16-year-old foreign exchange student found living with Ark. sex offender

thv11

Police reports state that 55-year-old Ronald Eitel recently moved to East 23rd Street in Texarkana.

Eitel was charged in 1982 with 12 counts of rape and convicted of four counts. Upon conviction, Eitel received two 20 year sentences and two 60 year sentences that were run consecutively, which meant he was to spend the better part of his life in prison. That changed when his sentences were recently overturned and was released from the Texas Department of Corrections.

So last nite watching the local news they came across with a sex offender bulletin giving this persons new address and speaking as if he was very guilty monster. I thought how I believed that there is always more to the story but just forgot about it until today. I get the news that they raided his home and how this girl was in serious danger because he is a serious sex offender so I dug deeper and found this.

chronical

What say you ats? What am I missing here in this case?

This...

Police learned that Eitel's wife, who used another name and identified as a single parent, applied to house the exchange student and was accepted following the placement protocol.

There is something very wrong with that. These people are very sneaky and disgusting. I have ZERO tolerance for hurting children. I get sick and dizzy when I read about this stuff.

a reply to: Digital_Reality
Sure that is what they say and she may have lied on forms but it is not easy to do because of the home visits.

The truth as I have learned it is that he only moved in with them yesterday and the woman has been at the residence for a while.

Did you check out the second link showing that the reason he was released from jail is because the dna evidence in 5 of the girls did not match his and the others had no dna evidence. In other words in 2001 they let him go because he was innocent.


I would strongly advise you to get all the facts before judgment

Everything I have found shows that this woman they claimed lied may not even be his wife. In other words they got the wrong lady. Therefore she may not have lied at all but they have their facts wrong.

a reply to: Digital_Reality

There is something very wrong with that. These people are very sneaky and disgusting. I have ZERO tolerance for hurting children. I get sick and dizzy when I read about this stuff.

Looks like it is affecting your ability to discern what was actually written. Kneejerk much? Nobody was hurt. There is no indication that anyone had any intention of hurting anybody. The guy was wrongfully convicted and released from jail recently.

Before that the wife was probably lonely and applied for the housing program.

It's curious. One article says his sentence was overturned. The other article says his convictions were overturned. Which is it? It's germane.

If it was indeed the convictions that were overturned, I'd be curious to know how it was Arkansas was able to slap him with the sex offender tag. If it was simply the sentences that were overturned, then that would be how he had the tag applied.

I find the fact that his wife applied to the program under another name to be highly suspect. Ducking a home visit wouldn't be all that hard. They (the wife) would know when they were coming. All he had to do was leave and hide his stuff, and that's that. I'd like to know what his wife's excuse is for lying on the application about both her name and marital status. Doesn't make her look good.

a reply to: Shamrock6

For some reason they were tracking the man and he first arrived at the address with the girl yesterday.

I get the same about his past. The article if the facts are right shows clearly that he did not do the crime.

a reply to: deadeyedick

This is one of those things that you really have to read to get the full picture. If the case is overturned, that changes everything. However, if they still have him listed as a sex offender, he needs to get busy cleaning that up. And having this expunged from his record.

It's sad, and his case being overturned should include all this being cleaned up, but the lawyers and courts gotta make it difficult.

Thanks for the intrest in the story and any finds will be greatly appreciated.



He is currently in bistate justice bld. and on his way back to prison of their choosing.

a reply to: RogueWave


I read it. The part about him being hairy and it not being mentioned stuck in my head among other facts.
When I saw that his wife lied it set off alarm bells.

Everything I have found shows that this woman they claimed lied may not even be his wife. In other words they got the wrong lady. Therefore she may not have lied at all but they have their facts wrong.

I looked back and did not see this info. This is an off the cuff opinion. If she did lie, that would be kind of odd, don't you think?
If not, your right, It looks like he is innocent.

But your right, RogueWave. I would get eliminated from a jury real fast on a case like this. I have children so it would be hard for me to take in the facts and keep a level head. I am a smart man but I get a little emotional when it comes to children getting hurt.

a reply to: deadeyedick

I don't see anything that specifies when he got to the house, only that it was "recent." Did I miss something?

a reply to: retiredTxn

The Arkansas sex offender registry lists his convictions. It doesn't list the same ones mentioned in the article.

My guess, and this is pure guesswork based off what I've been able to find, is that the convictions were not all overturned but some were, or the charges were changed. His sentence was overturned and/or set for "time served." It's all very curious and people seem to be changing the language used which, as I've said time and again on ATS, semantics matter when it comes to the law.

Not a shot at you, deadeye. Am referring to different articles using conviction and sentence as if they're interchangeable terms.

According to this source, HERE , he was arrested on a parole violation. Authorities are looking to see if he also violated any state or federal crimes.

The 16 year old girl is the one who alerted the police, after seeing the warning on TV about a level 4 sex offender who moved to the area.


My bad. Listed erroneous info. Source did not say what I previously stated. That's what happens when you have two sources at once.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: deadeyedick

I don't see anything that specifies when he got to the house, only that it was "recent." Did I miss something?

Yea that is how I was alerted to the case. Local news ran his name and addy on tv stating a pedo alert in the area. The local news always tells when and where in the area such people live and move. They stated he moved in yesterday. then today stated they found this girl at the address he moved to.

It came across to me that police and news were alerted yesterday that they just moved in and that they investigated his conditions and found her.

originally posted by: Digital_Reality
a reply to: RogueWave


I read it. The part about him being hairy and it not being mentioned stuck in my head among other facts.
When I saw that his wife lied it set off alarm bells.

Everything I have found shows that this woman they claimed lied may not even be his wife. In other words they got the wrong lady. Therefore she may not have lied at all but they have their facts wrong.

I looked back and did not see this info. This is an off the cuff opinion. If she did lie, that would be kind of odd, don't you think?
If not, your right, It looks like he is innocent.

But your right, RogueWave. I would get eliminated from a jury real fast on a case like this. I have children so it would be hard for me to take in the facts and keep a level head. I am a smart man but I get a little emotional when it comes to children getting hurt.

of the twelve girls that picked him in a line up only 6 had dna evidence and none of the dna matched his. One of the girls even told police that he was not the person that raped her and then she told them who did it to her and they ignored her.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: retiredTxn

The Arkansas sex offender registry lists his convictions. It doesn't list the same ones mentioned in the article.

My guess, and this is pure guesswork based off what I've been able to find, is that the convictions were not all overturned but some were, or the charges were changed. His sentence was overturned and/or set for "time served." It's all very curious and people seem to be changing the language used which, as I've said time and again on ATS, semantics matter when it comes to the law.

Not a shot at you, deadeye. Am referring to different articles using conviction and sentence as if they're interchangeable terms.

You are likely right. It said in one article that he pled to the charges he was convicted for. So not surprising that he would take the first out he was offered. I do not think it is over for him if he manages to get counsel.

originally posted by: deadeyedick
a reply to: Digital_Reality
I would strongly advise you to get all the facts before judgment

Everything I have found shows that this woman they claimed lied may not even be his wife. In other words they got the wrong lady. Therefore she may not have lied at all but they have their facts wrong.

Judgement seems to be the ONLY thing Americans do best. Can't wait for judgement to be passed on all of them. Just another parrot chirping every time the word "sex offender" is used. It's like a horribly retarded version of Pavlov's dogs. ...I also find that people that chirp the loudest tend to be the offenders.

I'm trying to figure out how his damn cases can be overturned and he can still be considered a Level 4 sex offender. If he didn't f'ing do it then he's not a sex offender or a risk. How do you overturn his sentences, release him, and keep him on one of the worst lists in USA?

The only thing predatory in this country is the justice and legal system. I'm guessing in about 10-20 years the majority of people in the USA (except the rich) will be in jail for something.

Interesting find, Deadeye, just another example of how our legal system needs a serious overhaul.

Some States don't remove a person from that States registry even if they were charged and their conviction was overturned ,If you fail to register even if not convicted, you will be guilty of a felony failure to register simply because your name is on the list. some people must be registered on the sex offender registration even after they are marked deceased. a reply to: Shamrock6