Print
E-mail
Share
digg
Newsvine
Facebook
Stumble
Technorati
reddit
Fark
twitterMan accuses teacher charged in sex assaults, sues city
Suit accuses Charles Rogers of abuse while working as rec center employee
Published Saturday, May 16, 2009 | 2:05 a.m.
Updated Tuesday, May 19, 2009 | 6:54 p.m.
Garrett Junior High teacher Charles Richard "Rick" Rogers coached the BC United soccer club for 23 years. He has been arrested and charged with possession of child pornography, using a minor in producing pornography and sexual assault and lewdness with a minor under 14.
Sun archives
- Boy alleges he was sexually assaulted by teacher (4-21-2009)
- People who know teacher saddened over child sex allegations (4-9-2009)
- Teacher’s bail set at $1.3 million in sex assault case (4-7-2009)
- Teacher charged with possessing child porn to be placed on house arrest (3-31-2009)
- Teacher’s arrest on child porn charges stuns Boulder City (3-26-2009)
A man who says he was molested in 1999 when he was 10 years old by a Boulder City recreation center employee is now suing the alleged abuser as well as the city.
The man filed the suit Thursday in Clark County District Court against Charles R. Rogers, who has been charged with two counts of sexual assault with a minor, three counts of lewdness with a minor and use of children in pornography, and 64 counts of child pornography.
Boulder City police say that in Rogers' home they found videos and photos showing preteen boys in various sexual encounters, including one showing Rogers in sex acts with boys believed to be between 6 and 12 years old. Rogers, 46 when he was arrested, most recently was a science teacher at Garrett Junior High School.
The plaintiff in the lawsuit alleges the city was negligent in hiring and supervising Rogers. Besides Rogers, the suit names as defendants the city of Boulder City, the city Recreation Department, the city Recreation Center, the city Department of Parks and Recreation and city Parks and Recreation Director Roger Hall.
City Manager Vicki Mayes declined comment on the suit Friday, saying she had not seen it. Mayes said she was unaware of any other financial claims against the city related to Rogers.
Hall could not immediately be reached for comment.
The lawsuit said that in January 1997, the plaintiff enrolled in a baseball program at the recreation center and two years later, after his father died, Rogers became close to him.
First Rogers invited him to stay after baseball practice for extra coaching and then he invited him to use the recreation center after hours and offered the facilities there for the boy's private use and enjoyment, the suit said.
Rogers then invited the boy, then 10, to sleepovers at his home, where he allegedly gave him "small white pills" and told him they would help him sleep.
The lawsuit alleges that while asleep, Rogers would remove the boy's clothes and take nude photos of him; and that at some point he forced himself sexually onto the boy.
The abuse lasted about two years and the boy didn't report it to anyone at the time, his Las Vegas attorney, Jason Naomi, said.
The plaintiff says he was adopted at the age of 16 and later began therapy for sleep disorders, depression, anxiety and digestive problems. These health problems are ongoing, the suit said.
The plaintiff said that last month, he had to be hospitalized and treated for post traumatic stress disorder after seeing a television news report about the arrest of Rogers. That was the first time the man revealed he had been abused by Rogers, Naomi said.
Naomi said the alleged victim has been cooperating with the Boulder City Police Department in its investigation and detectives investigating Rogers have found photos of the plaintiff, taken when he was a boy.
The suit seeks general and punitive damages that are unspecified but that are more than $20,000. It alleges assault, battery, intentional infliction of emotional distress, false imprisonment, municipal liability, negligence; and negligent hiring, supervision and training.
"Plaintiff was ... unwillingly and unlawfully confined, and restrained, against his will, with invalid use of authority and without means for safe and voluntary exit," the suit charges.
"It is the policy, practice and custom of defendants and their supervisors to tolerate and ratify the leaving of minor children in the custody, and care of persons, agents and employees of defendants," the suit says.
"Defendants ... owed a duty to plaintiff to ensure that his health, welfare and safety would be protected ...," the suit says. "Defendants ... breached such duties when defendants left the care of plaintiff in the custody and care of persons, agents and employees of defendants."
The suit was filed by Las Vegas attorney Jason Naomi.
From January 1986 until his arrest, Rogers worked for the Boulder City Parks and Recreation Department part time, helping organize league play.
Discussion: 23 comments so far…
Post a comment
- Most Read
- Discussed
- Most E-mailed
- Wonder drug for men no success story
- CityCenter: One man’s concept of a real city
- Bellfield tolls again for UNLV in 76-71 win over Louisville
- Metro corrections officer remembered for his love of family
- Notebook: UNLV prospect Polee likes what he sees, and hears, at the Mack
- Live game blog: Bellfield, UNLV come through late, upset No. 16 Louisville
- Man, 18, arrested for DUI in crash that kills woman, 24
- Man fatally shot during robbery attempt of woman
- Bishop Gorman crushes Reed to head to state championship
- Pitino doesn’t consider loss to UNLV a total loss
Blogs
The Greene Room
MWC Winners and Losers: Week 13
The Kats Report
If the message is 'rock out,' then KISS is indeed a message band (1 Comment)
Could a savior of shuttered Las Vegas Art Museum be ... Peter Max? (6 Comments)
For Paul Stanley and KISS, rock and roll is not over (6 Comments)
Twenty years ago today, Human Nature took root on the farm (1 Comment)
Robin Leach's Las Vegas Celebrity Watch
Photo Gallery: Donny Osmond’s triumphant return to the Flamingo
The Kats Report
'DWTS' champ Donny Osmond still deft afoot in return to Flamingo (8 Comments)
Calendar »
- 30 Mon
- 1 Tue
- 2 Wed
- 3 Thu
- 4 Fri
-
DJ showdown at Prive
Prive | 10 p.m. to 11:59 p.m.
-
Rok Box with Mike Carbonell at Tabu
Tabú Ultralounge | 10 p.m. to 11:59 p.m.
-
DJ Riz at Jet
Jet | 10 p.m. to 11:59 p.m.
-
Football specials at Diablo's
Diablos Cantina
The Sun
Locally owned and independent for more than 50 years.
Somehow it's hard to take someone seriously who suddenly decides ten years after the fact he was a victim and now wants money for it.
good luck with that. where have you been for all of these years? hope you got proof
We gotta do something about all these teachers!!
To KillerB & true_rebel_fan: Did you guys not read the very first sentence of the article? The guy was 10 years old when this happened 10 years ago. Instead of coming down hard on the victim, why not ask the question of why this Rogers character was able to work with kids. Recreation center employees and anyone with direct contact with children should undergo a thorough background check. We need to protect our youth, not blame them for falling prey to society's scum.
MisD -- I read just fine.
Kids' reports of this kind to teachers, cops, therapists, parents, etc., carry a lot of weight. Why didn't the kid report then or at least near then? To me it looks like just another "me too" spillover from all those Catholic lawsuits.
This is happening all over the country. Go to www.schoolteachernews.com and click on the Scandal page. This year they have documented over 200 of these types of incidents. In 2008 they found 478 of these kinds of cases.
10 years?.....this should have been handled "10 years ago" and the man would have been long taken off the streets.Where are the parents of this 10 year old? Where were they all this time. I find them guilty too....for what THEY allowed to happen to other children (if any) for all these years.This matter would have been dealt with long ago.I can't believe the parents.
Why sue the employer of a man that molested kids, when there was no evidence that he was capable of this type of behavior. People want the government to stay out of their business and then they want the government and employers to do background tests (which would have came up empty as he has no record) and then what? A Psch evaluation to predict that he may or may not be a future child molester? Please.
The children and Parents of children that KNEW first-hand what this man did and would do again in the future are the guilty ones in this case. NOT the employer.
For example, if a Von's store clerk follows a customer home and rapes her, should Vons be sued for hiring a potential rapist? Should Vons pay out tons of money to compensate a crime that happened over ten years ago? No, of course not.
The state is not the FBI and they can not do intense background checks on a man that would have came up ok anyway. There was no previous history of child abuse, sexual, or otherwise.
ALL teachers are not bad, and to generalize a whole category of people based on a few crimes is insane. There are good and bad teachers, good and bad Black people, Gay people, Mexican people etc...No one race, sexuality or creed is exempt from evil.
I am sorry for what happened to this man ten years ago, however, to sue anyone at this point would be futile. It will not change the past and now that the teacher is being held responsible for his actions, it will not change the lives of future victims.
The goal was for people to come forward with information on this man, to make the case stronger, not to line the pockets of previous victims. Money will not erase the pain, or humiliation.
Wow! I am simply amazed at some of the above posts. The very idea that a ten-year old can fully comprehend the perverted actions (rape, anyone?) by an adult, who in this very case, allegedly operated under the 'color of authority' is beyond my imagination. Unless many of you silently believe that the youngster enjoyed being molested? And, now he grabs an this opportunity to make some extra bucks? (I sure hope he gets as much as possible.)
More to the point: I have long argued for intense sex education for children - yes, as early as first grade. If parents can't take the responsibility - then the community (schools, churches, boy scouts, etc.) has little choice - or the community will be paying the victims out of their tax dollars years later.
Sexual victimization of young boys has long been swept under the rug. Most people (parents, especially) believe their boys are "strong" enough to repel these rapists. Young girls are normally categorized as being "helpless" in similar situations - hence they are given credence and sympathy. Boys are chastised for "allowing" such activity. I know, I've been there!! Try telling your mother that the adored parish priest (and part-time school teacher) had a knack of pulling down your trousers and tickling you to arousal. Oh, mom says, he's just teasing you. Furthermore, she advises, not to spread such nasty rumors or hell awaits.
I really believed that we'd traveled from such mind-think long ago. Evidently from the posts, we remain believing that Ozzie and Harriet still live.
Nevada5 -- your opinion is irrelevant on the delay, since that's pre-determined by a legal principle called "laches." It's the doctrine of stale claims -- who can remember with any clarity at all actual facts from ten years ago, what they did on a certain day, what actually happened, and so on. The People's Law Dictionary covers it at http://dictionary.law.com/default2.asp?t...
As for your sex education suggestion look up and read what Freud wrote on the subject.
Good point on the Ozzie and Harriet, although something more updated would be more accurate, like Family Ties.
NRS 11.215 Actions for damages for injury arising from sexual abuse of minor.
1. Except as otherwise provided in NRS 217.007, an action to recover damages for an injury to a person arising from the sexual abuse of the plaintiff which occurred when the plaintiff was less than 18 years of age must be commenced within 10 years after the plaintiff:
(a) Reaches 18 years of age; or
(b) Discovers or reasonably should have discovered that his injury was caused by the sexual abuse,
E whichever occurs later.
2. As used in this section, sexual abuse has the meaning ascribed to it in NRS 432B.100.
(Added to NRS by 1991, 117; A 1993, 254, 455, 456)
NRS 217.480 County to provide for counseling of victims and certain relatives upon request.
1. The board of county commissioners of each county shall provide by ordinance for the counseling of victims of sexual abuse and any relatives living with the victims. A relative is not eligible to receive counseling if he committed the sexual abuse for which counseling is sought. The counseling may be provided only upon request by the victim or eligible relative.
2. As used in this section, sexual abuse has the meaning ascribed to it in NRS 432B.100.
(Added to NRS by 1985, 2099)
NRS 217.480 County to provide for counseling of victims and certain relatives upon request.
1. The board of county commissioners of each county shall provide by ordinance for the counseling of victims of sexual abuse and any relatives living with the victims. A relative is not eligible to receive counseling if he committed the sexual abuse for which counseling is sought. The counseling may be provided only upon request by the victim or eligible relative.
2. As used in this section, sexual abuse has the meaning ascribed to it in NRS 432B.100.
(Added to NRS by 1985, 2099)
yes - I always enjoy a healthy debate regarding justice and injustice in our society.
The above post of mine (NRS statute) may or may not be good law. But, it is the law and I think can apply in this particular case if the alleged abuser is convicted.
Nevada5 -- Bad law. Laches is time-honored for a reason, and in cases like this it's just too easy to make it up with little chance of controversion.
It's all about greed. Apparently little was learned from the 80s-90s recovered memory hysteria.
For the plaintiff here it would seem to be simple -- IF he's in one of the videos, etc., seized from Rogers, which has its own problem -- it's highly illegal to possess, transport, or view it. If he's not then he has a big problem with his burden of proof.
I am not certain, of coarse I could be wrong, if an attorney would take on a case like this with no proof or evidence. It's not like he is still 10 years old and getting prepping from the children's protective services, if you know what I am saying. If all is as they say it is, good luck to this survivor of such a horrendous and heinous act. And with the lengthy time of getting through the trial and red tape, who would make up such a terrible thing?
Nevada and all the other states will want to continue their vigilance, perhaps even improve it.
newstart -- you don't lawyers. They're sometimes called "ambulance chasers" for a reason.
to killerB: controversion (?) can't find the word in any dictionary - what does it mean?
There are many "bad" laws on the books and you may be correct that NRS 11.215 might be one of them.
Greed? - not in this case as portrayed by the article written by Mr. Green. I do agree the so-called "memory hysteria" wasted numerous lives.
However, child rape is far reaching and needs to be addressed by society/community. For every child that comes forward - I'm willing to wager that at least a dozen children never see the light of justice served on their rapists.
Again, especially boys. As you point out - evidence 10-years old is difficult. In this particular lawsuit - it may be very possible that this young man is in one of the films/videos or photographs seized from the house. Perhaps he is simply protecting his own self-esteem, or community standing.
Many "survivors" feel guilt and shame because they experienced physical arousal while being abused. It does not mean that the child desired the experience or understood what it meant at the time. Furthermore - it is outright illegal and disgusting for an adult to molest a child even if the child requests such attention.
Boys are children - weaker and more vulnerable than their perpetrators - who cannot really fight back. The molester has greater size, strength, and knowledge. Such knowledge is also power exercised many times under the color of authority, using resources such as money or other bribes, or outright threats. Boys can respond physically to stimulation even in traumatic or painful sexual situations. Therapists who work with sexual offenders know that one way the molester can maintain secrecy is to label the child's sexual response as an indication of his willingness to participate. "You liked it, you wanted it," they'll say.
If this lawsuit brings some sense of closure to the young man - then I say go for it! I am also willing to predict that more youngsters - now grown men will come forward because of the photographic evidence. And, they should! The "trauma" the community might suffer, and tax-dollars lost, just might ignite more communicative and vigilant parenting.
Nevada5 -- "controversion" was intended to mean the opposite of "incontrovertible evidence":
"n. evidence introduced to prove a fact in a trial which is so conclusive, that by no stretch of the imagination can there be any other truth as to that matter. Examples: a fingerprint which shows someone had been present in a room, or a blood test which scientifically proves that a person is not the parent of a child." (from The People's Law Dictionary http://dictionary.law.com/)
You made the key point here with "ignite more communicative and vigilant parenting."
I think we are all too quick as a society to just make a blanket assumption a child is always "abused" and damaged by a sexual encounter with an adult. I remember an Encyclopaedia Britannica article on human sexuality which questioned this, saying the evidence is unless it's forced and violent it will just become part of the child's life experience, and not necessarily negative at that. Far too often it's the therapists and the prosecutors' drive for a credible child witness who instil the trauma and damage into the child. We have the California grand juries from a couple decades ago to thank for an extremely disturbing look into that racket. LA's McMartin trial and the Wenatchee witch hunt comes to mind.
Before you all jump on me about this, THINK FIRST -- all persons will at some time in their lives become interested in sex, then act on that natural urge. Our society just doesn't seem to know how to handle its children's sexuality. Society and its prosecutors (and other parasites, like the therapists) don't make a lot of distinction in how they handle a 17 year old and a young child as "victims" in consensual sexual incidents. The consequences can be tragic and long reaching.
i keep telling myself, I'm going to sue Nike for all my emotional distress. growing up, I was told that if I get MJ's shoes, I could jump like Mike. after buying them, I couldn't even touch the net, nevertheless the rim. So disheartening as a kid after that ordeal
Lets face it like the Priesthood in the past, now teaching has become home to these perves. this is the second perve busted by Boulder City from the same school in the last two years. What does that tell you. Doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure out there are more !
killerB:
Thanks for the update re: incontrovertible evidence
Now, as stated earlier I do not hesitate in a good debate. You made some points that are interesting, but also border on disturbing.
I think your original postings focused on this Boulder City man seeking financial reward (so to speak) for his alleged abuse suffered a decade past. Your argument has some merit in that it is much too long ago for evidence. You criticized resurfacing memories; considering it hysteria - also a salient point. I countered with the current legislation active in Nevada. Not that I agree with it. In fact, I don't know if it's even been used successfully.
I think you are wrong in attempting to sugar-coat adult/child sex as acceptable as long as violence is not a factor. Violence comes in many forms. Some may call it bribery, fraud, teasing, bullying, name-calling, etc.
In our societal structure our sexual nature and instincts are respected as private endeavors. I strongly believe that a child (legally someone under the age of 18) does not have the mind-set to fully comprehend his or her sexuality - even in consensual encounter(s).
Imagine a young boy, age 13, gathering with his friends at the neighborhood skate park and happily recounting how exhausted he is having just completed a sexual experience with the new girl, age 15, from school. Turn the same location with the same friends assembled and imagine, just imagine, this 14-year old "happily" sharing how Mr. Smith, the much admired middle-school teacher, had just performed "mind-blowing" oral sex on him. I don't think anyone would need to imagine their reactions. Justifiably so!! Sex between a non-age-appropriate partner is harmful and dangerous. That's why it is against the law and should remain so.
Your subtle attack on "therapists" and prosecutors is a stretch. As in any profession - you'll find rotten apples. Certainly, therapists have a great deal of "control" over their patients. I do remember the McMartin fiasco - and it was hurtful (in the very least) to those involved. In many cases it minimalized actual child abuse cases before the courts. In this state we elect our district attorneys - which gives them and their deputies exceeding license to harass border-line offenders in hopes of making the nightly news and headlines. (O.J. is a perfect example.)
Sensual interactions between age-appropriate minors should be taken on a case-by-case basis. Obviously, age-appropriate teens discovering each other sexually should meet different standards than the current case in the news. And, in most cases it is. Two 14-year old boys playing with each other behind closed doors is not a capital case. But, a grown man (at least three or four years older as far as I'm concerned) and a young child merits an investigation and prosecution.
Nevada5 -- If you found some of it disturbing then you're thinking.
"I think you are wrong in attempting to sugar-coat adult/child sex as acceptable as long as violence is not a factor."
I didn't sugar coat anything. In a society where all of us, especially kids, are constantly bombarded with sexy images and suggestions, it's an ostrich act to say kids are innocent. Listen in on a young teens' conversation sometime. Look how they dress and act. They're taught sexuality at school both formally and informally. There are places in this world where the age of consent is around 12 (in keeping with this country's common law), in Islam it commences with the onset of menses. In the U.S. there are still states where 14 year olds can marry.
The article I mentioned was from Britannica, an authority on information as old as this country. That takes a much broader view than narrow U.S. puritan hypocrisy.
"In our societal structure our sexual nature and instincts are respected as private endeavors."
Hardly. Look around. Despite sex being everywhere, the police machinery constantly grinds up mostly boys for the slightest offenses. Those two 13 year old middle school boys in McMinnville, Oregon, a couple years ago were on their way to becoming registered sex offenders for just swatting girls' butts in school.
"I strongly believe that a child (legally someone under the age of 18) does not have the mind-set to fully comprehend his or her sexuality - even in consensual encounter(s)."
18 is a stupid age and an arbitrary boundary completely divorced from reality. Of course, countries and religions long ago discovered if you control mankind's most basic drives you can control them like any herd. Legal or not teenagers are active in this regard. My biggest objection on this is the cases where teenagers or just older are prosecuted for consensual sex with slightly younger partners. Then there's the Kansas couple who married under the 14 year old parental consent law due to pregnancy, but when they moved to Nebraska he was immediately prosecuted for statutory rape.
"Your subtle attack on "therapists" and prosecutors is a stretch." Not at all. Look up http://www.co.san-diego.ca.us/cnty/cntyd... and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McMartin_pr...
These are just a small sampling of what it's really like. I've sat in courtrooms where state caseworkers and prosecutors rode to the rescue for mothers to keep custody of their daughters after making them available for their boyfriends. The innocent dads were treated with suspicion, like complete outsiders.
This is getting too long. But I must make this last point clear -- I'm NOT promoting or encouraging adult-YOUNG child sex encounters. I'm a father who tolerated no undue attention to his children when they were young.