Did anyone catch this segment the other day on the new UM? This was listed as one of the cases that was never aired on Lifetime, and I found it a bit bizarre that Spike chose this as one of the segments to remake. It was a very brief case in which Wychgel was shot by a Hispanic man who tried to steal his car. They produced a composite drawing of the man, but being that this took place a number of years ago the odds of anyone recognizing the man in the composite are essentially nil.

Anyone got any ideas why this segment was remade? How is Spike determining which segments to show?

Did anyone catch this segment the other day on the new UM? This was listed as one of the cases that was never aired on Lifetime, and I found it a bit bizarre that Spike chose this as one of the segments to remake. It was a very brief case in which Wychgel was shot by a Hispanic man who tried to steal his car. They produced a composite drawing of the man, but being that this took place a number of years ago the odds of anyone recognizing the man in the composite are essentially nil.

Anyone got any ideas why this segment was remade? How is Spike determining which segments to show?

That is strange they would show that one. I say that because I have the NBC version of it and even back then they said the statute of limitations was about to expire on the case and they needed to find the person responsible soon to be able to charge them.

Yes, I do not know if California's statute of limitations has changed. At that time, the statute of limitations was three years for crimes such as attempted murder and assault with a deadly weapon. In the early 90's the California legislature abolished the statute of limitations on child molestation. However this bill was later ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court because the bill had been made retroactive meaning in the bill, anyone, even where the statute of limitations had expired could be charged. The bill was rewritten and there is now a ten year statute of limitations on child molestation. However for adult rape cases the statute of limitations is 6 years. It was increased in the late 1990's from 3 years. Also, until 1992, California law stated if you were under 17 you could not in any way be charged as an adult for crimes. However in '92 the law was changed so people as young as 14 could potentially be charged as adults.

Yeah...why they redid that segment knowing the statues expired made no sense whatsoever. Who knows...

Well maybe they figure the guy did other stuff and they want to expose him? For him to nearly kill Rohrey over something so stupid tells me that was probably not that individuals first time shooting somebody. It certainly wasnt his first violent assault.

Well maybe they figure the guy did other stuff and they want to expose him? For him to nearly kill Rohrey over something so stupid tells me that was probably not that individuals first time shooting somebody. It certainly wasnt his first violent assault.

That's an interesting theory Kadrmas. If they can't nail him for this crime, perhaps they can find a witness or leads to another crime. An end run...I like that.

But again, the odds of catching the guy from a pretty generic composite sketch of a Hispanic male is pretty much zero.

I mean, don't get me wrong, I love being able to watch these obscure segments that never made it to Lifetime, but I just don't see a reason for them choosing this one to be remade. I mean somebody at Spike had to actually see the segment and say, "Yes, we're going to remake the Rohrey Wychgel segment for the New UM." I just don't see a reason for that to happen.

Time as we know it doesn't exist on Spike's UM. So, the warrant for this guy is probably still outstanding. :D

On a side note, is it just me or did the composite of the "Hispanic" male absolutely look like a white guy?

Wychgel has a FB page as well with the first name as "Rory." It says he's single, which likely means that sadly, his engagement never panned out.

Time as we know it doesn't exist on Spike's UM.

:rotflmao:

Wychgel has a FB page as well with the first name as "Rory." It says he's single, which likely means that sadly, his engagement never panned out.

On the segment, after reporting his injuries, they cut to him rolling his wheelchair down the sidewalk, and walking with him was a male friend. No one mentioned that he lost his fiancee, but that clip pretty much said just that very thing.

I don't know in these cases if the man tells the woman, "look, I love you too much to go through with this wedding - find a man who you can have children with and who will not be such a burden", or if the woman says, "I am so sorry, but I can't live like this". Either way, it is sad.

But what the heck is with the statue of limitations in CA? :confused:

Actually, almost all states are like that in terms of statute of limitations. It is a good thing to have in place for some crimes. The statute of limitations was later extended in California for certain crimes. At the time Rohrey was shot it was 3 years for most felonies. Later in the 90's the statute of limitations was extended from 3 years to 6 years for any felony where you could be sentenced to 8 years or more in prison. So attempted murder was extended from 3 to 6 years, rapes were extended to 6 years, the majority of felonies were extended to 6 years. Certain crimes have no statute of limitations, 1st and 2nd degree murder as well as aggravated kidnapping do not. Some felonies that are lesser felonies still have the same 3 year statute of limitations. Misdemeanors in California have a one year statute of limitations. At the time Rohrey was shot, besides first and second degree murder and aggravated kidnapping, all other felonies had a 3 year statute of limitations. Virginia is one of the few states in the country, perhaps the only one that does not have a statute of limitations at all, at least not on felonies they do not.

I am more familiar with Florida law as that is where I want to practice law eventually. Florida, 1st and 2nd degree murder have no statute of limitations, perjury in a first degree murder case also has no statute of limitations, Capital Sexual Battery which is the sexual battery of a child under 12 has no statute of limitations.

For First degree felonies which are punishable either by a maximum of 30 years or when designated up to life in prison, such things as armed robbery, first degree attempted murder, aggravated manslaughter, aggravated child abuse, being an accessory after the fact to first degree murder, the statute of limitations is five years. For a 2nd degree felony which is punishable by up to 15 years in prison, the statute of limitations is 3 years the same is true of 3rd degree felonies a felony which is punishable by up to 5 years in prison, which are things like grand theft, evidence tampering, burglary, other things of that nature. Misdemeanors, for first degree misdemeanors which are punishable by up to a year in county jail, the statute of limitations is two years, for 2nd degree misdemeanors which are punishable by up to 6 months in county jail, the statute of limitations is one year.

It is a tough issue, many folks do not like the statute of limitations but it was meant to protect people from having someone come forward years later and accusing you of something and because it was so long after the fact you would have no way to prove your innocence. In a case like Rohrey's yes it sucks because if you could match a specific suspect he could not be charged. But yeah, it is what it is. It is certainly easier for me to say, but I have concerns about tampering with the statute of limitations.

I have no problem with the statute of limitations. I just have a problem with it being such a short time (3 years or even 6 years) for such violent crimes as attempted murder. If you think about it, attempted murder differs very little from murder - the only difference is the victim was lucky enough to survive. But it was the same intent, the same violent disposition, the same violent act, etc., inherent in the individual that caused him to commit the act.

To have a limit of three to five years on child molestation is quite frankly a crime in itself. Child molestation often does not get reported for years after it happens, and understandably so. The famous hockey player Theoren Fleury is just now pressing charges against his former coach, Graham James, for molestation that took place 25 years ago! Why? Because it has taken him this long to come to grips with the heinous crime (molestation is probably second only to murder when it comes to the gravity of what one can do to another), and to finally get the courage to confront his attacker. Unfortunately, James, after serving 3 and 1/2 years for molesting other future NHL'ers and hockey players, was pardoned 5 years after completing his terms, and now rumour has it he is in Spain, doing what? You guessed it - coaching other teenage boys! God bless Canada!!

However, I would question the relevance of many of the limitations since forensics has come so far. Rape should no longer have one, because DNA can prove almost beyond the shadow of a doubt if someone was guilty. That memories have faded is almost a moot point with DNA.

Well, not surprisingly, I do not agree with your opinion. First off, it is not a crime to have a statute of limitations. Also, I do not know enough about Mr. James to know whether he is truly guilty or innocent but the fact he was pardoned it happens all the time.

Heck, look at Governor Pat Quinn of Illinois he just pardoned about 200 or so people not long ago. He was pardoned after his sentence? While it is unusual for someone convicted of child molestation to be pardoned, well unless it is proven and I mean literally proven they were innocent of the charge, people are routinely pardoned for other serious offenses in the United States, it is not just a Canadian thing.

Of course with Governor Quinn, the 147 people that he pardoned, none were currently behind bars. They were mostly on probation for various low level felonies and he pardoned people who had records of prostitution and drug offenses and the like from the 1980's and 1990's who have since cleaned up their act and been clean for several years. Governor Quinn has actually issued 321 pardons since he took office as Governor in January of 2009, replacing the disgraced Rod Blagojevich who at the time of his impeachment had a backlog of 2,500 clemency petitions sitting on his desk.

But the issue of the pardon, it does happen as I said. Look at former Governor George Ryan of Illinois, he pardoned 4 innocent death row inmates guys who were actually on the row when they were pardoned, practically unheard of. He also granted a form of clemency in that in his closing hours in office he commuted all the remaining death sentences to life in prison for the other 167 inmates on Illinois's death row at the time.

Also, Governor Tim Kaine, well now former Governor Tim Kaine of Virginia, took a courageous step in granting a conditional pardon to the 3 members of the Norfolk Four who I feel are innocent. Now under Virginia law, what that means is, their life sentences were commuted to time served and they were released from prison but they still have murder convictions on their record and are on supervised parole for 10 years. But it was still a huge step although I wish he would have issued an absolute pardon but the burden on the defendant to prove their complete innocence is much higher as a Governor would have to believe for sure that the defendant was innocent to grant it whereas the Governor can grant a conditional pardon if he has substantial doubts as to a defendants guilt.

In regard to forensics. Well, you are viewing the issue rather simplistically. Just because you have DNA does not necessarily mean that a crime actually occurred. There have been instances of consensual sex and then a woman turns around and claims it was rape. Most rape cases do end in a plea bargain so in that regard, you are right that the eyewitnesses probably would not come into play. But just because you do not have DNA does not mean you do not do any investigation and make sure that what a person is telling you is actually true.

Plus, since there is such advanced forensics these days, for current cases, there should be no problem in testing such evidence right away. Get it to the lab as soon as possible. But, just ask the LAPD how that one has worked out. They have such a backlog in their dysfunctional crime lab that even current cases, there have been I believe over 7,000 cases have had the statute of limitations run out. These were cases submitted long before the statute would have run out and they still were not tested.

But again, the statute of limitations was set up for a reason and I feel it is best to leave it alone. I tend to be weary of these prosecutions for crimes that occur so many years after the fact. Physical evidence has been destroyed or perhaps never existed because the crime was not reported. Thus, especially in cases like rape cases where it is a he/said, she/said thing that is a problem because you could be innocent and have no way to prove your innocence because the evidence that would prove you innocent does not exist.

But again, the statute of limitations was set up for a reason and I feel it is best to leave it alone. I tend to be weary of these prosecutions for crimes that occur so many years after the fact. Physical evidence has been destroyed or perhaps never existed because the crime was not reported. Thus, especially in cases like rape cases where it is a he/said, she/said thing that is a problem because you could be innocent and have no way to prove your innocence because the evidence that would prove you innocent does not exist.

1. What reasons were they set up? Compare those reasons, then, to the way things are today, and to the way things changed. Do they still line up?

2. Regarding "physical evidence" which has been destroyed, and cloudy memories, etc., doesn't that happen in murder cases too?

This is the key statement: "the statute of limitations was set up for a reason and I feel it is best to leave it alone". So what if some of the reasons it was set up are no longer applicable? Should we not revisit it and change it? We do this all the time in crime and punishment - we ask "why did we legislate this in the first place, and should it still be this way" and if necessary we change it.

Haven't you seen that email about things that are still officially crimes in some states - such as in Philadelphia where you can't put pretzels in bags. Well, the reason that was put in back in 1760 has long since died. So should the law. The point is: we need to constantly revisit all this stuff.

Hello, so did Spike actually follow through with this UM Rohrey Wychgel remake, or was it later dropped?

Yes, this is Rohrey, and I happened to Google myself yesterday and was surprised to see myself listed. However, I'm not all surprised to learn weird things might occur years later. There were just too many things that weren't quite right with my case. And don't get me start about the "police" sketch! I was so doped-up I was still seeing Angles when they asked me to describe the kid. Despite morphine pump, I was literately laughing when his guy was drawing, I couldn't believe they hired this "hack"! I was actually more pissed at this guy's skills, than I was getting shot! Seriously!!!
Which is partly why I've recently started to revisit and write everything down. Now, to hear they have remade my incident on UM, certainly begs the question; "Why? And Why Now? If true, it would've been nice if someone would've told me.
One of you wrote that you saw:talk: :typing: this segment back in Aug 2008, but you didn't really mention how different it was. I'm currently trying to locate this online, but no luck yet.
If someone knows the truth regarding this, and if someone knows how I could find a decent video of the new one, I'd really appreciate it!
Thanks,
RW

So nice to have you here Rohrey! First off how are you doing physically since the attack? I saw the original of your case (sent you a pm btw) and I believe I also watched it on Spike. It was similar just even more edited. Of course they didn't mention the part at the end like Robert Stack did about the statute of limitations about to run out on the case. I have no idea why they aired it considering it was time sensitive. Sad to say sometimes I think Spike just airs the more intense cases hoping more viewers will watch without much concern of actually solving the case. I'm guessing no one was ever arrested for your shooting, right?

So nice to have you here Rohrey! First off how are you doing physically since the attack? I saw the original of your case (sent you a pm btw) and I believe I also watched it on Spike. It was similar just even more edited. Of course they didn't mention the part at the end like Robert Stack did about the statute of limitations about to run out on the case. I have no idea why they aired it considering it was time sensitive. Sad to say sometimes I think Spike just airs the more intense cases hoping more viewers will watch without much concern of actually solving the case. I'm guessing no one was ever arrested for your shooting, right?

I doing good, thanks for asking, 20 years for a quad is pretty good! I had a lot of vocal ,as well as, spinal damage, but at least I have an intact brain and a strong enough voice to carry a conversion.
This whole UM deal was strange enough. It only started for me because over 2.5 years after my incident, my detective casually ask me to come in to meet with him. We sat down, then he basically said that if I wanted any chance on catching this kid, then I'd might want to get the media involved. I asked why, and that's when he first mentioned the statute of limitations was 3 years. I'm not angry person at all, but I was completely stunned, dumbfounded, and entirely pissed at him. Det. Varga wouldn't accept help from the Sheriff's Dept. or the police dept. with the #1 gang unit in the county Santa Ana PD. I know this through a family friend in that unit. Anyhow, despite every other questionable things that developed around him, I called every newspaper, TV News station, and a few other shows like UM. Everyone responded quickly news wise, but UM really were cool. I think we shot the segment in September 1993, and it was a last minute deal. It was suppose to air late October, I think the 27th, but that just happened to be the same night of the great big Laguna Firestorm. Of all nights, it aired during the most costly residential fire in that county's history. Thus, UM and every other TV shows were pre-empted by 24 hr news coverage. If you've seen the UM's listed of aired dates, mine was finally re-aired Dec 29, 1993; only 7 days before statute ended. Actually, the only reason UM re-aired it was because they said they felt bad about the situation. It was very cool of the producers to re-air it so soon. Sooner would've been nice, but I appreciated the effort.

In the end, the case was never solved, as far as I know?

Awesome that you are still with us and still doing the best you can Rohrey! It is tough for me to see stories like yours and still be pro defense. It appears to me, the bigger problem besides the short statute of limitations, is that your detective did not communicate effectively with you about your own case. The problem with the sketch, from what I can tell, it was so general, it would have fit a lot of hispanic males in southern California. It seems your neighbors and UM did the best they could, I am deeply sorry this happened to you but it seems as if you have turned your tragedy into a positive or at least as much of a positive as one can. I hope this doesn't sound condescending?

I am not trying to pretend what you have gone through or are going through. Just amazing how you have the strength to go on and live life. That is just amazing to me, a God send and something that I hope you are proud of, that you can do that. So much I think my own life is tough but then I stop and think, so many have it so much harder than me, yet do better and are happier than I am. Sorry for sounding sappy, but it is true. Keep doing the best you can.

While I do support a statute of limitations, I do feel that certain changes should be made. Such as if there is physical evidence that could be compared. But me, being pro defense, I still just, your case is one that stands out to me as being one where you truly got screwed by the system and not by defense lawyers as the case was never prosecuted because a suspect was never found. Rather you were in essence screwed by the cops who were supposed to be investigating your case. While it would be one thing if they actually tried hard and didn't find a suspect, it sounds like they gave what was at best a half hearted effort and that the detective on your case was too proud to admit that he was maybe over his head in this case and needed help trying to solve the case. A true tragedy all around.

Now, to hear they have remade my incident on UM, certainly begs the question; "Why? And Why Now? If true, it would've been nice if someone would've told me.

UM sometimes makes decisions about these kinds of things that can really annoy those of us here who are interested in seeing the cases solved.

For example, UM profiled the case of Cindy Anderson, a 20 year old woman who went missing in 1981. One of the odd clues in her case was the fact that someone had been spray painting graffiti in many places around town, including expressway overpasses and even a large wall only a few feet from her office, where she had to see the disturbing stalker-like messages on a daily basis: "I love you Cindy, G.W."

Well, it turns out that those messages had nothing to do with Cindy or her disappearance. The woman, Cindy B., for whom those messages were meant (her young boyfriend painted them to show his feelings for her, signing them with his initials G.W.) has posted details here on this forum. they can be found in one of the threads discussing Cindy Anderson.

Cindy B knew nothing about Cindy Anderson and her disappearance. Cindy B. left the country for 3 years and never saw the UM episode. When she finally returned to the states, she notified the police to tell them that they were following a false lead. She provided proof that the messages were intended for her and not Cindy Anderson.

The authorities pretty much chose to ignore that information and continued to suspect an innocent maintenance worker at Cindy's office who happened to have the initials G. W. This man was never able to clear his name and was still a suspect when he died.

Then, a couple years ago, when Spike starting re-airing UM, Cindy B. contacted them, requesting that they remove the portions of the segment that mentioned the messages. UM's reply to her was something like, we're not going to change anything in the segment, but we'll take that info off our website.

So, basically, an innocent man has been a suspected kidnapper/murderer for years, the police and UM had the power to clear his name, and they refused. Viewers watching any of the more recent airings of this segment will still, 30 years later, have no idea that the messages are completely irrelevant to Cindy Anderson's disappearance.

Somewhat similar to your case, IMO. They are reformatting and airing your segment without notifying you. Knowing that this could provide some help for your case, you'd think that they'd try to contact you so that if any new information resulted from the broadcasts, you would be able to find out about it.

I doing good, thanks for asking, 20 years for a quad is pretty good! I had a lot of vocal ,as well as, spinal damage, but at least I have an intact brain and a strong enough voice to carry a conversion.
This whole UM deal was strange enough. It only started for me because over 2.5 years after my incident, my detective casually ask me to come in to meet with him. We sat down, then he basically said that if I wanted any chance on catching this kid, then I'd might want to get the media involved. I asked why, and that's when he first mentioned the statute of limitations was 3 years. I'm not angry person at all, but I was completely stunned, dumbfounded, and entirely pissed at him. Det. Varga wouldn't accept help from the Sheriff's Dept. or the police dept. with the #1 gang unit in the county Santa Ana PD. I know this through a family friend in that unit. Anyhow, despite every other questionable things that developed around him, I called every newspaper, TV News station, and a few other shows like UM. Everyone responded quickly news wise, but UM really were cool. I think we shot the segment in September 1993, and it was a last minute deal. It was suppose to air late October, I think the 27th, but that just happened to be the same night of the great big Laguna Firestorm. Of all nights, it aired during the most costly residential fire in that county's history. Thus, UM and every other TV shows were pre-empted by 24 hr news coverage. If you've seen the UM's listed of aired dates, mine was finally re-aired Dec 29, 1993; only 7 days before statute ended. Actually, the only reason UM re-aired it was because they said they felt bad about the situation. It was very cool of the producers to re-air it so soon. Sooner would've been nice, but I appreciated the effort.

In the end, the case was never solved, as far as I know?


It is good to hear that you are doing well. It is unfortunate that this has never been solved - I can't even imagine what it's like to have gone through something like this. God bless and thanks for letting us know how you are doing. Here's hoping that you stick around the boards.

Yeah i saw his Facebook page as well, poor guy!

I had never seen this segment before and was hoping it was solved but due to the nature of the crime and conditions in which it occurred, I was not surprised to see it was still unsolved. I had no idea Rohrey had posted here and decided to look him up. Sadly, he passed away in November of last year. Hopefully the man who shot him is someday brought to justice.

https://www.legacy.com/obituaries/name/rohrey-wychgel-obituary?pid=194451929

I had never seen this segment before and was hoping it was solved but due to the nature of the crime and conditions in which it occurred, I was not surprised to see it was still unsolved. I had no idea Rohrey had posted here and decided to look him up. Sadly, he passed away in November of last year. Hopefully the man who shot him is someday brought to justice.

https://www.legacy.com/obituaries/name/rohrey-wychgel-obituary?pid=194451929

Geez... That is the shortest obituary I have every seen. Not even his DOB was listed. That's really sad. I'm just curious why there wasn't more, but maybe that's what he wanted. He seemed like a really cool guy who just got dealt a horrible hand after his assault.

RIP, Rohrey...

I’m wondering if the gunshot wound(s) may have ultimately led to his death, which in turn could lead to updated charges of murder for the assailant. That would be nice...

Geez... That is the shortest obituary I have every seen. Not even his DOB was listed. That's really sad. I'm just curious why there wasn't more, but maybe that's what he wanted. He seemed like a really cool guy who just got dealt a horrible hand after his assault.

RIP, Rohrey...

He was born on July 13, 1965 according to public records

This RW case is one of the many unsolved crimes on the show that was especially upsetting. RW had his whole life ahead of him, and was left paralyzed by the criminal who stole his car. Horrific.

I just read that RW died last Fall - very sad. 54 is fairly young to die; as a previous poster mentioned, it's very possible that the gunshot wounds he sustained ultimately led to his death years later.

It's nice that he posted on here before he passed.

Even if they found the criminal that did this (very unlikely), it sounds like he can't be prosecuted for the crime, anyway. What a joke.