Los Gatos man sentenced to 64 years for molesting girl

sc sucks wrote:

i was at the trial, obviously none of you were. The case started out as being conssensual, then the da changed the charge to forcible [rape], but it was called forcable "under duress". They stated that she felt obligated to have sex with him because she felt that if she didnt, he would stop paying child support to her mother. So he actually wasnt convicted of physical-forcible rape. also it was his step daughter. it is still really icky, but 64 years is a bit much for what was basically a statatory rape.

__________
And if it were your 17 year old daughter , how would you feel ????? Yah thats what I thought !!!!!!!

sc sucks wrote:

i was at the trial, obviously none of you were. The case started out as being conssensual, then the da changed the charge to forcible [rape], but it was called forcable "under duress". They stated that she felt obligated to have sex with him because she felt that if she didnt, he would stop paying child support to her mother. So he actually wasnt convicted of physical-forcible rape. also it was his step daughter. it is still really icky, but 64 years is a bit much for what was basically a statatory rape.

Ummm well given that the victim was his step daughter that he raised since she was 3 your argument falls pretty flat. She called him daddy and trusted him and he was threatening her in order for her to stay quiet. Nice try though.

sc sucks wrote:

i was at the trial, obviously none of you were. The case started out as being conssensual, then the da changed the charge to forcible [rape], but it was called forcable "under duress". They stated that she felt obligated to have sex with him because she felt that if she didnt, he would stop paying child support to her mother. So he actually wasnt convicted of physical-forcible rape. also it was his step daughter. it is still really icky, but 64 years is a bit much for what was basically a statatory rape.

"It wasn't rape rape." Thank Whoopie for that little gem. You're both clueless.

jimi doss wrote:

<quoted text>
__________
What a crazy way to explain deviant predator like behavior ,,
Im sorry but RAPE is RAPE !!!!!!! Come on how can you defend such horrific behavior !!!!!!!!!!

Some people will try anything, even this sort of thing ridiculous explaining and justifying , I feel sorry for that person but your right RAPE IS RAPE

People shouldn't comment unless they know the facts. The person who wrote this story obviously did not sit through the whole trial. Del was NOT convicted of RAPE. Granted, the girl was under age and that line should have not been crossed, but it was consensual, not forced. She knew what she was doing and this was not the first time she had been with an older man. She was not a virgin and has been with men older than her before this. She has a reputation. I know both the families and I was there at the sentencing. Del didn't rape, molest or otherwise the "victim's" sister. The sister in question is Del's sister and they did NOT have sex or otherwise. Del was not molested by his mother as someone else had said. That is a horrible thing to say. You don't know what hell you are talking about. Only the people involved know the truth. You can talk out of your ass if you like, it will not affect the feelings the family. Both families are in pain and suffering. Leave it alone.

Breakthecycle wrote:

REALLY..sickening that the sister did not speak out. The cycle only repeats when you fail to protect others! This young lady could have been spared this pain had his sister spoken up and BROKEN the cycle. I am sure this man was molested by his mother as a young boy..it is after all a learned behavior.
Why 63 years...oh about a lethel injection?
Well SC prosecutors, judges, DA's your FINALLY opening your eyes get tough stay tough!

You're stupid. His mother did not molest him. His father was the abuser, locking him in the closet without food or water for hours on end when he was little. The sister did not have sex with the brother. The "victim" was not a virgin and was very promiscuous. I know her. I've seen her. She was not sweet and innocent. He not force sex on her. She has been known to "date" older men. Mr. Colegrove should not have crossed the line. He admits of wrong doing. It was not rape. He did NOT force her. He should and will pay for his actions.

get your story straight wrote:

People shouldn't comment unless they know the facts. The person who wrote this story obviously did not sit through the whole trial. Del was NOT convicted of RAPE. Granted, the girl was under age and that line should have not been crossed, but it was consensual, not forced. She knew what she was doing and this was not the first time she had been with an older man. She was not a virgin and has been with men older than her before this. She has a reputation. I know both the families and I was there at the sentencing. Del didn't rape, molest or otherwise the "victim's" sister. The sister in question is Del's sister and they did NOT have sex or otherwise. Del was not molested by his mother as someone else had said. That is a horrible thing to say. You don't know what hell you are talking about. Only the people involved know the truth. You can talk out of your **** if you like, it will not affect the feelings the family. Both families are in pain and suffering. Leave it alone.

Del Eddy Colegrove was such a gentleman, that a jury of his peers found him guilty and he has been sentenced to 64 years in prison. Leave it alone? You're high.

I attended the trail and the sentencing, I also know the defendant and the plaintive. After reading this article I found it was too bad that it was only from the DA's prospective because the facts were twisted and turned around in ways that made this "young girl" to be completely innocent, which in this case was not the truth. There is two sides to every story, and it's sad that the plaintive's true character was never revealed. Sentencing of 64 years is just ridiculous when people who murder one another receive less time. It is too bad that people are forming opinions on this article alone when the author of this article did not do enough research in order to write a non objective story.

guys do you have any idea how many 18 yr olds diddle 14 or 15 yr old girls? It happens in HIGH SCHOOL, and it happens across the US. get over it.

sc resident wrote:

guys do you have any idea how many 18 yr olds diddle 14 or 15 yr old girls? It happens in HIGH SCHOOL, and it happens across the US. get over it.

guys do you have any idea how many gang bangers stab people? It happens in HIGH SCHOOL, and it happens across the US. get over it.

uh Clem wrote:

<quoted text>
Del Eddy Colegrove was such a gentleman, that a jury of his peers found him guilty and he has been sentenced to 64 years in prison. Leave it alone? You're high.

you say High like it's a bad thing

sc resident wrote:

guys do you have any idea how many 18 yr olds diddle 14 or 15 yr old girls? It happens in HIGH SCHOOL, and it happens across the US. get over it.

So that makes it OK ???, Geez thats a loser mentality

Besides that I believe this guy is like 42 years old ? ya gonna try and justify that too??

jimi doss wrote:

<quoted text>
__________
What a crazy way to explain deviant predator like behavior ,,
Im sorry but RAPE is RAPE !!!!!!! Come on how can you defend such horrific behavior !!!!!!!!!!

im not denfending it, im saying it wasn't rape, if you were at the trial, it was called "force through financial duress". Because the girl felt obligated that if she didnt do it, her mother wouldnt get child support. it was basically all part of the testimony, im not making it up, im just saying 64 years? thats more then twice what they give violent rapists and murderers, he should have got like 10.

Feral toads with no respect for human life or dignity - naw, it wasn't any different in the "good ol days", was it?

I recall some guy in high school taking his 30-06 and shooting a girl's stepfather dead. It turned out the guy had been molesting the girl for several years.

Unfortunately, the kid went to prison... but I imagine he was the hero of the cell block, more or less... vigilante justice is deplorable, sure, but that solved that problem. Happens all the time. Get over it.

sc sucks wrote:

<quoted text>
im not denfending it, im saying it wasn't rape, if you were at the trial, it was called "force through financial duress". Because the girl felt obligated that if she didnt do it, her mother wouldnt get child support. it was basically all part of the testimony, im not making it up, im just saying 64 years? thats more then twice what they give violent rapists and murderers, he should have got like 10.

__________
Im sorry but Im still not feeling what your saying here. The girl was 16 and 17 years of age he was 40 or 42 years of age. Threatening the girl with the fear of financial disaster in here family is no different than threatening her with the fear of violent disaster . FEAR IS FEAR especially to a young teen or adolescent .
The defendants mothers behavior as well as the defendants behavior after the verdict was read probably added some time on to the sentence . If it was as described here in the story , a blatant insult to the court and the trial. So what would you expect the judge to do .
So 64 years for the multiple molestations and rapes of a young teen girl over time , The intimidation and threats of financial and family well being over the same period of time . As well as the blatant disregard and disrespect to the Judge , the court , the jury , the victim and the victim's family ?? 64 years sounds about right Im afraid in my my book :):):)

jimi doss wrote:

<quoted text>
__________
Im sorry but Im still not feeling what your saying here. The girl was 16 and 17 years of age he was 40 or 42 years of age. Threatening the girl with the fear of financial disaster in here family is no different than threatening her with the fear of violent disaster . FEAR IS FEAR especially to a young teen or adolescent .
The defendants mothers behavior as well as the defendants behavior after the verdict was read probably added some time on to the sentence . If it was as described here in the story , a blatant insult to the court and the trial. So what would you expect the judge to do .
So 64 years for the multiple molestations and rapes of a young teen girl over time , The intimidation and threats of financial and family well being over the same period of time . As well as the blatant disregard and disrespect to the Judge , the court , the jury , the victim and the victim's family ?? 64 years sounds about right Im afraid in my my book :):):)

dude your lost, your trying to comment on a case you know nothing about, you werent at the trial obviously. the girl even admitted during trial that she really didn't feel forced, that she is mostly going along with that story because its what her mother wants. dude what you need to face is that these things arent so black and white anymore, it isn't "wow that guy sounds horrible, lets lock him up and throw away the key", your totally lost on this case and i suggest you stick to commenting on cases you know more about. it would make your opinion more valid.

sc sucks wrote:

<quoted text>
dude your lost, your trying to comment on a case you know nothing about, you werent at the trial obviously. the girl even admitted during trial that she really didn't feel forced, that she is mostly going along with that story because its what her mother wants. dude what you need to face is that these things arent so black and white anymore, it isn't "wow that guy sounds horrible, lets lock him up and throw away the key", your totally lost on this case and i suggest you stick to commenting on cases you know more about. it would make your opinion more valid.

__________

Just the point ther . My opinion is my opinion , If you dont agree thats fine but that doesnt give you the right to tell anyone what to do.

Get over it its not just my opinon its obviously the opinion of tweleve other people sitting on the jury as well.

Appearently they were there and they agree with me as well .

Get over your lil pitty party and quit trying to sell us on some phony "its not rape" deal ok ??? That story didnt fly for the jury and the judge and it doesnt fly here as well.

Nice try but the VERDICT is in and hes guilty !!!!!!!!!!

I totally agree with Jimi. He was wrong. No matter what, he was older and her step father!! He should have known better. I know the family too and I agree with the punishment. Although I think he should be castrated too.

did anyone get his immigration status, get watsonville out of santa cruz county!!! blah blah blah blah rubble rubble rubble.......oh wait, it was a white man from holier than thou los gatos???? oh never mind.....

loweroceanlocal wrote:

did anyone get his immigration status, get watsonville out of santa cruz county!!! blah blah blah blah rubble rubble rubble.......oh wait, it was a white man from holier than thou los gatos???? oh never mind.....

Sounds as if you've had to wait a long time to unload. Feel better now?