Thursday, January 10, 2008

Officer Gets Probation for 'Misconduct' With 16-Year-Old in Police Station

From the SA's office: Just before his scheduled rape trial was scheduled to begin today, Baltimore Police Officer William Darrell Welch, 41, of Quiet Stream Court, Timonium, Maryland, pled guilty to misconduct in office.

Judge John C. Themelis sentenced Welch to a suspended 10-year prison term, three years' probation and ordered him to tender his resignation to the Police Department by January 14, 2008.

On July 16, 2006 Welch had sexual intercourse in the Southeastern District Station with a 16-year old girl after she had been taken into custody by another officer.

Assistant State’s Attorneys Temmi Rollock and Jennifer Williams of the Sex Offense Division prosecuted this case.

UPDATE: More from Melissa Harris.

22 comments:

graham said...

Anything related to Pat Jessamy's office that beings with the words "Just before the trial was scheduled to begin..." usually means good news for the perp and bad news for the victim.

ppatin said...

Very true. When I first read the story I thought it happened out in the county since the cop was from Timonium and I wondered what was going on. Then the saw that it was a city case and suddenly it made sense.

Marc said...

OK, so the usual excuse is, "City juries won't convict." Do they not convict rapist cops from the county, either?

Anonymous said...

You guys seem to forget this is one of the cases where evidence (in police custody) went missing awhile back. Without that evidence I am sure the case was pretty weak.

John Galt said...

Also, the S.A.'s office may be reluctant to argue before the court just how very disreputable the defendant is, given that numerous cases before Balto. Co. criminal courts may be pending which depend upon reports filed by the accused.

Maurice Bradbury said...

Geez, no matter what kind of badness the 16-year-old had been up to, just the fact that he was 41 and she was 16 would seem to make it pretty cut-n-dried, but it looks like the age of consent here is actually 13 or 14-- sheez that's two years younger than Louisiana! Marty Burns is says that because she didn't say she resisted the charges wouldn't have stuck. I guess Welch didn't want to take his chances with a jury.

If this was NY that would be on the cover of the Post and Daily News in 50-point type... but it's Baltimore, so ho hum. Methadone n Froot Loops, police station teen sex, what else is new.

Malnurtured Snay said...

Holy shit, I'm that cop's neighbor!

Gor said...

Consent in Maryland is 16, unless that person is in a "position of authority" in the school system, so Officer "Dirtbag's" violation was against the "public trust" (through to an ex-law enforcement type, like myself, it is enough to his ass canned)

Anonymous said...

Wow, so much for sending my daughter to Johns Hopkins.

Anonymous said...

Woah, man, there is just so many bad things in this story.

ppatin said...

I was going to say, everything I have ever heard about MD says that the age of consent is 16, although sex between a cop and an suspect who's in custody should never, ever qualify as consensual.

ppatin said...

"You guys seem to forget this is one of the cases where evidence (in police custody) went missing awhile back. Without that evidence I am sure the case was pretty weak."

Yup, here's the quote from the article:

"The prosecution's case was complicated by the disappearance of crucial evidence, including the rape kit, clothing and discarded wet wipes that DNA analysis had concluded contained genetic material from Welch and the girl. The evidence was missing as early as May and has not been found, but it had been tested before it disappeared."

Pretty disgusting that cops would cover for each other like that.

badfish said...

while i admit it is indeed fishy that the rape kit went missing, i wouldn't neccesarily point at the cops as the culprits. at least while i worked up here in Manhattan DA the rape kit was often delivered by a member of the hospital where the woman was treated. frequently, these kits would be misplaced (although with enough digging around and pressing the hospital staff, you could get something). also im sure the girl's age complicated matters--the rape kit was probably under extra oversight at the hospital. unfortunately it is in these cases where the evidence is handled with the least care.

Caederus said...

badfish,

It's not the hospital. The kit had been processed by the crime lab before it went missing, as was all the other evidence.

badfish said...

gotcha. so the kit is tested in-house by the police lab? most disturbing...

John Galt said...

I'd be very interested in buzoncrime's take on the disappearing evidence trick.

C Love "The Rap Addict" said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Sean said...

Wow, c love, I actually agree with you on this one! That's a first! :)

Carol Ott said...

Snay, you have some really freaky neighbors out there in the burbs.

buzoncrime said...

It sounds like Warren Brown got a good deal for his client; if I ever get in the jackpot, I'd want him to represent me. (On the other hand, I'm not sure I could afford him.)

As far as the missing evidence goes (and I don't think this is the only case):

For years, the department has not paid any real attention to what's going on in evidence control, because it's a not-so-sexy facet of police work. In the past, there were hundreds of bags of evidence everywhere; it was a surprise the operation ran as smooth as it did. An effort was made, in late 2000, to get them to rent adequate, secure warehouse space off-site to accomodate thousands of bags of evidence from Baltimore's many homicides, rapes, and shootings--and store it sensibly. "We don't have the budget for that". oh.



There are two possibilities here: either the evidence was misplaced (for real), or one of the folks there deliberately misplaced it. I dunno; probably no one else knows either. (I'm sure Warren Brown was trying to be nice.)

As far as misplacing it goes, it would certainly be possible. But it should not be possible. There should be systems in place, especially where an officer is suspect, to carefully check. No one should be trusted in that environment.

Many departments over the years have suffered embarassments and worse over their evidence units. It doesn't take a lot of imagination to figure out how sensitive those units are, but sometimes they are treated as just another office--like the mail room.


As far as the second possibility, one can only say that Baltimore in the last several years has had dismaying instances of lack of accountability, lack of integrity and lack of professionalism in the police department (several sex allegation cases and stealing fancy wheels off suspect's cars, for example). The specialized units are especially wild, and lacking in discipline. (And we have too many of them, and too few peopel in patrol--one of my pet peeves).

There was a standing rule that one was especially careful around female prisoners: you never were alone with them if at all possible, and you always tried to have a female officer wilth you during questioning--unlesss you were in a very public area of the station. Officers and supervisors in recent years seem to have a reckless disregard for the consequences of following those rules.

On the other hand, let's be balanced. The vast majority of officers are diligent, and try to be professional--and try to do the right things. And remember, the police are all we have to protect us for real.

Often however, officers are sometimes let down by their leaders.

Anonymous said...

There is NO "age of consent" involving an officer of the law and a member of the public. The presumption is that the power is SO EXTREMELY UNBALANCED that no "consent" is BELIEVABLE.

Someone under arrest or detention can no more "consent" to sex with an officer than a child, a retarded person, or someone asleep or in a coma.

It's that simple. DON'T GO THERE or you don't deserve the public trust it requires to be a police officer.

No sympathy. No respect. Just DON'T GO THERE - and I haven't a LOT of respect for the "fellow officers" who wouldn't just lose this bastard in a firefight with crack dealers.

R Johnson said...

Unfortunately, integrity in law enforcement is sadly lacking in some cases.