I announced that I was going to take a break from Pizzagate for awhile but I feel compelled to comment here. Please do not think that I am defending this perp but I just had to dig further when I saw that the charge was statutory rape instead of the felony of forcible rape. Statutory rape is a crime by virtue of the ages of the perp and victim, not force or coersion and it requires intercourse. And typically there is a separate criminal code for sexual abuse of children whether by intercourse or other impermissable conduct. So the charges seemed weird but then again we know California is weird.

I could not find any news reports on my cell phone that went back to the time of arrest where some more details might be available; I only found dozens of reports on the sentence and was able to glean a little background information.

Mr. Burgess was a family friend for over 20 years and had invited the family to his cabin for a mini-vacation. During the visit the mother observed several "incidents" between Burgess and the child. No details of the " incidents" were provided. Why would there be several? Wasn't the first incident enough to get as far away from Mr. Burgess as possible or was the conduct just suspicious. The prosecutor said there was no penetration involved and this was a plea bargain which the parents had earlier found acceptable . Intercourse was a requirement for statutory rape but was defined as any penetration no matter how slight and ejaculation need not occur. The statute could be applied as a misdemeanor or felony and punishment could be as little as probation or a prison term. One unusual provision of California's statutory rape law is that it provides for civil damages without having to resort to a full fledged personal injury trial.

Mr. Burgess had the financial ability to defend himself in court which might have required the child to testify. The trauma of a jury trial can be as bad as the trauma of the assault itself placing a parent and the prosecutor in the terrible position of letting a defendant off easy.

Let's assume that the "incidents" consisted of rubbing up against the child's private area with no real penetration or even an exposed penis. Sort of like what Joe Biden does to little girls breasts, sly as a fox. This plea agreement acknowledges the commission of a sexual offense inspite of any ambiguities, imposes probationary control over the perp, provided closure for the family at least as to the misery of court proceedings, and enables money damages with which to pay for counseling.

The law is not perfect. Until we have camera lenses trained on all of us 24/7, with audio, we are not going to have the full justice all children deserve. Sometimes we will be forced to settle for less.