a tent in the area, was booked on charges of unlawful sexual intercourse, child abuse and violation of parole.

Okay. So it sounds like the girls willingly had sex with him. I know, they are too young to consent and I'm in no way defending this creep. But what's up with these girls? I would think they were junkies, but there's nothing about him being charged with supplying them with anything. That implies to me that these girls were willingly visiting this guy for sex.

I remember when one of the reasons young guys wanted a nice car was score with the young women. This guy is a bum. What's going on with these girls? If they wanted sex, they could no doubt get it with guys who aren't homeless. There's something missing here. And what are the odds these girls aren't from homes with good fathers? Fairly high, I'd think.

4 comments:

  1. Anonymous8:04 AM

    From the sound of this article, this guy will not be homeless for long. He will get a roof and meal, excercise, and education, provided by the taxpayer.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Yeah, sometimes I think. "We sure showed him! We gave him a roof, a bed, three hot meals a day, medical care,..."

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous8:41 AM

    They say registered sex offender but they dont list former crime. If he was an actual pedophile that would have been in the headlines for sure.

    The sex offender registry has hundreds of thousands of names on it, but a recent study showed that less than 5% of them were an actual danger to children. Hell, Teenagers get put on the list for sexting these days. ( distributing child pornography )

    Without the crime listed this is about as useful information as being told "youths" are rampaging though Wisconsin.

    That the mainstream media has any credibility at all anymore is a complete mystery to me.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anonymous,

    Thanks.

    You're right... the term "sex offender" is way too vague.

    A rapist who attacks women is a danger to my wife. A pedophile is a danger to my children.

    A man who gets busted hiring a prostitute is not a danger to me or my family. A woman who gets busted for prostitution isn't, either. Nor is a guy who, ten years ago as a 17-year-old, was messing around with a willing 16-year-old stepsister.

    ReplyDelete

I have to approve your comment before it appears. I won't reject your comment for disagreement - I actually welcome disagreement. But I will not allow libelous comments (which is my main reason for requiring approval) and please try to avoid profanities. Thanks!