Climber Charles Barrett Arrested for Yosemite Sexual Assaults

Per US Govt. press release:
A three-count indictment was unsealed Tuesday after the arrest of well-known professional rock climber Charles Barrett, U.S. Attorney Phillip A. Talbert said in a news release.

According to court documents, in August 2016, the now 38-year-old Barrett forcibly committed sexual assault on two occasions and committed abusive sexual contact on a third while in Yosemite National Park.

Do You Have a Tip About This Case?

The U.S. Attorney’s Office asks that if you have information about this case or believe you may be a victim of Barrett’s, call (888) 653-0009, or email nps_isb@nps.gov.

The National Park Service is investigating this case. Assistant U.S. Attorneys Kimberly Sanchez, Michael Tierney, and Jessica Massey are the prosecutors.

CBS News Story about the Arrest. 

yooooooooooooo

Who?

If it's true, I hope they lock him up and throw away the key.

Can anybody provide context/a synopsis on this character??

M Clunewrote:

Can anybody provide context/a synopsis on this character??

I don't know him very well but hung out a handful of times, kind of the quiet intense character. One of the most talented climbers to ever do it, putting up double digit boulder problems and 5.13 trad climbs consistently for over a decade and even put out a few pretty good guidebooks. Always came off as super humble and friendly, sucks to see this. 

As a professional defense attorney, I ask everyone to withhold judgment until we know more. An indictment is an accusation that arises from a one-sided presentation to a grand jury. He may be guilty, maybe not—but let’s wait until either a jury decides after a trial or he pleas guilty.

Sucks for him and a few of his possible victims. I wonder if Instagram played any roll here.

Eastern Sierra Old Guy wrote:

I read the indictment - seems a little weird that he is accused of sexual assault on one day , and again the next day. Like, if he assaulted you why did you hang out with him again the next day? 

If we aren’t going to dog pile on Charlie then we are DEFINITELY NOT going to victim shame. 

Eastern Sierra Old Guy wrote:

Charlie has his issues but has given much to the climbing community.

The problem with statements like this is you are essentially saying, “oh he gave a lot to the Climbing community so he couldn’t possibly have done this.”  I agree there is no need to dog pile on someone and let due process take it’s course, but statements like this are already showing bias towards the accused.

Like, if he assaulted you why did you hang out with him again the next day? Sorry to all parties involved and hope all heal. Let's please avoid the online dogpile.

If you don't want a dogpile maybe YOU should refrain from YOUR bullshit.

Molly Haightwrote:

If we aren’t going to dog pile on Charlie then we are DEFINITELY NOT going to victim shame. 

Bravo! And to Eastern Sierra Old Guy, I'm sure you realize that being likeable or great at something doesn't mean you can't also be a criminal. Harvey Weinstein made some great movies. Bill Cosby was funny as shit, even when he was doing his "Spanish Fly" date rape drug bit. I hear R. Kelly wrote some really sexy songs, but he was also keeping women captive and abusing them in horrible ways.

I also believe in letting the justice system work its course. But given that bail is a thing and this person is likely to be released at some point pending trial, I think it's important that other potential victims have a heads up about the very serious allegations the US DOJ has made against their potential new camping or climbing buddy. 

Alan Rubinwrote:

As a professional defense attorney, I ask everyone to withhold judgment until we know more. 

Lol - too late - he’s Canceled as Fuk.

Kudos to “KG” for stepping up to the plate.  Hopefully the unfortunate spread of this all over the internet reaches a few others to also step up and help find and confirm the truth for all involved.

Well. I hope it’s not true. And that justice is served either way.

Guess I’ll just sit back and watch the dumpster fire that this thread is turning into.

Todd Berlier wrote:

to any and all up voting this comment or similar or just agreeing, you are revealing your implicit bias. 

to you (collective) please read thru these truly horrific statistics

https://www.rainn.org/statistics/criminal-justice-system

and of course he is innocent until proven guilty, i get that.

just for future reference if you choose to respond to this post and you haven't read thru the above link or you aren't using your real name i won't respond. 

Why not? You truly object if some of us prefer an avatar or alias?

Ironic, in this thread.

I did read your link, and, I am one of those statistics. A great many of us  are, at some point in our lives.

Best, OLH, aka Helen

Eastern Sierra Old Guy wrote:

Charlie has his issues but has given much to the climbing community. Before the vilification begins lets pause - let the courts do their job. An accusation is just that. I read the indictment - seems a little weird that he is accused of sexual assault on one day , and again the next day. Like, if he assaulted you why did you hang out with him again the next day? Sorry to all parties involved and hope all heal. Let's please avoid the online dogpile. 

If this guy was a bolt chopper the internet would have already hanged him. If the stories are true hopefully more people will come forward.

Alan Rubinwrote:

As a professional defense attorney, I ask everyone to withhold judgment until we know more. An indictment is an accusation that arises from a one-sided presentation to a grand jury. He may be guilty, maybe not—but let’s wait until either a jury decides after a trial or he pleas guilty.

A criminal trial doesn’t even mean he’s guilty or innocent, but you know what’s weird is that most people don’t get accused and indicted on 2 counts of sexual assault with one additional accusation. 

When this thread inevitably gets axed, might a suggest creating another as a PSA, that just states a few publicly available facts. The OP could turn off comments and just bump it once a week or something. This thread is bound to die, but future potential partners should know.

Eastern Sierra Old Guy wrote:

Again, let the actual facts come out before rushing to judgement . That shouldnt be a controversial thing to say . 

Controversial or not, you’ve said it three times now. People are aware of your opinion.

Eastern Sierra Old Guy wrote:

You know whats really weird is when people don’t actually read the accusation (3 accounts over two daus with the same woman, not three women) before jumping on the dog pile 

I edited my comment as you were accusing me of jumping on the dog pile. I said most people don’t get accused of sexual assault let alone an indictment being brought against them.

Erik Strand wrote:

She said that she is one of the people who escaped going to jail.

I personally am a couple of the cases where they didn’t go to jail, as well. The court system helps you stay out. You gotta be a repeat offender in today’s times to go to jail. 

I’ve also been in court enough times to know how biased and unjustly it is 

Lol! 

I've never had occasion to escape going to jail. I don't think you quite meant it that way, though.

You still missed the mark rather wildly. There was not even a suspect for my rape, unless you count the bank robber with similar shoeprints (ended up being a female, lol!), and, I am one of that minority who reported it, immediately.

But yes, it takes getting reported in the first place. Authorities believing you enough to follow through. A rape kit getting processed. Quite a lot of repeats before they get caught. Then there's the uphill battle in court.....

Where the victim is on trial also.

@Todd, so do you actually believe saying you won't reply to an alias (which you did, with me) would slow trolls down? I don't. But I also don't care. It's still a conversation within our community here, and every "troll" currently on here still slips up now and then with actual content. Or humour. Or sarcasm. Sometimes, that response isn't unreasonable.

Best, Helen