Rohrey Wychgel

[Mr. Fuji]

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?

[crystaldawn]

Originally Posted by Mr. Fuji

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.

[kadrmas15]

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.

[mphs95]

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

[kadrmas15]

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.

[mphs95]

Originally Posted by kadrmas15

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.

[Mr. Fuji]

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.

[justins5256]

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

[Oooga Chucka]

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.

[Wamisto]

Originally Posted by justins5256

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

[Wamisto]

Originally Posted by Oooga Chucka

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?

[kadrmas15]

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.

[Wamisto]

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.

[kadrmas15]

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.

[Wamisto]

Originally Posted by kadrmas15

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.