The first phone call to the convicted sex offender went to the man’s answering machine. The second call went to his cell phone, resulting in a short conversation that didn’t produce any evidence.
Then came the surprise for Citrus County Sheriff’s Detective Chris Prus, who was arranging the Jan. 20, 2006, recorded phone calls to Daniel Weckesser, 48, at his home in Lady Lake. Weckesser called back 10 minutes later, speaking to a 27-year-old man who accused Weckesser of performing sex acts on him when he was younger.
Testifying at a court hearing last Wednesday, Prus described the 45-minute conversation where Weckesser reportedly apologized to the man for the sex acts, along with making other statements. Weckesser was arrested on a warrant Feb. 9, 2006, after which he’s said to have “confessed in detail” to performing sex acts on the boy.
Grant argued Weckesser’s fifth and sixth constitutional amendments prohibited Prus from talking to him without a written waiver of his rights. Though the investigation was separate from the other crimes, it resulted from the same episode, Grant argued.
Assistant State Attorney Thomas “Skip” Boll argued Weckesser’s invocation of his rights doesn’t apply to every crime he may have committed, and that this was a similar crime involving a different victim.
A June 6 status conference at 9 a.m. has been set when a ruling is expected. Weckesser faces life in prison if convicted of the charge, a first-degree felony.
http://www.chronicleonline.com/articles/2007/04/29/news/news30.txt
The article shows how Weckesser's rights in the 5th and 6th Amendments were violented. He has the rights of an accused person and the right to a speedy trial, but both rights were denied. He faces life in prison and convicted of first-degree felony, which is not fair.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
This is not fair. If he did or did not perform sex acts, he still has rights. Thus, this trial should be appealed to the Supreme Court if his rights were violated.
Post a Comment