Indiana band leader charged with seducing 2 teens

Wow I am so amazed I can't believe NOT WHO CARES IT DEOS NOT MATTER man he got In trouble big woop guess what there are other thing that are more important.

Teacher files Tort Claim against the City of Madison, Sheriff, and Madison H.S. Seeking 2.25 million in damages

Reads:

City of Madison:

The accuser's allegations are not believable and have been directly contradicted..

There is no physical evidence to corroborate their accusations..

DNA samples... did not match Blanton...

Detective Simpson and Elden entered Blanton's home without a warrant and without consent. the detectives interrigated Blanton for more then an hour after he asked to speak with his lawyer. The detectives arrested Blanton without a warrant and without probable cause. The detectives searched Blanton's property without a warrant and without probable cause. The detectives prevented Blanton from bringing needed medication with him to jail.Several members of the Madison Police Department defamed Blanton in statements to the media. This conduct is contrary to Indiana State Law and constitutes torts for which the City of Madison is Liable.

As a result, Blanton and his family suffered significant damages...

Sherrif:

The jail staff wrongly delayed and/or denied providing Mr. Blanton with his medication while he was incarcerated...

...told by jail staff "they would get it later" ...rose to unsafe levels... Jail doctor instructed... a double dosage... Jail staff told Blanton... "take it all"... caused him to vomit... caused him to black out...

Madison H.S.

MCHS refused to release... property...

...Madison never returned equipment to Blanton... Some of the equipment was destroyed, some of it was salvaged to repair other instruments, some has been irreparably damaged through use, and some remain locked away at MCHS...

Madison School Board admitted.. wages are owed..

What I want to know is why when he was ACCUSED, the media automatically publicized the whole case and now when he defends himself by filling a case against the city, the sheriff, and the school over said entities misconduct, the media is silent, even the local paper. Is the tort claim posted anywhere online or in a public place so people can get the full story and not just the one side of the story against this individual.

Yes you do get picked up when a bitc* crys wolf,

Wait on a judge or jury to decide. A judge or proswcutor found probable cause to arrest. Thats why hes in jail. Police agencies get sued all the time. Anyone can claim police misconduct or file a lawsuit with no evidence. If a judge favors a party. That's a decision and worth printing.

Train wrote:

Wait on a judge or jury to decide. A judge or proswcutor found probable cause to arrest. Thats why hes in jail. Police agencies get sued all the time. Anyone can claim police misconduct or file a lawsuit with no evidence. If a judge favors a party. That's a decision and worth printing.

Did you read the tort, there was no warrant or probable cause for the arrest!! The two detectives acted on their own. Also, he is not in jail. His arrest was recorded, it is all on tape, everything he claims, can't make it any easier. The police going to deny their own voices?

To file a charge don't you think there should be evidence, apparently you can arrest him without evidence! Maybe the media should have waited until a judge favors a party before printing!!

My daughter is in the band. Mr. Blanton's equipment is still being held at the school like that paragraph claims. This makes me wonder. There is some fact here.

I hope he gets the school and the police department for a ton of money. Both organizations have too many that are holier than thou and deserve to pay out the nose and have many firings. The hell with the cops and the school board, I don't support any of those cretins.

I know a little about the law. The police and prosecutor just need probable cause for an arrest. Not a conviction. Statements from two different girls describing similar acts is probable cause. I'm not sure about the searches. The police may have been in the wrong there.

I find it funny that if this guy is innocent why doesn't he submit to a polygraph for the prosecutor. You get sex and then sue for millions. Our country is really messed up.

Pink wrote:

I know a little about the law. The police and prosecutor just need probable cause for an arrest. Not a conviction. Statements from two different girls describing similar acts is probable cause. I'm not sure about the searches. The police may have been in the wrong there.
I find it funny that if this guy is innocent why doesn't he submit to a polygraph for the prosecutor. You get sex and then sue for millions. Our country is really messed up.

You cannot arrest anyone in their home, unless you have a warrant, period. Unless the police think here is a felony presently being committed - and that obviously was not the case if the questioned him in the home.

Also it is rumored the two girls, are best friends, and possibly more then just friends. It is not as if two girls who never met each other, from seperate cities said the same story. Two girls who were best friends, made very close allegations, and admitted to conversing about the subject before police interviews. Then the police left straight from the interviews to Blanton's. They did not even bother to take the time to double check the girls's story.

One of the girls dropped out of high school, ran away from home, talks about getting high, drunk, and having sex on her facebook, and just was released from jail after pleading guilty to a felony.

Maybe no one as asked him for a polygraph, or the girls. Ether way a polygraph is not allowed to be submitted as evidence b/c it only works on 2 out of 5 people.

"From LAW" You cannot arrest anyone in their home, unless you have a warrant, period. Unless the police think here is a felony presently being committed - and that obviously was not the case if the questioned him in the home.

You are so wrong on this. It def does not have to be a felony to be arrested in your home witout a warrant.

Wow wrote:

"From LAW" You cannot arrest anyone in their home, unless you have a warrant, period. Unless the police think here is a felony presently being committed - and that obviously was not the case if the questioned him in the home.
You are so wrong on this. It def does not have to be a felony to be arrested in your home witout a warrant.

It is correct!

Police cannot enter a persons ome without a warrant, unless invited in.

Ever heard "a man's home is his castle?" It is true.

If you even have an active warrant and the police do not have the hardcopy of the warrant with them, they cannot enter your home and arrest you. UNLESS they think you are presently commiting a felony and they must enter the home to protect the law.

You CANNOT be arrested inside your home without a Hardcopy of a warrant present. NOW, as soon as you step out side your door, BAM, they can arrest you and hold you for 72 hours. HOWEVER, a charge must be filed within those 72 hours. Unless a holiday or weekend falls into those 72 hours.

That is Indiana law. So if you ever have an acive warrant, hunker down in your home, it will keep ya out until they come with the paper itself.

Blanton was arrested in his home without a warrant being issued, nor a hardcopy of a warrant. The arrest was a WARRANTLESS arrest. On top of that, according to the paragraph above, they entered his home without consent, and arrested him inside the home. Then the searches... every bit of this was done without any kind of warrant?

Also, lets remember the strip search case, Simpson was directly involved in those illegal searches, seems to be a pattern evolving.

My question is, why would you do that? If you wanted to protect "victims" do it the right way. Go to the prosecutor, get an arrest warrant, get a search warrant, investigate the situation, lock it in, then act!!

Do not BREAK the LAW to PROTECT the LAW!!!

I am a friend of Blanton's, and they have gone after this guy when all the evidence keeps pointing in the opposite direction. Not ONE piece of evidence has been found to support the girls, and they are 8 months into this investigation. However, there has been mounting evidence to support that the girls are not telling the truth. Not to mention the hundreds of witnesses to back Blanton.

When the police got on the news and made things up. The girls in the interview admitted they did not have the texts, or photo's they claimed Blanton sent. Yet the Police the same day get on the news and tell everyone he sent them, knowing, there was ZERO proof to this fact. It made national news!! They destroyed him!

I believe police are simply trying to act as Judge and Jury! They are supposed to be seeking the truth, not TV time!

I not saying he guilty or not. I dont know enough about the case, BUT I do know you can arrest someone for a Misdemeanor in their home without a warrant, if the police witness it. Your first comment was you can't arrest them unless felony but your 2nd post now says you cant enter without warrant. That is two different situtions.

well obviously you cannot arrest someone in a home unless you have entered.

My fault, unless a crime is being committed, in which the police are presently in the home, and were invited into the home. All three have to be present. Otherwise it is a false arrest.

police cannot enter a home without a warrant, unless the belief that a felony is being comitted. OR unless invited. IF they cannot enter, they cannot arrest. If they enter under above = crime one, if they arrest in the home = crime two.

Ether way in this case, no crime was being comitted at the time. No police were invited into the home. No warrant was issued, or in hand. Police entered = crime one, police arrested in the home = crime two.

So if the cops come to your house on lets say a simple loud music call or a "possible' battery, they have to have your permission to enter the house to investigate?

Lets say you refuse to turn off or lower the music etc. Nothing they can do about it huh? You can simply shut the door and walk away huh?

Explain to me how police arrest a child molestor who does not admit to the crime. They are taking the work of child to arrest somone. It can be done. It is probable cause and is not proof beyond a resonable doubt. Probable cause is all that is needed for an arrest. I am not saying this Blanton guy is guilty or innocent. I dont know him. He could have a 1000 people come to court and say how good of a guy he is. The girl could have a 1000 people come to court and say how good of a girl she is. Only Blanton and the girl knows the truth.

You can be arrested in your home. If you invite the police inside and you are in their presence and they have probable cause to arrest you, then they can. I am not arguing wheather the police were invited in, just telling you the facts.

In most Child abuse cases throughout the country, if a child makes accusations about an adult, this is defined as reasonable suspicion not probable cause. Probable cause comes into play when physical evidence comes into play. Even reasonable suspicion is widely misunderstood in many states.

Reasonable suspicion does not provide grounds for arrest; however, an arrest can be made if facts discovered during the detention provide probable cause that the suspect has committed a crime. Nothing still has been found to support probable case of a crime to thsi date.

Physical evidence from where. Ive heard of children coming forward years later. What happens then?

I found this on an attorney website.
People often say to me that,“it is my word against theirs. Can they arrest me for that?” Well the short answer is yes they can. For the police to make an arrest, they only need probable cause. Probable cause is defined as a reasonable belief that a person has committed a crime. That’s it. And probable cause can be supported by the mere testimony of one person.

If I have sex with my girlfriend only two people know we had sex unless someone actually saw us. I can tell my friends we had sex and she can say we didn't. Some will believe me and others will believe her. It's up to them.

charge dismissed

The girl was of legal age -17 yrs of age- 45 days from 18 when she slaims the acts occurred. 16 is the legal age in Indiana (side note she made claims against other teachers of the same kind that were found to be false, had dropped out of high school, and is a convicted felon)

The girl was not his student - she went to school 60 miles away at the alleged time - from where Blanton was contracted

He was not her teacher

He still denys all alligations, as anyone who knows Blanton well stands behind him and his innocence

What does this mean - Jefferson county charged him with a crime that - if it had happened - was not a crime.

Also to date - still not one piece of evidence - of any kind - has been found to support the girls claims...