Germain's bail set at $1,080,000 Comments on Stories, posted by Editor, Pleasanton Weekly Online, on Sep 12, 2008 at 4:00 pm
Judge Hugh Walker set Henry John Germain's bail at $1,080,000 for 15 counts of alleged child molestation today. Five women have brought charges against the 62-year-old Dublin resident, who up until his arrest was tennis director at Castlewood Country Club, and investigators still believe there could be more alleged victims.
Read the full story here Web Link posted Friday, September 12, 2008, 3:35 PM
Posted by anonymous, a resident of the Bordeaux Estates neighborhood, on Sep 12, 2008 at 6:07 pm
definitely not all of the charges are outside of the statute of limitations. from what i've heard, some of the more recent alleged victims are 14 or 15 years old now, making the most recent charges at most just 6 years old.
Posted by Cholo, a resident of Livermore, on Sep 12, 2008 at 6:40 pm
Elizabeth Grossman is the same attorney that defended Tanda Rucker, a basketball coach convicted of molesting girls. If there are any loopholes, she will not only find them, she will use them to dismiss charges.
In this case, it was reported in one article that 50 letters were written in support of the defendant's character. That's probably why she was checking to see how many of Henry's friends were in court and then stating that he has many supporters. When the time comes, she will have 50+letters in support of Henry's good character.
The way I see it is pretty is as pretty does. In my opinion, anybody that sexually abuses kids may have a few good qualities, but the sexual molestation of kids far outweighs the good qualities.
Posted by Anna, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Sep 12, 2008 at 7:42 pm
So what if his attorney can round up a thousand people saying he has good character. People may think someone has good character when all along they have been hiding a dark side. I think that is a flimsy defense on her part. Child molesters have an illness and most likely will repeat the act even though they know it is wrong. Letting him out on bail is a risk to innocent children. It was so brave for those women to come forward and go through all this in order to protect future children from being hurt.
OAKLAND, Calif. -- A former Alameda girls high school basketball coach pleaded no contest to having sex with three girls she met through the sport.
Tanda Rucker, 32, faces up to a year in county jail and five years of probation after pleading to 18 felony charges, which included penetration with a foreign object and oral copulation with minors.
The former Berkeley High School basketball star, who led the school to a state championship in 1991, will also have to register as a convicted sex offender for the rest of her life, which will keep her from coaching youth basketball again, said defense lawyer Elizabeth Grossman.
Rucker had relationships with two of her 16-year-old players at Encinal High School. She also had a relationship with a Richmond girl she met through high school basketball. The incidents occurred between 2000 and 2002, prosecutors said.
The relationships were consensual, Grossman said. She accused the girls of lying to gain financially from lawsuits pending in Alameda County Superior Court.
In the lawsuits, the parents of the former Encinal students called Rucker a "child sexual predator" who "enticed, manipulated and pressured" their daughters into lesbian relationships.
"It's very disappointing to see people reinvent history to finance their future," Grossman said.
Rucker faced accusations of an unlawful sexual relationship from a fourth woman, but prosecutors dropped eight felony counts last month after the woman decided she did not want to cooperate, lawyers said.
Rucker, who lives in Southern California, is free after posting a $680,000 property bond. Sentencing was set for February
Posted by legal eagle, a resident of the Castlewood neighborhood, on Sep 12, 2008 at 8:48 pm
This case falls well within the statute of limitations. any case before 1988 may not. These crimes occurred in the late 1990's and are therefore prosecutable. Defense laywers often file motions to challenge the statutes because they are trying to give their clients their moneys worth. Dont be fooled by these tactics because they are common in the profession. the rule of law stands and judges see right through these tactics. At the end of the day the truth always prevails. i dont think you can compare the Rucker case to this one. Very different circumstances and the victim were over the age of 14. In California molesting children under the age of 14 is a much more serious offense. Molesting the same child on multiple occasions is also a serious enhancement. using force to molest a child is also a serious enhancement. molesting children under the age of 10 calls for an automatic 25 years to life sentence. go to california codes at Web Link and read sections 288 pc onward. the law is well defined and states the sentences for these crimes. section 803f dictates the statute of limitations. here it is: (f) (1) Notwithstanding any other limitation of time described in
this chapter, a criminal complaint may be filed within one year of
the date of a report to a California law enforcement agency by a
person of any age alleging that he or she, while under the age of 18
years, was the victim of a crime described in Section 261, 286, 288,
288a, 288.5, or 289, or Section 289.5, as enacted by Chapter 293 of
the Statutes of 1991 relating to penetration by an unknown object.
(2) This subdivision applies only if all of the following occur:
(A) The limitation period specified in Section 800, 801, or 801.1,
whichever is later, has expired.
(B) The crime involved substantial sexual conduct, as described in
subdivision (b) of Section 1203.066, excluding masturbation that is
(C) There is independent evidence that corroborates the victim's
allegation. If the victim was 21 years of age or older at the time of
the report, the independent evidence shall clearly and convincingly
corroborate the victim's allegation.
(3) No evidence may be used to corroborate the victim's allegation
that otherwise would be inadmissible during trial. Independent
evidence does not include the opinions of mental health
(4) (A) In a criminal investigation involving any of the crimes
listed in paragraph (1) committed against a child, when the
applicable limitations period has not expired, that period shall be
tolled from the time a party initiates litigation challenging a grand
jury subpoena until the end of the litigation, including any
associated writ or appellate proceeding, or until the final
disclosure of evidence to the investigating or prosecuting agency, if
that disclosure is ordered pursuant to the subpoena after the
(B) Nothing in this subdivision affects the definition or
applicability of any evidentiary privilege.
(C) This subdivision shall not apply where a court finds that the
grand jury subpoena was issued or caused to be issued in bad faith.
(g) (1) Notwithstanding any other limitation of time described in
this chapter, a criminal complaint may be filed within one year of
the date on which the identity of the suspect is conclusively
established by DNA testing, if both of the following conditions are
(A) The crime is one that is described in subdivision (c) of
(B) The offense was committed prior to January 1, 2001, and
biological evidence collected in connection with the offense is
analyzed for DNA type no later than January 1, 2004, or the offense
was committed on or after January 1, 2001, and biological evidence
collected in connection with the offense is analyzed for DNA type no
later than two years from the date of the offense.
(2) For purposes of this section, "DNA" means deoxyribonucleic
(h) For any crime, the proof of which depends substantially upon
evidence that was seized under a warrant, but which is unavailable to
the prosecuting authority under the procedures described in People
v. Superior Court (Laff) (2001) 25 Cal.4th 703, People v. Superior
Posted by Maria, a resident of the Deer Oaks/Twelve Oaks neighborhood, on Sep 13, 2008 at 3:24 pm
I think it's odd when people who cannot possibly know if a person has molested a child or not publicly supports them. I know many teachers, coaches, etc. in Pleasanton who I talk with, socialize with, have meetings with, etc. and who seem like very nice, decent people. However, if any one of them was accused of a child molestation, all I could say was that I did not personally see them molest a child. I could not claim that the person was incapable of that crime. The fact that they were pleasant and helpful to me and my child is irrelevant.
Child molestation is common. It is common for child molesters to be pleasant, harmless-seeming individuals when they are not molesting children.
Posted by Donna, a resident of the Birdland neighborhood, on Sep 13, 2008 at 8:06 pm
Letters of support showcasing Henry's sterling character are ridiculous. If a man is a grouchy, rude jerk socially, does that make him more likely to be a child molester, if accused? How a person behaves socially and in the workplace has no bearing whatsoever on the likelihood of being a child molester. Logic and intellectual reasoning tell you this.
Regarding parents not noticing changes in behavior in children being molested, the vast majority of molested children suffer without adult help. That's a fact. Should they notice? Yes. Is it strange that they don't? Yes, but the fact is they don't put two and two together
I have worked at schools where I have seen children who are isolated, sad, never smile, sit alone at lunch, etc. I become concerned when I see this, and I report it to school staff, who never take these behaviors seriously. They say they'll 'keep an eye on it" and they do nothing. Adults are not good at taking care of children, despite propaganda to the contrary.
Some molested children are medicated. Adults don't bother to find out why the child is withdrawn, etc. they just give them pills for depression.
Posted by Hoping it will go away, a resident of another community, on Sep 14, 2008 at 8:31 pm
When the attorney for Henry asked for supporters to stand; it was almost impossible to do--in fact I could not do it. I am a supporter of Henry as he is the only one whose name is published and thus the only one I am aware of that I have a relationship with. I have always found Henry to be such a fine person, a great teacher of tennis and someone that I trusted my children to be with probably unchaperoned. AT the same time, I did not want to stand and say I was a supporter of Henry without all of the facts.
If I knew the girls who have issued claims against Henry, I might have different thoughts--or I might not. It is difficult to support somebody who is given the opportunity to hide behind their words. The truth will come out at some point and then I will be able to see the situation and support those that should be supported.
For the moment, I will support the only person I know who is involved, but I will do it silently not taking the risk of jeapordizing the feeling of the girls that came forward if that is really the truth. I prefer to think the Sheriff's department is being extremely overzealous in this situation because they seem to have failed so miserably in the Scherer double homicide case. Do you all not think it wierd that after weeks and months of silence this weekend had an article on the Scherer murders and the state of the case. Did you ever see anything that took about 10 paragraphs to say nothing. Were is that case going??? Henry looks like easy pickings, but it seems to me they are really working hard to get people to come to the table other than the first two. It is easy to accuse and ruin a persons life, but will they be able to prove it. Really how strong were those acquisations? Who wrote that Henry's confession was basically "I don't know what you are talking about, but I am sorry for how you are feeling" Is that person in the know? If so, Henry may be innocent. Don't judge too early, and I think we need to get Henry out as he just might be innocent but with a totally torn up life.
Posted by Hallelujah, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Sep 14, 2008 at 9:47 pm
Thank you Hoping it will go away!!!!!! Ditto to everything, particulary the sheriffs involvement in this case. Anyone remember the McMartin (?) pre-school case in Southern California, the horrible things that happened to those children, come to find out it was all mass hysteria created by the investigators, the children were never abused....hmm...Innocent until proven guilty - on both sides is so true! I pray that everyone is innocent and this ends quickly for all involved.
Posted by friend, a resident of the Castlewood neighborhood, on Sep 14, 2008 at 10:42 pm
I agree with hoping it will go away. You can't always believe what you hear. Anyone of us can be accused of anything and then we have to defend ourselves and prove we are innocent. What happened to Innocent first. I believe that he is innocent, show me the proof, I was in that court room and listened, there was not any evidence that said he molested, the DA said there was no rape, no touching of any genitals, no contact. Okay, so where is the molestation? Did he hug them when they had a good game? Show us the proof and if he is guilty then he should be punished, if he is not and this is all made up and a person is destroyed then he should have some recourse to get his good name back. But either way, his life is ruined. Why does his name get dragged through the mud and not the name of the accusers, are they not adults now? We should know who they are as well, it is only fair and then we can judge them as well. Why isn't their names listed? Remember we ALL have constitutional rights, we are all innocent until proven guilty, but most people assume the worse and become a lynch mob. That is the saddest of all. Again, if he is guilty he should be punished, but how will all of you feel if he is found innocent, shouldn't rush to opinions.
Posted by Kweb, a resident of another community, on Sep 15, 2008 at 6:10 am
I also agree with "Hoping it will go away"! In my kids school here in Michigan, months ago a parent was just falsly accused an found out to be innocent and is now suing the school and everyone else. However, his life and family's life was cruicified.
Posted by numbers, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Sep 15, 2008 at 7:32 am
my question is where is 4 and 5???
In addition to setting the bail, Walker said that if Germain were bailed out, he must turn over his passport, stay in California, continue to not come in contact with anyone under the age of 18 unless with an adult present, and not come into contact with Jane Does 1, 2, 3, 6 or 7.
Posted by Doo Doo, a resident of the Valley Trails neighborhood, on Sep 15, 2008 at 8:09 am
You guys are still at it......hilarious. Are you still trying to find some small, possible way that Henry might be innocent? Tell me, are you guys serious about this or are you joking now? And for the person that asked why the victims names aren't being released, I'll kindly answer you. The poor girls have been victimized enough by a child molestor. Why would anyone want to give you delusional people access to harass the poor victims any more than they already are. We should be thankful to these strong women who decided to stop living in shame and help the 'future' victims of Pleasanton. I wish you 'Henry people' would understand that our children are safer now, with one less child molestor off the streets.
One last thing for you Henry people. Please try to ignore (for a moment) the fact that you "knew him"... and read the facts of the case and get informed....Then try to think about if it was your daughter...or sister...or cousin...would you feel the same? Or in Pleasanton is it OK as long as its someone elses child...or the molestor has an outstanding overhand serve???
Posted by legal eagle, a resident of the Castlewood neighborhood, on Sep 15, 2008 at 8:30 pm
i am very disappointed in the statements being spread by "Hoping and "Kweb". The facts of this case are public record. go to the courthouse in pleasanton and ask to read the probable cause declaration. This will tell you everything you want to know about the case. You are spreading bad information and your comments are hurtful to the victims. you are talking about other cases that have no bearing on this one. I really think it is easy to turn the police into the bad guys. most of society blames the police for everything. Our sheriff's office is the best agency in the state. i have never met a more dedicated group of people. They do not make up charges and frame people. As for the Scherer murder case. i have total faith it will be solved very soon just like the Henry Germain case has been solved and brought to light. Have you ever done a murder investigation? do you know how hard it is to try a case in court. you have to have all your facts and evidence. you need to watch the statements you make and back them up with facts and not speculation. your statements are hurtful and disrespectful to the victims. yes, the victims in this case are confidential. long ago law makers throughout the country realized that victims refused to come forward because their names were made public. They were victimized again by people, not unlike you, who spread misinformation. today, you do it anonymously with your computer. You are hiding behind your blog name? why don't you post it so we know who you are? why didn't you stand up in court. were you afraid of the ridicule that you may receive. how do you think the victims feel. please be more sensitive and less selfish. this is not law and order, cases don't get solved in an hour. i am so disappointed in people like you who refuse to educate themselves and advocate for child victims.
Posted by parent, a member of the Foothill High School community, on Sep 15, 2008 at 8:56 pm
Maybe if the victims had child predator education as early as kindergarten (like the TV ad where John McCain is ridiculing Obama for supporting), then these girls would have had the knowledge to know what was happening to them was wrong and that they should tell someone. The programs that I have seen in elementary schools are very valuable.
Posted by Marisa, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Sep 15, 2008 at 9:08 pm
I think the Pleasanton police and detectives who handled this case are awesome. They have saved so many children from being traumatized by this disgusting creep. They should be proud of this for the rest of their lives. Talk about doing meaningful work, it doesn't get more meaningful then saving powerless children from an adult predator.
I think it is important to let girls know that it is okay to tell, that keeping it a secret should not be an option. For that, we need to stop having people who, like in this post, sympathize and defend the victim without knowing all the facts.
Posted by Marie, a resident of the Castlewood neighborhood, on Sep 15, 2008 at 11:52 pm
Marisa, as I have said before Castlewood is part of Alameda County we do not have Pleasanton police we have Alameda County sheriffs. They are the ones to thank for the great job they have done in this case.
Posted by Barry, a resident of another community, on Sep 16, 2008 at 2:53 pm
Sorry to burst the bubble of the people who think he did not do it. But you should probably look to his past actions in prior employment. He has done it before to numerous young girls and nothing was done about it, this was in the 70's & 80's. Hopefully those victims will find closure with this case.
Posted by kweb, a resident of another community, on Sep 16, 2008 at 4:22 pm
Cholo - quit pretending you care. You have nothing involved in this case just trying to stir up emotion. We remember what the word Cholo means "dumb _ss and chicken sh_t" and "Biggest Loser". Is this the the only way you can feel good about yourself is to pretend you care and name call the minority opinion?
Legal eagle: You are phoney - Ever hear of guilty till proven innocent. You don't even know the relevance of the declaration. Your mind is so narrow that you would be the last person that should be a judge. I never blamed the police with this case either. Haven't been to the court yet because I live a couple thousand miles away.
Barry: Your making up the stuff about past employers from the 70's and 80's which you knowing about. It is his past actions that make us doubt and not believe the accusations. What are you - related to Cholo and Doo Doo? Nothing like slander.
I never said anything against victims of molestation!!!!!!! So don't assume that I don't have compassion for victims of molestation.
Posted by Cholo, a resident of Livermore, on Sep 16, 2008 at 5:17 pm
Dear Plutonians, In my opinion, Kweepy is a priest. He was arrested for showing off in a park toilet where teen prostitutes gather. If I'm not mistaken, we're you busted by the Oakland Vice cops for coming on to one of them? Yup, that's kweepy!
Posted by Brea, a resident of the Deer Oaks/Twelve Oaks neighborhood, on Sep 16, 2008 at 8:15 pm
The lack of intelligence of people who are supporting this guy based on knowing him as a tennis instructor is incredible. I don't know if he's guilty or not, but I certainly am intelligent enough to know that I can't know for a fact whether any of my children's teachers or coaches, etc. are capable of child molestation. If they don't act nice to the parents and kids socially, how are they going to get any victims?
Posted by Nancy, a resident of the Las Positas Garden Homes neighborhood, on Sep 16, 2008 at 8:17 pm
I think I read on here that the tennis instructor's attorney asked for his supporters to stand up in court. I find it strange that that's allowed. It seems wrong, offensive to the victims. How about in a murder trial, can supporters of the person accused of murder stand up before the trial begins? Why would a judge allow this?
Posted by Cholo, a resident of Livermore, on Sep 16, 2008 at 8:39 pm
Ms. Attorney loves to put on a show. She is after all, a hired gun and her job is to flex her muscles and show off. Just wait until the depositions start. She will make every effort to politely re-traumatize the victims, their families and witnesses. Mr. Henry will then look smug and righteous. Some of the victims will then go home and have nightmares, crying spells and develop serious sleep disorders. They may back down and not want to proceed. It's a cruel spectacle but perps and their enablers love it. It sparks their rage and will increase their popularity at the club and on the streets as fighters for justice.
Fortunately, the Judge will know the routine and not be fooled. Yup, Mr. Henry is gonna go to the pokey for a very very loooooooooong time.
Posted by rumor, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Sep 17, 2008 at 12:12 am
i heard a rumor also at the club that henry molested several children in palm springs during the 70's and 80's. maybe in san diego too. the real story is starting to come out. hope the cops look into that.
Posted by no fool, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Sep 17, 2008 at 8:33 am
Creeps like Kweb and all the other supporters of Henry are just acting like that so they can get a rise out of you people. They don't believe in Henry, they just want to envoke emotional conversations and cause chaos. They want you to loose your cool and act irrational. Don't be so easily fooled by the pretenders. They just have no lives and they are amused by the suffering caused by this sad situation.
Posted by Myra, a resident of the Del Prado neighborhood, on Sep 17, 2008 at 1:51 pm
In the San Francisco Chronicle today there is an article about a boy scout leader child molester who admitted guilt and was sentenced today. As he walked out of the courtroom, his supporters stood up. This 'man' admitted molesting boy scouts. His supporters were still proclaiming his innocence. It is clear that his supporters have psychological issues. His supporters are actually not supporting him, they are showing all of us that they have serious, unresolved psychological problems. There is someone in their private lives who's guilt they cannot face. Denial is a powerful force in human lives.
Posted by Myra, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Sep 17, 2008 at 5:37 pm
Bob, I'm talking about the boy scout case. What are you talking about? In the Chronicle article today, it said he pled guilty. I don't have time to find the article now, but I will tomorrow. I don't know what you are referring to... ??
Posted by boston, a resident of the Castlewood neighborhood, on Sep 17, 2008 at 5:53 pm
Does anyone really have knowledge of Henry's past history? Why did he leave those other tennis clubs in Palm Springs and San Diego? I think the whole healing process starts with all the facts which ever side you our supporting. Please anyone with more facts please share. Thank you!
Posted by marie, a resident of the Castlewood neighborhood, on Sep 17, 2008 at 8:11 pm
I attended the town hall meeting put on by Castlewood & the sheriff's office at that time a lady got up and asked what Castlewood would do in the future when hiring someone. The sheriffs office said that there was nothing that came up in Henry's past. So I guess until you get caught you don't have a trail for them to find.
Posted by MainStreetDiva, a resident of the Vintage Hills Elementary School neighborhood, on Sep 18, 2008 at 8:59 am
Bob, in today's Valley Times, pg A5 (East Bay Roundup) an article states that the Sea Scout leader pleaded guilty, not "no contest."
However, when I searched the local news sites online to find a link, the various articles state either he was 'found guilty' or made a 'plea deal.' So which is it? It's difficult to tell unless you were in the courtroom at the time.
Posted by kweb, a resident of another community, on Sep 18, 2008 at 9:07 am
Many years ago, I had visited Henry and wife(deceased) when he worked in San Diego, Palm Springs and Castlewood. Far as I know, he took these jobs for career opportunity. Not for any other reason.
I don't understand the personal attacks for any individual who make comments about the great experiences they had with Henry or the disbelief of charges. If your so studid that you can't understand a person's personal viewpoint from everyone(family and friends of both the victims and accused)involved then do us all a favor and stop posting.
Posted by a concerned mom, a resident of the Ruby Hill neighborhood, on Sep 18, 2008 at 1:26 pm
Sad for a long time. I am so sorry for your pain. There is a web site called Abused Children Heard Everywhere www.strongernow.com that you can hear other's stories of being hurt. Many of the victims say that sharing their own stories has helped them heal. Maybe by reading some of their stories will assure you that you are not alone. I also believe that the founders of the Ache Foundation are willing to talk to you if need support. You are in my thoughts.
Posted by kweb, a resident of another community, on Sep 18, 2008 at 1:56 pm
Sad for a long time,
FYI - Never would want anyone to go through child molestation and sexual abuse. You're right, my family and I didn't know any side of Henry that could have been a monster so that is why I participated in this posting.
Good luck with your road to recovery, sounds like you can do it.
Posted by Georgia, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Sep 18, 2008 at 2:52 pm
Why? Isn't it obvious? You've had a 'great experience' with someone who possibly enjoys torturing children. I'm interested in what that experience was like, given the probability that the guy is a child torturer.
Posted by rodolfo, a resident of the Downtown neighborhood, on Sep 18, 2008 at 3:58 pm
I see Kweb supporting Henry all by himself now? Where are the dozens of Henry supporters now? When the story first broke, all there was on here were Henry supporters? All I heard was "innocent until proven guilty". There hasn't been a trial at this point, yet there are no Henry supporters to be found? Where did they go?
Posted by uncertain, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Sep 18, 2008 at 7:20 pm
I suspect I'm typical of the "Henry supporters" derided above.
I've known him for many years, some of them as a fairly close friend, and spent thousands of hours with or around him at Castlewood and in other settings, and never saw anything that would raise any suspicion.
The early case against Henry seemed subject to interpretation at best, and my sympathy was with him, assuming that there was a good chance of misinterpretation or exaggeration. As the new complaints surface and the numbers grow, this seems less likely. Of course until the actual evidence is heard in court it won't be possible to have a truly informed opinion.
But that's not the tenor in this forum. Here he's a monster who should be locked away forever, even before he's entered a plea or said a single word in defense.
To folks like cholo or rodolfo, our withdrawal from this lynch mob scene is "proof" of something. Well it just says we don't see any value in subjecting ourselves to abuse from uninformed and highly opinionated bloggers who apparently have nothing better to do.
Posted by asdfjkl;, a resident of another community, on Sep 18, 2008 at 7:50 pm
First, I want to thank the Pleasanton Weekly for providing this outlet--the blog. Without a doubt the concerned community is very divided, and an outlet, a source for expressing your thoughts and your concerns is good. Not only are their two sides, but within each and almost every individual within a side--there is division. Everybody is kind of apologizing for their stand until the truth is finally released and we know where we should stand there will be that division. Those supporters of Henry need desperately to show their support for him--a meaningful individual in their lives. They try to find ways to gather additonal support, and at the same time ask for understanding if their loyalty and support are unfounded. Those that do not support Henry also need the same outlet. One thing that concerns me and makes me lean more toward my support of Henry is the bad language the supporters of the other side use. Where is this coming from? Is it lack of education, maybe a parent that did not guard their children as closely, or a parent looking for a financial windfall? I hope you have noticed, but those that do not support Henry seem less educated, have a lesser command for writing, and sometimes are just downright rude and sometimes unbelievably stupid. Those who support Henry are always polite, articulate, and searching for a truthful answer. I do not think this would make a case in a trial, but it does seem the more educated are in support of Henry. Now, with that said, I fear the longevity of the blog has served its useful purpose. First it does increase the traffic to the on-line version of the Pleasanton Weekly (something that I will remember and use for a long time, secondly it does provide a meaninfull outlet for a deeply wounded community, and thirdly it provides an avenue to vent--express your inner most thoughts and opinions to the unkown public. I think it is time for the Pleasanton Weekly to close this blog based upon the thread that seems to exist--just junk. I have seen Jeb Bing close useless, or harmful blogs before and this just might be the correct time to do it. He is the guru--let him decide. But, when the blog is no longer serving a useful purpose close it. Re-open it on September 30th--a very trying day for so many people involved.
Posted by Peter, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Sep 18, 2008 at 7:52 pm
Uncertain, you didn't see anything suspicious in Henry's behavior? What makes you think you would have noticed if he was a child molester? Child molesters don't drop hints about their criminal activities to people they socialize with. How many times have you read that people could tell that someone was a child molester? You never have, because they never can.
People just aren't smart about child molesters. They think there are signs. Have you ever met anybody who you suspected was a child molester? Do you know that there are many people out there who are, and you don't have a clue?
Posted by supporter of uncertain, a resident of another community, on Sep 18, 2008 at 7:57 pm
Uncertain: Do not give up on Henry. I have not seen any new damaging evidence (maybe you have). In fact, I never saw any old damaging evidence. I only saw some references to some 10 year old claims that were mic'ed by the victim that suggest Henry did not know what she was talking about, but he was sorry for her feelings. If there is new evidence--lets here about it documented in a form that we can all see, digest, and feel comfortable that it is accurate.
I support getting rid of Cholo and the others that are a menance to this blog--can you block them??? Please help us all.
Posted by Cholo, a resident of Livermore, on Sep 18, 2008 at 9:25 pm
Of my guness...if Jeb shuts it all down until the 30th, we'll gonna miss out on the opportunity to practice free speech tomorrow. Afterall, tomorrow is when his attorney, Elizabeth Grossman shows up and tries to get everything dismiss. Who wants to miss that? No me.
You are correck, I don't espeak engleeeeech too so good mysef. But, I ain't dumb to flush yousef back you caming from to a toilet hole. Bye by Effendi! You f ren....cholo's. Tee hee hee, tee hee hee...
coo bird coo bird coo bird...meaning the control freak!
Posted by YYY, a resident of another community, on Sep 18, 2008 at 9:57 pm
It is amazing to me that anyone could consider that 5 women/children would come forward making false claims regarding sexual abuse. Coming forward in a public forum is torturous for the victims, as well as their families. There are tremendous feelings of guilt and shame for the victims and their parents. The parents feel like they should have known, and should have protected their child, and the victims feel so ashamed that they didn't have the strength to stop the abuse. Approximately 70% of child molesters are family members or close friends of the family, who have the families respect and trust. The victims in this case need our support, they have nothing to gain finacially or otherwise except peace of mind that a molester will be unable to harm other children in the future.
Posted by another uncertain supporter, a resident of the Amador Estates neighborhood, on Sep 18, 2008 at 10:48 pm
You are too smart for this forum. I stopped reading this last week and logged back on to see if there were any new developments. I don't even read the posts by Cholo, as I assume most people don't whether supporters of Henry or the accusers. It's too bad they can't filter idiot posters out of what is a very serious matter for our community.
Posted by kweb, a resident of another community, on Sep 19, 2008 at 5:11 am
Cholo - you attacked me several times before I came back at you.
I do agree with Uncertain and Suppporter of Uncertain.
Has anyone thought about how Henry's children are doing? Most kids cherish their father. I know his did. Not comparing this to getting over molestation ten years ago or yesterday, but the huge loss and upset this has caused in their lives is awful. The stupid comments by the lynch mob are not right and his kids are definately innoncent victims.
Cherishing your Dad was meant for most people, with the exception of Cholo - his Dad probably wanted to beat the crap out of him every day of his life.
Posted by Kweb Hater, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Sep 19, 2008 at 8:25 am
Kweb? For once, your right. Henry children are innocent victims. Its really sad that children have to go through this mess. Its also a shame that the victims had to be molested. There are so many victims left in Henrys' wake, and there will be more. You know Kweb, your finally making sense. If you add up all of the molested victims, and his own children, and the victims that haven't came forward. Thats alot of victims that Henry left behind. Henry's children should seek therapy later, when their ready. Maybe you can talk to them kweb? You can tell them all of the fun things you and Henry used to do together.
Posted by kweb, a resident of another community, on Sep 19, 2008 at 10:17 am
Have you ever played tennis? Played in junior tennis programs, high school tennis, college tennis team, open tennis tournaments? Made hundreds of friends because of tennis? F___ you for judging me - your an a__ hole!!!!!!!!!! You sure sound like Cholo to me.
Posted by bored, a resident of the Castlewood Heights neighborhood, on Sep 19, 2008 at 10:47 am
Kweb and Kweb hater -- please learn the simple grammar rule about the difference between "your" and "you're". If you mean to convey "you are", DON'T USE "YOUR". Your rants are bad enough without the illiterate mis-use of the language. You're both in need of a lesson in more than just English grammar.
Posted by Kweb Hater, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Sep 19, 2008 at 10:49 am
I can assure you, I'm not the infamous Cholo. I'll also tell you that I haven't played organized tennis. Does that mean I wouldn't understand friendships or loyalty and such? Are you really implying that? I tried to be nice to you Kweb, now you throw underlines at me? You start throwing almost curse words at me? You're a bully. Now I see why there is people like Cholo in here, to protect the innocent bloggers from bullies like you. Time to take your own inventory.
Posted by Uncertain Supporter, a resident of the Amador Estates neighborhood, on Sep 19, 2008 at 11:29 am
Kweb,I admire your support for Henry. The question of whether he did what he is accused of or not, is for a jury to decide. You sound like a compassionate person. Cholo is a very disbursed person and based on his posts and web links, he was a victim of molestation. Obviously, the effects are long lasting. Supporters of Henry-don't post any more. Let our jury system work. This blog just ingnites stupidity and Henry supporters are not stupid.
Posted by kweb, a resident of another community, on Sep 19, 2008 at 11:31 am
Kweb hater- My anger was at your sarcastic comment about having good times with Henry and why don't I explain them. Your right maybe I will have to help his kids. I took your comment as a Cholo remark.
Bored, what lesson do I need? Please let me know what you think?
Posted by come forward, a resident of the Amador Estates neighborhood, on Sep 19, 2008 at 3:39 pm
i heard they are bringing more charges against henry. even more victims have come forward. keep coming forward people. you have our support. now is the time. don't let this man get away with the horrible things he has done to you. parents please help your children and come forward. your case can help the other victims.
Posted by Maria, a resident of the Beratlis Place neighborhood, on Sep 19, 2008 at 10:27 pm
Henry Detractors: Not so fast. Have you heard of bandwagon fans? Everyone wants a payday a the Castlewood Country Club expense. Hey clubbers-your rates are about to skyrocket! Better get acquainted with Ruby!
Posted by Cholo, a resident of Livermore, on Sep 20, 2008 at 11:50 am
Alison, the girls/young women are TELLING THE TRUTH. They have no reason to make up a story of sexual abuse.
Enablers encourage perps and intend to undermine the victims that come forward. Uncertain Supporter pokes at Cholo, accuses him of having been sexually abused and enjoys saying that "obviously the effects of abuse are long lasting." She couches her hostility with her distortions/fantasies about my life? Her stance is what makes it possible for child molesters to thrive and to victimize numerous children. Uncertain Supporter dissociates in order not see the harm to children.
Uncertain Supporter is the VOICE OF THE ENABLER.
Pay attention to how enablers assist child molesters.
There are 1602 Registered Sex Offenders in Alameda County, 26 of them live in Pleasanton.
Uncertain Supporter, are you also a child molester?
Posted by Sonja, a resident of the Jensen Tract neighborhood, on Sep 21, 2008 at 10:05 am
My daughter was molested at the age of 11 by a relative and we did not call the police because she was so truamatized she could not talk to anyone about it for 14 years. We responded by keeping her away from this person but realized later that this person remained free to continue molesting other children in the neighborhood. I am so ashamed to think we could have saved other children and did not. These girls who have come forward have so much courage because it brings all the pain back but they are doing it to save other children and they should be applauded. I will never forgive myself for not turning in the man who molested my daughter.
He is a neat guy and may have some very helpful suggestions for you and your family.
There are ways to make the name of your relative molester public. That way, if he is still alive, parents with young children can still be warned. If you can put your shame aside and send David an email, it will be worth it. Your are not alone and don't forget, there are lots of good people around to help you out. It is NEVER to late.
An excellent bookstore with books related to Sexual Abuse of Children and the treatment of the families of offenders. Listing of conferences related to violence, trauma and abuse. Check it out and educate educate educate yourselves.
Posted by Jack Sprat, a resident of the Bonde Ranch neighborhood, on Sep 25, 2008 at 12:21 pm
Anyone of you listen to the hidden microphone recording of Germain?
Anyone of you listen to the police interview of Germain?
If the answer to both of these questions is no, and you're relying on "information" the police have leaked to the press to make your judgment, then you're weak-minded, easily manipulated. . . sort of like the American public, come to think of it.
Posted by Jack Sprat, a resident of the Bonde Ranch neighborhood, on Sep 25, 2008 at 4:29 pm
No and no.
Which is why I'm reserving judgment. Right now, all we have is the police account of the evidence. If you believe, despite copious evidence to the contrary, that police never shade the truth, then by all means join the frothing mob of villagers with torches and pitchforks.
For those who'd rather not froth, fix yourself a cocktail and put "The Ox-Bow Incident" in your Netflix queue.
Posted by Henry Supporter, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Sep 25, 2008 at 8:36 pm
I am still a supporter of Henry. I wish we were able to get more detailed information such as being able to listen to the tapes that keep getting brought up as the most damaging of evidence. I will support Henry until there is concrete evidence not to support Henry. This evidence that 5 girls have come forward is in my mind suspect. Review what evidence we have. Henry was recorded saying to Jane Doe 1--something like I am not sure what you are talking about, but I am sorry. Jane Doe 2 was a friend of Jane Doe 1, and Jane Doe 3 was out of the country and has not been interviewed per the rumors. Then the sheriff's department started calling everyboy who had association with Henry between the age of 9 and 12 and insisting they meet with the sheriff. These parents and girls felt they were under duress to meet. There rumor was uncovered that Henry hugs the girls for good performance, puts his arms around them to demonstrate the correct technic with thier rackett and gave them sodas, worms, and gummie bears in support of their tennis efforts. Henry worked very hard to make them capable of playing on the high school tennis team if that was their dream. I hope Henry is out on bail. I am such a novice at trying to gather this information from the Santa Rita Jail, and I am a novice at being able to get transcripts of the interviews and copies of the tapes recording between Henry and the victims. If anybody has suggestions, I would like to hear them. For those of you who just keep saying he is guilty without any evidence, I hope you get off of this blog and repeat after me. . ."innocent until proven guilty", "innocent until proven guilty",. That is the American Judicial Systems isn't it? Then remember where we live, what we have defined as justice and don't forget how great living in American is as long as we follow the guidelines and rules established long before this fiasco with Henry Germain. For those suppoters--lets hear from you in this blog. I am sure Henry needs you.
Posted by Sonja, a resident of the Jensen Tract neighborhood, on Sep 26, 2008 at 11:12 am
For SUPPORTER OF HENRY I ask you to go to the Sherrif's office and read the counts in detail and you will know for yourself. As far as Henry not incriminating himself on the tapes, NO ONE other than the people who recorded it know and they will be played in court when he goes to trial and we can judge at that time what was rumor and what was true.
Posted by Emily West, Pleasanton Weekly reporter, on Sep 26, 2008 at 1:11 pm Emily West is a member (registered user) of PleasantonWeekly.com
To those questioning if Germain is out on bail, it appears so as he is no longer listed as an inmate on the Santa Rita Jail Inmate Locator. Several phone calls have been made to his attorney and to the Alameda County Sheriff's Office, to confirm the information, none of which have been returned.
Posted by Quick, a resident of the Downtown neighborhood, on Sep 26, 2008 at 3:51 pm
Anyone who molests a child deserves the worst punishment.
Anyone who supports this animal should be ashamed of themselves.
- One victim could mean a conspiracy
- Seven or more!?!?!?! too many kids, too long
These were kids who are now young adults, and lives are being affected forever by these few moments they were taken advantage of. Imagine trying to grow up and have a stable relationship, what should be a loving embrace turns into tears as these thoughts creep back to your head.
I know what this man has done, I have been told. It makes me sick to my stomach and I hope to God he gets the book thrown at him.
Posted by boston, a resident of the Castlewood neighborhood, on Sep 26, 2008 at 4:42 pm
Dear Quick, how do you know henry is guilty... did you read court reports (I can only find websites that cost for info) can you or anyone advise a better way or did you hear from a friend involved (If so, I'm sad for the hurt and pain for all)
Does anyone worry about Henry leaving the country? or suicidal?
Posted by legal eagle, a resident of the Castlewood neighborhood, on Sep 26, 2008 at 11:06 pm
Henry is back in jail for more molestation charges. it looks like police are beginning to back track Henry's life and are discovering all the previous sexual abuses in his closet. How could a man get away with these crimes for almost 30 years? it is because the original people were scared to come forward. They most likely felt alone and did not have the right resources to turn to. This is not the case today. I know our community and agencies support the victims. Now is the time to come forward if you were abused by Henry. Do you still think he is being framed by the victims and police? Why would so many victims from different generations and places be liars. People may want to think twice about posting his bail and helping him get out of jail. The victims and community are best served when he is in custody. He will have his due process but there is to much probable cause to believe he committed these crimes. I worry that he will harm more children if allowed to be free. My compassion goes to everyone involved, including Henry. I feel for his children during this difficult time. This is a terrible situation for everyone but i hope it brings future closure and no more children will be victimized.
Posted by MainStreetDiva, a resident of the Vintage Hills Elementary School neighborhood, on Sep 27, 2008 at 10:32 am
Thank you for posting this web link, Cholo.
I find the results of these studies very disturbing - it certainly goes against every preconceived impression I had of a "typical" pedophile. I had pictured them as loners, men who reside on the fringes of society. If these studies are accurate, a lot of us, including moi, need to stop worrying solely about strangers and start to more closely examine the men who interact with our children on a regular basis.
I had no idea that an overwhelming majority of molesters are married, have jobs, are religious, and usually prey upon someone in their family or within their social circle. No wonder so many victims don't feel comfortable coming forward - the molester is often someone in their parent's social network or family.
My heart goes out to all of the victims of his behaviour (including his children) and I hope they all can get the help they need to begin healing.
Posted by MainStreetDiva, a member of the Walnut Grove Elementary School community, on Sep 28, 2008 at 1:16 pm
I somehow missed your earlier post on 9/16, where you recommended looking into his past actions in teh 70's and 80's.
Can you share what you know and how you know it? Were you acquainted with him during that time?
I may go onto Intellius or some other web site, fork over my own money, and see if he has any other convictions. But if Castlewood did a background check when they hired him, wouldn't the report have included that information?
Posted by lisa, a resident of the Country Fair neighborhood, on Sep 28, 2008 at 5:54 pm
Unlike other cities, for private businesses, the city of Pleasanton does not require any background checks for anyone who works with children 1:1 in Pleasanton. Castlewood would not be required to do one, even if it was in city limits. Also the city doesn't background check city commissioners or city volunteers.
Pleasanton is a haven for child molesters (convicted, arrested not convicted, paroled) who wish to work with children, unfettered by regulations and background checks.
Posted by Marie, a resident of the Castlewood neighborhood, on Sep 29, 2008 at 7:04 am
Main Street Diva,
When the sheriff checked Henry's background nothing came up. So doing a background check would have shown nothing. The sheriff told us this at the town hall meeting that Castlewood held for the members.
Posted by Laura, a resident of the Mohr Park neighborhood, on Sep 29, 2008 at 9:37 am
for background checks for children you need to send the city council an email at email@example.com saying they immediately need to change the zoning ordinance for child businesses back to 'conditional' from 'permitted' for all child-based businesses (it was deregulated in 2007 under hosterman). along with that, the city attorney already has the ordinance that needs to be adopted, tweaked to include for-profit corporations, employees and volunteers, that was adopted already by other cities. the pleasanton mothers club has been wanting this for years. the city knows what it needs to do, but just hasn't acted on it.
10.65.020 Background check.
10.65.030 Time of checks.
10.65.050 Annual statement.
10.65.070 Civil penalty.
10.65.080 Prohibited use of city facilities.
10.65.010 PURPOSE. The City Council, having completed a lengthy study of social services in San Mateo, including issues of child protection, finds that it is necessary and appropriate that non-profit corporations working with children in the City of San Mateo check the criminal backgrounds of their employees and volunteers who will be alone with children and/or who have supervisory or disciplinary control over children.
The City Council finds that children are vulnerable to adults having authority over them and that it is important for children to be protected and for parents to be better assured that children enrolled in non-profit programs are protected. (Ord. 1996-25, § 1, 1996).
10.65.020 BACKGROUND CHECK. Non-profit corporations doing work or providing service in the City of San Mateo which employ or use the services of employees and/or volunteers shall make criminal background checks (1) pursuant to Penal Code Section 11105.3 or (2) to the extent allowable by law pursuant to AB 1562 (1996) (Megan's Law), Penal Code Sections 290 and 290.4, as follows:
(a) Employees: Adult employees who have supervisory or disciplinary authority over a child or children shall be checked within 10 days of initial employment or within 10 days after an employee is in a position with supervisory or disciplinary authority over a child or children.
(b) Volunteers: Adult volunteers who in the ordinary course of their volunteer duties are expected to be alone with one or more children without a second adult being present shall be checked within 10 days of initially volunteering or within 10 days after a volunteer is in a position in which he/she is alone with one or more children. A volunteer who is alone with one or more children is deemed to have disciplinary or supervisory authority over a child or children. Mentors, tutors, big brothers/sisters, coaches are examples of positions that may typically be alone with one or more children. (Ord. 1996-25, § 1, 1996).
1. "Child" or "Children" shall mean persons under 18 years of age. The singular and plural shall include one another.
2. "Adult" shall mean person 18 years of age or older.
3. A volunteer is "alone with one or more children" when there is no other adult person 18 years of age or older (1) present in the same room with the child or children or (2) if the activity is out-of-doors, present within a 30 yard radius of the child or children. The number of children with an adult is not relevant to whether a volunteer is alone with a child; it is the absence of a second adult that is controlling.
4. A volunteer is not alone with one or more children in the ordinary course of their volunteer duties when a volunteer is occasionally alone with children (1) due to the late arrival or illness of a second adult, (2) due to the unexpected need to take a child to his parent or guardian, or (3) due to unplanned or emergency incidents where a second adult is not present.
(d) For the purposes of meeting the time requirements of this Chapter, the background check shall be deemed made under this section when fingerprints are filed with the Department of Justice.
(e) Exemptions: The following non-profit corporations shall be exempt from this chapter: (1) corporations that are licensed by the Federal, State, or local government and where the licensing procedures include criminal background checks of persons otherwise covered by this chapter; (2) private and public schools; (3) medical facilities; and (4) religious corporations with respect to programs that are not predominantly sports or recreation programs.
The following employees and volunteers of non-profit corporations shall be exempt from the background check and training requirements; (1) parents or legal guardians who work with, supervise, or discipline only their own children; (2) persons who work with, supervise, or discipline children in the City for less than 5 days in a calendar year. (Ord. 1997-5, § 1, 1997).
10.65.030 TIME OF CHECKS. In the event that there is a break in the employment or volunteer relationship for a year or more with the non-profit organization, the background check shall again be made within 10 days of the recommencement of employment or volunteering. (Ord. 1996-25, § 1, 1996).
10.65.040 REGULATIONS. The City Council may adopt regulations to implement this chapter. (Ord. 1996-25, § 1, 1996).
10.65.050 ANNUAL STATEMENT. Non-profit corporations shall file an annual statement certifying compliance with Section 10.65.020 and Section 10.65.060. This statement shall be filed during the month of July of each year to cover the preceding 12 months, and shall be considered as late if not filed by August 1. (Ord. 1999-2, § 2, 1999; Ord. 1996-25, § 1, 1996).
10.65.060 TRAINING. Non-profit corporations that have employees or volunteers who work with or supervise children shall provide at least two hours of child abuse training within six months of the commencement of employment or volunteering. The training received by an employee or volunteer shall be valid for a two-year period from the date of the training and notwithstanding the preceding paragraph, shall be transferable to other non-profit corporations without the need for further training during the two-year period. (Ord. 1999-2, § 4, 1999; Ord. 1996-25, § 1, 1996).
10.65.070 CIVIL PENALTY. There shall be a civil penalty of $100.00 imposed upon the nonprofit corporation for each employee or volunteer subject to a background check under section 10.65.020 who is not checked and/or for each employee or volunteer subject to training under section 10.65.060 who is not trained. (Ord. 1999-2, § 3, 1999; Ord. 1996-25, § 1, 1996).
10.65.080 PROHIBITED USE OF CITY FACILITIES. Non-profit corporations who are not in compliance with the requirements of Section 10.65.050 and/or Sections 10.65.020 and 10.65.060 shall not be permitted to use City facilities for the functions of their non-profit corporations. Nothing in this provision shall be construed to prohibit a non-complying, non-profit corporation from applying for or receiving permits for the use of their own property, including property which they rent. (Ord. 1999-2, § 5, 1999; Ord. 1999-2, § 1, 1999; Ord. 1996-25, § 1, 1996).
Posted by Stacey, a resident of the Amberwood/Wood Meadows neighborhood, on Sep 29, 2008 at 9:52 am
I suspect we don't have all the facts on this when someone says "Pleasanton needs to require background checks". I also suspect there is a misunderstanding of what "zoning" governs versus ordinances related to businesses.
Additionally, in the case of Mr. Germain, a background check wouldn't have had any effect since none of his previous victims from SoCal stepped forward. Also note that Castlewood is located in Alameda County and not Pleasanton. So Pleasanton law would have had little effect upon this issue.
Posted by MainStreetDiva, a member of the Vintage Hills Elementary School community, on Sep 29, 2008 at 10:00 am
I understand it would not have affected Germain, for both of those reasons. But we should try to plug whatever holes we can find regarding molesters working with kids in Pleasanton, and perhaps this regulation is one of those holes.
I have emails out to friends, to try to see what regulations Dublin and Livermore have in place, just to compare.
Posted by Laura, a resident of the Mohr Park neighborhood, on Sep 29, 2008 at 1:30 pm
You'd have to ask Hosterman why she changed it.
to make the child businesses 'conditional' is needed so that when you go to the city to open a business related to children, the city can have a 'condition' on the place of business that says employees and volunteers are required to obtain background checks in accordance with code etc etc, place the results on file with the police dept with x days of hiring someone. also conditions may be required to make the building code comply with state building code and fire safety regulations that require that buildings that have children in them more than a certain time period per day be upgraded to make it safer.
you could contact the planning commission for more details.
as it is now, someone can walk off the street and in many areas of town, get an immediate permit to open a child based business. it did not used to be that way.
Posted by Jerry, a resident of the Oak Hill neighborhood, on Sep 30, 2008 at 2:02 am
I don't know if this man is guilty or not, that will be determined in a court of law, but I have a question for an authentic criminal attorney. I realize he can be arrested here for the accusations that originated in Southen California but can the charges from there be added on the back of the charges he faces in Alameda County and be resolved through the judicial system here. Wouldn't extradition to the county in Southern California where the alleged crimes took place be required...
Posted by Anonymous, a resident of San Ramon, on Oct 17, 2008 at 9:29 am
Has anyone ever heard of "innocent until proven guilty"? Everyone is convicting Henry based on media articles that are totally incomplete and that have taken statements out of context before he's even had his day in court. The wire on the girl was worthless since the poor man apologized not knowing what he was apologizing for but just because the girl was upset. Sure would like one of you to be set up like this one day so that you can experience a klu klux klan hanging like this one.
Posted by LynchMob, a resident of the Downtown neighborhood, on Oct 17, 2008 at 11:44 am
Anonymous- You Henry supporters are like cockroaches, once you think you got'em all... there goes another one. Henry will have his day in court and someday he will have his day with the all mighty. Since you decided to chime in, what homework have you done. Have you been through the court appearances or read any of the investigators reports? Who have you talked to? Do you not believe ANY of the published reports just because they are published? Listen, Henry is guilty! Someone here before said it perfectly- "Henry is guilty from the time he touched those children, not just when a jury finds him guilty..."
But you also hit a new low here. To compare the conversations between residents about a local captured child molestor to the brutal racist activities of the klan is way out of line. You can offend alot of people when you bring up that part of history. I understand you want to defend Henry (or the system), just don't make a fool out of yourself in the process.