Moab, Utah (The Weekly Vice) -- Arielle Beck, a 28-year-old former teacher's assistant and softball coach at a Utah school will face a new trial in a case involving the forcible sex abuse of a 14 year old girl who committed suicide after testifying in Beck's first trial.
Beck was previously convicted in 2003 of sexually assaulting and stalking a 14 year old student who attended the school she was employed by, however the case was overturned by the Utah court of appeals. The trial judge threw out the conviction upon the belief that the jury may have been influenced by the number of questions posed to Beck at the trial as well as the manner the questions were asked.
Yes, you read that right. The judge believed the conviction should be thrown out because he considered the number of questions asked during cross examination to be "prolonged and adversarial."
Prosecutors appealed that decision, however the judge's verdict to throw out the conviction was upheld by the state supreme court, who gave prosecutors the option of retrying the case.
Prosecutors have decided to pursue that second trial opportunity, despite not having the victim available for new testimony.
Kelly Sowell, the victim in the case, attempted suicide twice before giving her testimony in the first trial and finally succeeded afterwords by hanging herself to death in her bedroom closet after Beck's conviction.
Now Beck will face a new trial in the case, which has been scheduled for April 20, 2009.
Background:
Beck and the victim met in the summer of 2002 when Beck coached softball at the school the victim attended. Beck then became a teacher's assistant for the victim's English class, where she allegedly started grooming the girl for a sexual affair. This activity allegedly included sending her love letters and explicit emails.
Beck now faces charges that include one felony count of sodomy and three felony counts of forcible sexual abuse. She also faces misdemeanor charges of child abuse, supplying alcohol to a minor and allowing an unlicensed minor to drive a motor vehicle.
The Weekly Vice Opinion:
For those who continually disregard the seriousness of teacher / student sex cases, this case is a reminder of why this kind of activity is outlawed. Even when a student appears fine on the outside, there are significant statistics that show a large number of the students involved are not fine on the inside.
We hear from the students themselves from time to time - and the emails are consistent for the most part. The victims who email us do not regularly express feelings of hate or revenge. Most of the time they hate the fact that they had to go to authorities. They are embarrassed, hurt, and often wish they could just wake up the next day and learn that the whole thing was just a bad nightmare.
Danny Vice
www.theweeklyvice.com
Join The Discussion. Click Comment Link Below And Fire AwayReady For More Seriously Messed Up News? Join Us On Facebook!
Posts
39 comments:
Wow. How utterly sad for all involved. Has Kelly's family thought about a wrongful death suit after the 2nd trial if she is convicted? I have no doubt Beck will face her justice again, as why would the State they are living in even consider taking it back to trial unless they had plenty of evidence they are sure about?
What happened here? She was found guilty, then all charges were dropped. I guess that is the American way. Appeal, appeal, appeal. I had to sit on a jury, where a man was accused of this crime. And,.oh he was so guilty. And we found him guilty. And yep, he appealed, because they found out the judge knew intimately one of the jurors, and it was obviouse the judge did not like this guy. He won the appeal and our state did not reprosecute. So, go Utah go! Kelly may you rest in peace and know that justice will be served here, and if not, I would rather face justice down here, than from Him. I know, innocent until proven guilty. Been there, done that.
What questions did the judge ask?
Could a wrongful death suit, or civil suit be an option here if she is found guilty again?
Robo, a civil suit could be filed even if she was not found guilty. Remember OJ Simpson? He was sued by the Goldman family after being found not guilty.
Pepper, it was wasn't so much the questions, but the fact that the judge asked questions that the attorney supposedly should have been asking. The appeals court thought that demonstrated the appearance of impartiality.
This is by far the most depressing case on this site. My heart goes out to the victim. I hope she has found her peace in the afterlife.
Hi Mom,
These stories don't depress me, they make me angry. Most of these female teachers get off with no jail time or very limited jail time.
More and more, teachers are either trying to have sex with kids, provide them condoms, push the gay agenda on them or just outright rape them.
I really don't think I want to know how things will be in these schools a generation from now.
The smile on Becks face speaks in volumes. More like a smirk.
I went into this court case with an open mind. Knowing that innocent people are sometimes accused wrongly. But, in this case, after hearing the evidence the State had and listening to the testimony of Kelly, Kelly's friends, the school principal, the teachers, Kelly's parents, and numerous others, in lieu of the Defense's witness's there was no doubt which side was telling the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Kelly was a victim here by someone she should have been able to trust, her coach and her teacher.
I came, upon this accidentally. I was searching for some infor. on Glen Beck and seen the name I once seen while visting in Moab, Utah. It was a Saturday and I noticed alot of people in and out of the local courthouse. Wondering what was going on, beings as it was a Saturday. After discovering it was a trial of a local teacher, being a teacher myself I decided to look in. Ms. Beck herself was testifying. I recall one of the questions the judge asked more than others. He asked Ms. Beck, "So, you say the only e-mails you ever sent to Kelly was just forwards, the same ones you sen to all your friends, etc.?" Ms. Beck replied "yes sir". Then he asked her, "Well then can you explain to the court why none of these forwards were on Kelly's computer, but the incriminating e-mails were?" She simply replied, "thats a mystery to me to sir". Well, I don't know much about computers really, but I remember thinking that would be impossible. But, I am one that beleives in our justice system, even though sometimes it fails. Remember, there are alot of great and wonderful teachers also. I beleive this woman was also the alleged vicims coach if I recall. Well, back to Glen Beck search.
Mr. Vice, upon reading this i was wondering? where this woman was found guilty on 3 counts orignally and then appealed it and won the rights to a new trial, right? What if she is found guilty a 2nd time around of even one count, and according to some other accounts i have read she most likely won't even spend one more day of prison time most likely, BUT could the State of Utah then press purjury charges? or would they? Ummmm,,,,and are they going to use the testimony of the child from the first trial? This should prove somewhat interesting and bring up alot of questions.
I know my sister is gone, I know that that Ms Beck is guilty! I ask myself everyday what can be gained in this lose lose situation, and no matter how sad I feel about the loss of my sister the gain is always justice, justice that this woman wont hurt another family another little girl, and maybe the next teacher, coach or any grown person will read this story and do everything in there power not hurt our children. To think twice about what is right and what is wrong, maybe just maybe my sisters life wont have been in vain if one child is saved by bringing Beck to Justice. She laughs and smiles all around town like she got away with something, I want that smile and that smirk on the sex offenders list where it belongs, where the world can see that the rape of a child is a game to her. Where ever she goes the neighbors shield there children from her, where everyone knows her name only because she hurt my little sister. That would be justice, and I will be there to see her convicted again. My sister had many true friends and they will be there to, there to see that there friend did what she had to, to keep there kids, and there kids kids safe. Thanks to sites like this, this story will be heard, no matter the outcome. God bless..
Tracy H,
I've received hundreds of emails from victims and the many family members who surround tragedies like this.
I have to say, this is the first time I've almost been brought to tears by a single post on this site since it's inception a year ago.
I know this is her sister, because I hear the love in your words. I hear the heartache in them too.
And never mind stating I was almost brought to tears... because I think I've passed that.
Thank you Tracy so MUCH for speaking up. For placing a piece of your heart on this page.
I can honestly tell you...I will not forget what you've written. Through all the chatter that goes on here - your words ring as true as I can honestly say I've heard.
Thank you for sharing them with the thousands who will read them.
You have no idea how many souls you'll touch. How many stone hearts you'll melt. And how many tears will be shed. This I promise.
God Bless YOU Tracy. You will be in my prayers.
I hope this one rots in hell also.
10Lindsey Says:
November 18th, 2008 at 1:10 pm
I was kellys best friend. I was with kelly and the teacher and i was the one who seen everything that they did. I was the one who drove the teachers vehicel while kelly and her were in the back seat messing around. I am so mad cuz the teacher doesnt want to tell the truth. After the trial my parents moved me out of Moab cuz kids at school were threating me and i just felt like killing myself. Kelly stayed there and she killed herself. I miss her so much. Now the teacher is getting another trial and i have to testify again and i am going to make sure she goes right back to prison where she belongs. Because of her my friend is dead. The teacher just thought this was all a game or something but its not and she has hurt alot of people. Kelly i love u and i wish u were here. I am sorry that i left u in Moab by yourself. I should of never left u. Rest in Peace. I LOVE U!
wow way sad.
Oh come on, the letting a unlicensed minor drive a vehicle charge is just beating a dead horse.
Josh are you stupid or what? This was not about letting an unlicensed driver drive a car. Don't be pathetic. I read that and thought, "what! is he talking about?" Dude get real.
Reader, I think josh was referring to another article I posted around the same. Father asks son to take him for a beer run.
Coloradojustice/Bob
Ok,,,I am at a loss for words on this one. Let me think here. A judge can ask to many questions in his court room? Learn something new everyday. Wow...a sad unfortunate tradgedy. A child dies, from ? the action's (alleged now, right?) of teacher here. And all the State of Utah can say, "tisk tisk, Judge, you asked her too many questions, while she testified under oath in our judicial system, and if Mr. Edwards above is correct and honest in what got asked in court, I say bravo! your Honorable Judge for asking...may the family find justice on April 20th. If justice is due. (I have no doubt it is from what I have read, I know we are guilty of this in society, but hey folks I think this one speaks for itself. RIP little Kelly.)
Umm, me again. Just wondering, maybe my mistake. While reading other sights on this particular story, which brought me here in the first place as I read on the Weekly Advice lately, I note differences in the stories. This one says, the judge threw out the conviction? assuming by the jury? Where the other sights says, that the trial judge asked "prosecutorial" questions of Beck while on the witness stand during the first trial, and the case first went before the Utah Court of Appeals, which in turn went to the Utah Supreme Court, both courts giving Ms. Beck the right to a new trial, based on that the trial judge asked questions he/she shouldn't have asked? questions that the higher courts feel that the prosecution should have asked therefore giving the jury the impression the judge was biased against Beck. (according to other sites). Just wondering the differences? and hope I am not out of line. Well, Pittsburg won the Super Bowl, going to go celebrate! now.
Bob,
The teacher was convicted, but the defense appealed the conviction on grounds that the judge asked too many questions, instead of letting the prosecutor ask them.
The defense won the appeal and the conviction was overturned.
The prosecutor then had to file motion to try the case again.
I have no idea how other sites are wording that whole process, however since family members and friends have visited this site a number of times, I think we have the basics of the story laid out pretty accurately.
You are always welcome to ask questions.. eventually someone who was in court that day will be by to explain further if needed. =)
Oh, ok. I must have just interpeted them wrong, each while saying the same think, but my taking it different. Thanks for clearing that one up with me. I was wondering and interested. Hey, you do a good job here exposing alot of bad folks here! Thank you.
I may be out of line here. But, here goes anyway. I am friends with the family now. And I tell you, talk about a tragedy, that one can only sit and say "I'm shocked as all hell". The whole community of Moab, Utah is saddened and in shock, utterly! This family has been through more than I could ever live with. And yes, Dan, I can tell you that is Kelly's sister up above. I went to the latest funeral of Kelly's brother just a few days ago. Tracie gets up as speaker for the eulogy and says, "My family has gone through alot of tradgedy's, and we have not learned to grieve any less, just alot quieter now." This family lost in the past 3 years, Kelli, Kevin, Mike, and now Robert, (Cleve, he went by.) And grandpa. Sometime in March, Kelli's mom and dad were traveling over here to Colorado from Utah when a freak accident killed Mike, and left Sherrie and their other daughter severely injured. Then not too long afters, their grandpa died and Sherrie watched (Sherrie is Kelli's mom) and a month later, Sherries son Cleve died unexpectedly in SLC, Utah???? under wried circumstances.......5 deaths in 3 years in one family of young people, with exception of grandpa? Wow, tradgedy city in Moab.
I'm almost of the opinion that this site, and the many comments that are added to it should almost become required reading for teachers.
This problem is so widespread, it's obvious our society really doesn't understand how tragic these cases an become. Or how many lives become effected in the process.
It's changed forever my view of these kinds of cases, regardless the age of the student. And to think, teacher's unions oppose the prosecution of teachers who are involved in this garbage.
grand jucntion,
Sorry for the anoymous report up above. I just got caught up in the moment, and frankly, had tears welling up in my eyes for the family I have become to know somewhat...I was wondering what happened on April 14th. So thought I would check myself without asking them. And didn't find no news at all. SO, checked with a close family friend and she reported that this teacher did not go to trial on the 14th of April. But rather it was cancelled and is up for a final pretrial on June 12th. Don't know if the recent tradgedy on May 31, of their son Robert Cleve Sowell will effect that or not? But, apparently beck has to plea or not, and if she doesn't it goes to trial on October 26th. So just giving an upday. Sorry about the anymous up above....DAN is it true what Bree above about the teachers union?!
It's Horrible that students can't be protected from people like this. What makes it worse for them is they get harrassed by other kids. If they wouldn't have been so cruel this poor girl might of had a chance to put this behind her & hopefully had a future. Instead of helping her they made her life hell. They should be held accountable for how they treated her. I hope that what this Horrible woman did & those rotten kids did comes back & bites them good & I hope it Hurts!
Update on this blog. Arielle Beck cowardly pled guilty under the Alford Plea. An Alford Plea is where the person plea's guilty without "admitting guilt", because the State had enough evidence to convict at trial. The family naturally is upset over this, as is alot of town people. The State had an overwhelming amount of evidence to get a conviction at trial, right? Then why would anyone, not just Arielle, be allowed to plea under the Alford Plea? The family said in a statement to newspaper that they would like to see the Alford Plea Law changed, that it not be allowed when it comes to crimes against children! But folks guilty is guilty. This woman is still going around town and telling Kelly's family that she is going to soon be getting her PHD in psycology that she majored in before her crimes against Kelly. For her guilty plea she received 5 years probation, has to register on the Utah Sex Offenders list, take a course in Sex Offenders treatment program (is she going to be her own teacher, with her PhD?)and pay the State back almost $8000.00)for counseling that her victim received. RIP Kelly Rae Sowell
I am from Moab to. Nice small little town. But like any towns, large and small it has its secrets. One thing I do know, if Ms. Beck is going to using her PHD, she will have to do it somewhere else besides here. Word around towns this small travel fast.
Hi, I don't know for sure how this works. But will give it a try. I was wanting to explain a few things. Even though this is an old post, it is still very fresh in my mind. For I live it everyday. I am Kelly's mom. How I miss her...it's been 5 years since she died, and yet it seems like yesterday in so many ways. The thing that saddens me, in addition of losing Kelly, is that Arielle Beck was responsible for Kelly's death. We just recently had another case here in Moab where a coach/teacher was accused of having a relationship with a 2 girls. He also was a popular teacher/coach with the kids. The 2 cases are so similar in many ways. Yet so very different as to the outcome. He pled quilty from the very beginning. He didn't plea cowardly under the Alford Plea, he accepted full responsibility. He did not put the young girls and their family through a trial, let alone appeal it the Utah Court of Appeals and to the Utah Supreme Court. HE was wrong in what he did. However, did the right thing as far as the law goes. Unlike Arielle Beck, who still to this day, will not admit guilt....Kelly only wanted to be a child again, and a few member's of Arielle's family and her friends made life a living hell for Kelly here in Moab. She couldn't take it any longer. If Arielle would have done the right thing from the beginning, first never doing to Kelly what she did, and then second, admitting guilt instead of putting Kelly through the emotional abuse before and after the trial, Kelly would still be here. She would be a young adult perhaps with a child of her own. Arielle, was not put on probation as stated, she has not done anything towards her plea. She runs around town without a care in the world, and if she did get her PHD, it didn't do her any good. She is working at Maverik Convenience Store. She shows no remorse whatsoever in what happened to Kelly, or to our family. I only wished I knew how to get the laws changed that ANYONE that harms a child in any way, and is found guilty, or pleas because the State has sufficient evidence to convict them if it goes to trial, they should never ever be allowed to plea under the Alford Plea.....never. Oh, how I wish I could get that law changed to that effect. One day, maybe I can let Kelly RIP, but there are just so many issues still not closed in her death. That I cannot forget. I just don't have the resources nor knowledge of how to change laws, and don't understand why Arielle was suppose to be put on probation for 5 years, and she is not? And why, the same thing happened again in our school district? Thanks for the comments in support of our family. It's been a long hard 8 yrs. I miss you Kelly.....so much. Love Mom....
Hi, I don't know for sure how this works. But will give it a try. I was wanting to explain a few things. Even though this is an old post, it is still very fresh in my mind. For I live it everyday. I am Kelly's mom. How I miss her...it's been 5 years since she died, and yet it seems like yesterday in so many ways. The thing that saddens me, in addition of losing Kelly, is that Arielle Beck was responsible for Kelly's death. We just recently had another case here in Moab where a coach/teacher was accused of having a relationship with a 2 girls. He also was a popular teacher/coach with the kids. The 2 cases are so similar in many ways. Yet so very different as to the outcome. He pled quilty from the very beginning. He didn't plea cowardly under the Alford Plea, he accepted full responsibility. He did not put the young girls and their family through a trial, let alone appeal it the Utah Court of Appeals and to the Utah Supreme Court. HE was wrong in what he did. However, did the right thing as far as the law goes. Unlike Arielle Beck, who still to this day, will not admit guilt....Kelly only wanted to be a child again, and a few member's of Arielle's family and her friends made life a living hell for Kelly here in Moab. She couldn't take it any longer. If Arielle would have done the right thing from the beginning, first never doing to Kelly what she did, and then second, admitting guilt instead of putting Kelly through the emotional abuse before and after the trial, Kelly would still be here. She would be a young adult perhaps with a child of her own. Arielle, was not put on probation as stated, she has not done anything towards her plea. She runs around town without a care in the world, and if she did get her PHD, it didn't do her any good. She is working at Maverik Convenience Store. She shows no remorse whatsoever in what happened to Kelly, or to our family. I only wished I knew how to get the laws changed that ANYONE that harms a child in any way, and is found guilty, or pleas because the State has sufficient evidence to convict them if it goes to trial, they should never ever be allowed to plea under the Alford Plea.....never. Oh, how I wish I could get that law changed to that effect. One day, maybe I can let Kelly RIP, but there are just so many issues still not closed in her death. That I cannot forget. I just don't have the resources nor knowledge of how to change laws, and don't understand why Arielle was suppose to be put on probation for 5 years, and she is not? And why, the same thing happened again in our school district? Thanks for the comments in support of our family. It's been a long hard 8 yrs. I miss you Kelly.....so much. Love Mom....
For a second, consider only the law, not who did or said what. Ignore guilt or innocence and consider why an appeal might be filed (and won) by the defendant.
In the American legal system, which happens to be the best in the world, the prosecution starts by presenting evidence, including witnesses, explaining its interpretation of the facts as they are presented. The defense similarly presents evidence, including witnesses, and offers its own interpretation of the facts, even the facts presented by the prosecutor.
Both the prosecution and the defense are allowed to question the witnesses, looking for lies. Yes, witnesses tell lies--for both sides. Often, these lies are to protect friends and family for a list of reasons. Witnesses fabricate events and stories to support their version of the "truth." Even accusers/“victims” lie. (Fact: using the term “victim” and not “accuser” assumes the accused is guilty as charged.) It happens in virtually every court every day. Secondly, the defense can present its own interpretation of the facts. In fact, it is their duty. Anything less is malpractice.
The judge has the duty to interpret the law and protect both the defendant's rights and the law—at the same time. It is a balancing act, but the judge is to remain impartial. It is his legal duty. It is also his duty to draw the line when either side of the case crosses the line, violates protocol, or infringes on anyone's rights, etc. It is his duty to act as the third-party. He has the option of asking questions to CLARIFY answers from witnesses or the interpretations offered by attorneys. It is NOT the judge's option to take on the role of either the prosecutor or defender. When a judge goes too far in his questioning, he finds himself either on one side or the other, obviously suggesting to the jury that he believes the defendant is innocent or guilty. This violates his proscribed role and duties. It is WRONG!
The jury is tasked with understanding the facts by accepting or rejecting the interpretations offered by the prosecutor or defense. When witnesses provide contradictory statements, the jury has to determine who is telling the truth and who is not. Sometimes, it boils down to either the accused or the accuser being the liar. In the end, the jury needs to come to a final conclusion about guilt or innocence based on their interpretations of the facts and their decision about which witnesses are telling the truth and which are not. It is never an easy task unless the judge DIRECTS them to ACQUIT or to find the defendant GUILTY, which is called a "directed verdict." The jury should NOT be tasked with disregarding or interpreting the judge's remarks too—because his role is neither to be prosecutor nor defender.
When a judge crosses the line for either defendant or prosecutor, he unduly influences the jury in their deliberations, interpretations, and conclusions, swaying and sometimes guaranteeing the eventual outcome. It is a "given conclusion" that when a judge does this, he "taints" the outcome and the jury's decision is, by definition, NOT a fair one. We are all guaranteed a FAIR trial by the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution, the Bill of Rights.
In this case, the judge virtually guaranteed a GUILTY verdict by the nature and number of his questions. That is NOT in doubt. Thus, the appeal. Thus, the decision.
Part two:
On the other hand, if the defense had presented no witnesses or interpretations of the facts that contradicted a virtually "directed verdict," the judge's influence might be discounted (ignored) by the appellate court. In such event, the appeal would have failed. In fact, it probably would have been denied without being heard. When an appellate court decided to hear an appeal, it is generally a good indication that an appeal is justified.
If the interpretations of the facts were disputed, the witnesses contradictory, or the decision of the jury something other than absolutely certain, the appellate court has no alternative than to overturn the first decision and leave the retrial to the original venue. It is the RIGHT thing to do. (Right and wrong have no place in the law, only legal and illegal, but this discussion is for the public not for lawyers.)
In this case, it is apparent that the facts were in dispute and there was contradictory testimony. The defense did the RIGHT thing by appealing the case. The judge should have been reprimanded for his actions. It would be interesting to know if that happened.
As to the prosecutor, if he perceived that the case could only be won with the judge's undue influence or that the case boiled down to the unsupported testimony of the accuser, it was wise to not retry the case. It would be a waste of time and resources. If, on the other hand, there was indisputable evidence and supporting testimony, the case should have been retried. Note a fact often overlooked by people: it is impossible to prove a negative, i.e. that something NEVER happened. (The defense can prove that something could NOT have happened because of a certain proven fact, but that’s the limit of proving a negative.) It is a different story when it comes to proving something did happen. In other words, the prosecutor has a far easier task than the defense, which has to come up with a plausible interpretation of the facts that contradicts the prosecutor AND to prove which witnesses did not tell the truth.
A high-profile case like this is a prosecutor's dream, an opportunity to establish a reputation, to stand for justice, to protect the innocent, etc., to promote one’s career, to have the opportunity to be hired somewhere than a tourist-trap like Moab, Utah. That it was NOT tried clearly suggests that the prosecutor concluded that the case was not worth retrying, for reasons that only he truly knows. (Obviously, the prosecutor was not worried about the effects of a retrial on the accuser.)
“The Weekly Vice” has taken the side of the accuser, being indignant about the appellate court correcting the totally inappropriate actions taken by the judge. Is “The Weekly Vice” omniscient, knowing more than the courts and having greater wisdom than those with years of practice in court?
After reading the posts and before posting the legal observations above, I contacted the prosecutor's office in Grand County about obtaining a complete copy of the transcript. The cost is high, but was willing to pay it and review it if there was any suggestion of incompetence or impropriety on someone other than the judge's part. (That was documented by the appellate court.)
The Alford Plea (pleading guilty while maintaining one's innocence, similar to nolo contendere) was a joint compromise on the part of both the prosecutor and the accused. The prosecutor does not take the risk of losing the case at retrial (which by some opinions was substantial) and the accused has the opportunity to end her ordeal and to "start over." To some, it's win-win. To others, it's lose-lose.
As an expedient (though shallow) alternative to reviewing the transcript, I was referred to some individuals in Moab. They offered insights into both sides of the case. My conclusion: the facts are not black and white. I will not relate the information I gathered because it is "hearsay" only, but it is clear that the case was NOT "cut and dried" as far as who did what to whom, when, where, and why.
The only facts that are clear are that one girl took her own life, for reasons known ONLY to her, and another girl went to prison because of the improper actions of a judge. She was NOT found guilty in a fair trial before her peers. She did plead guilty (as an expedient compromise) while maintaining her innocence, an oxymoron of the highest order. Two lives were unalterably changed and cannot be undone.
By everyone's definition, both sides of the issue, justice was NOT served.
One final thought, a question really:
Why was the accuser harassed by her schoolmates?
I believe that question is the key to the truth. Find the answer and the apparent black and white of the case becomes...well, let's leave it at that. I'll leave my own conclusions off this site because I only contributed to clear up legal perspectives of this case.
To Anoymous above..
In answer to you question, even though this is an old post, and you will probably never even see it...but as Kelly's mom I will comment. Don't know why really.
But Why was Kelly harassed by her schoolmates? really? seriously? well, they were but a handful of "her schoolmates" and they were friends of the Becks. And a few followers. If you were so into this case, that you even paid for the transcripts...? why didn't you contact anyone from Kelly's family. There was no black and white...there was no white and black. Arielle had every right to appeal and appeal again. No one denies that. And I have no doubt of who you are. But, just as in the case of pleaing under the Alford Plea....if you really feel what you say, then you have a name. Not anonymous. Just sayin.....RIP Kelly. Your right, Justice was not served. Arielle is alive, free to do whatever she wants, whenever she wants. I wish her the best really. Because I know that is what Kelly would have wanted. But there is a justice far beyond what any judge here on earth can impose or not. Yes, mistakes were made during the first trial, for sure. But, we will never know how the second one would have turned out, now do we? Just sayin...she pled "Guilty"....enough said. It wasn't a lose/lose situation. Her family still has their Arielle. I wish I still had my Kelly. But you wouldn't know anything about that would you?
And even IF a judge makes mistakes during a trial...that does not mean the person is innocent? or gulity? Again, we will never know will we, because Arielle pled Guilty...under the Alford Plea. I still 100% believe that anyone that is accused of harming a child, in anyway, should give up the right to plea using the Alford. God, how I wished I could change that. If they harm a child, then they should have to prove their innocence in a court of law, or just out and out say they are gulity. No Alford Plea...I know if I didn't do it. I wouldn't plea under no Alford Plea, they would have to go to the full length of the law to prove it.
Why would someone post on here a bunch of leagal mumbo Jumbo, So that the record stands straight This woman PLED GUILTY on the second round, she damed herself with letters written to Kelly while in PRISON, so Mr. AnoyMOUSE A.K.A. predator Lawyer. Hope you got paid by the hour for typing your nonsense. Look her up on Utahsexoffenders.net she isnt smiling any more and not for another ten years. Justice was served cold. Thank you and have a nice life defending Saitan.
Post a Comment
****Please Read Before Posting****
The fastest way to post is to type your comment, click "NAME", enter any screen name you wish, and then click "PUBLISH".
Anonymous posts are discouraged, because it makes a conversation difficult to follow. No one can tell who's talking to who. Be somebody. Pick a name - any name. This way your fellow bloggers know who you are when you return to comment again. Thank you!