Comments for Former Wichita PD Officer Charged With More Sex Crimes Comments are posted from viewers like you and do not always reflect the views of this station.
Posted by: Anonymous on May 14, 2012 at 10:38 AM
sorry...but this person is a child molester, so he needs to be sent to prison for a long long time
Posted by: you on May 13, 2012 at 11:05 AM
YOu right he could go work for TSA and wichita airport security. They are all have moral issues, but wait most of them are just dead beat dads not preverts so maybe no.
Posted by: Anonymous on May 13, 2012 at 10:29 AM
Sorry but policeman are heroes and we need to let him off with a warning.
Posted by: Anonymous on May 13, 2012 at 06:41 AM
The State Statute for sexual battery is correct on KASPER and should mention 16 years of age or older.
Statute 21-3517: Sexual battery. (a) Sexual battery is the intentional touching of the person of another who is 16 or more years of age, who is not the spouse of the offender and who does not consent thereto, with the intent to arouse or satisfy the sexual desires of the offender or another.
Posted by: anon on May 12, 2012 at 10:08 AM
yea right. If he does it is only because the public is seeing the cover up that they do.
Posted by: sue Ellen on May 12, 2012 at 10:05 AM
This is true. I looked up the same thing and that is exactly what it said. I dont know why they took it down now.
Posted by: sam on May 12, 2012 at 10:02 AM
right!!!!
Posted by: anon on May 12, 2012 at 09:59 AM
Once again they are covering up for their own. If you look up any other criminal and they dont erase nothing.
Posted by: Jared Cerullo on May 12, 2012 at 01:45 AM
See my response to a comment below. The facts were reported on his KASPER registration webpage, which, for some reason, has now been removed.
Sedgwick 11CR653 Feb 28, 2011 Mar 09, 2012 N/A Aggravated sexual battery; Intentional touching, without consent, 16 yoa; Force,fear Non Drug-Grid Severity Level 5 Active
Sedgwick 11CR653 Feb 28, 2011 Mar 09, 2012 N/A Sexual battery; Intentional touching of another, without consent, who is 16 yoa Class A Misdemeanor Active
Posted by: Jared Cerullo on May 12, 2012 at 01:43 AM
His information on KASPER, for some reason, has now been removed. This is how it appeared when I wrote this story, and how I reported it.
Sedgwick 11CR653 Feb 28, 2011 Mar 09, 2012 N/A Aggravated sexual battery; Intentional touching, without consent, 16 yoa; Force,fear Non Drug-Grid Severity Level 5 Active
Sedgwick 11CR653 Feb 28, 2011 Mar 09, 2012 N/A Sexual battery; Intentional touching of another, without consent, who is 16 yoa Class A Misdemeanor Active
Posted by: tiredofsickos on May 11, 2012 at 08:51 PM
Well said Ravenfeather, well said.
Posted by: tiredofsickos on May 11, 2012 at 08:48 PM
Well Drey, don't really matter, kansas lets all kinds of sick and deranged people either go free or take up space on death row.
Posted by: Anonymous
Location: Lost in Space
on May 11, 2012 at 10:25 AM
Law enforcement should be held to a higher standard when it comes to person crimes. They are professionals who have sworn to uphold the law.
Truck drivers are held to a higher standard when it comes to DUI and other driving crimes. Why should LEOs not be expected to adhere to a higher standard and have stiffer penalties?
Posted by: Anonymous on May 11, 2012 at 08:26 AM
fact checking obviously isn't a priority @ kake new
Posted by: Anonymous
Location: wichita
on May 11, 2012 at 08:12 AM
You might need to have someone do a fact check on the "touching two 16 year old" conviction. Would hate to have another media source in a lawsuit for not reporting correct information. Wonder why people don't trust media???
sorry...but this person is a child molester, so he needs to be sent to prison for a long long time
YOu right he could go work for TSA and wichita airport security. They are all have moral issues, but wait most of them are just dead beat dads not preverts so maybe no.
Sorry but policeman are heroes and we need to let him off with a warning.
The State Statute for sexual battery is correct on KASPER and should mention 16 years of age or older. Statute 21-3517: Sexual battery. (a) Sexual battery is the intentional touching of the person of another who is 16 or more years of age, who is not the spouse of the offender and who does not consent thereto, with the intent to arouse or satisfy the sexual desires of the offender or another.
yea right. If he does it is only because the public is seeing the cover up that they do.
This is true. I looked up the same thing and that is exactly what it said. I dont know why they took it down now.
right!!!!
Once again they are covering up for their own. If you look up any other criminal and they dont erase nothing.
See my response to a comment below. The facts were reported on his KASPER registration webpage, which, for some reason, has now been removed. Sedgwick 11CR653 Feb 28, 2011 Mar 09, 2012 N/A Aggravated sexual battery; Intentional touching, without consent, 16 yoa; Force,fear Non Drug-Grid Severity Level 5 Active Sedgwick 11CR653 Feb 28, 2011 Mar 09, 2012 N/A Sexual battery; Intentional touching of another, without consent, who is 16 yoa Class A Misdemeanor Active
His information on KASPER, for some reason, has now been removed. This is how it appeared when I wrote this story, and how I reported it. Sedgwick 11CR653 Feb 28, 2011 Mar 09, 2012 N/A Aggravated sexual battery; Intentional touching, without consent, 16 yoa; Force,fear Non Drug-Grid Severity Level 5 Active Sedgwick 11CR653 Feb 28, 2011 Mar 09, 2012 N/A Sexual battery; Intentional touching of another, without consent, who is 16 yoa Class A Misdemeanor Active
Well said Ravenfeather, well said.
Well Drey, don't really matter, kansas lets all kinds of sick and deranged people either go free or take up space on death row.
Law enforcement should be held to a higher standard when it comes to person crimes. They are professionals who have sworn to uphold the law. Truck drivers are held to a higher standard when it comes to DUI and other driving crimes. Why should LEOs not be expected to adhere to a higher standard and have stiffer penalties?
fact checking obviously isn't a priority @ kake new
You might need to have someone do a fact check on the "touching two 16 year old" conviction. Would hate to have another media source in a lawsuit for not reporting correct information. Wonder why people don't trust media???