Climber Charles Barrett Arrested for Yosemite Sexual Assaults

I took a bit of time to reflect on my feelings about this case and verdict. Here’s a few thoughts in no particular order:

• Again, I’m so impressed with the victim (KG), the other victims who testified as witnesses, the investigators and the US Attorney office. This was a very difficult case for a lot of people and the commitment and hard work that went into this result is phenomenal. 
• In my opinion Charlie Barrett is just the tip of the iceberg. And, frankly, he was just another in a long line of abusers who use some kind of elite status in sports (and other endeavors) to create impunity for their bad actions. You can look at gymnastics, rowing and, yes, even USA Climbing and find other examples. We need to stop being so impressed by fame or exceptional skills that we give people a pass. 
• On a related point: I find it annoying to hear that the “climbing community” failed in this instance. I think that passes the buck. WTF is the “climbing community?” Most climbers had never heard of CB. Who failed are all the individual people, many of them famous climbers, and other influential people in the climbing industry and media, who for years chose to dismiss the pleas for help and support from the women Charlie victimized (who many of these people also knew well). Instead, they made excuses and looked the other way in the face of very credible allegations. All because CB climbed hard or was fun to party with. I hope next time they will make another choice. 
• This isn’t over for the victims. They will continue to need support. I imagine they’re all feeling a huge sense of relief that he was convicted and will face a very long sentence in a maximum security federal prison, but, also, CB is on record saying he was going to retaliate against the victims and witnesses even if he got convicted. I’m sure the feds are all over that, but people need to have ears wide open for any inkling that someone in our midst is helping him follow through on that threat. And, this time, report it! 
• I wonder where all the men are who said that it was unfair to talk about this case on MP until CB was found guilty by a jury? Surely they must be anxious to speak out now that it’s okay and they don't have to worry about tainting a jury or unfairly prejudicing people against the defendant? Or maybe they were just sock puppet accounts run by the defendant’s cronies? Who knows?

Tradibanwrote:

And how about those fellas who said they would reserve judgement until after the verdict?? Where y’all at? 

It’s time to judge.

Right. Are the innocent until proven guilty people still going to try and protect the next creep?

The haters have been proven wrong. When Andrew Rice says someone is a criminal, they are a criminal.

Ryan Squawwrote:

Right. Are the innocent until proven guilty people still going to try and protect the next creep?

The haters have been proven wrong. When Andrew Rice says someone is a criminal, they are a criminal.

Uh, this isn't my point at all. I have no particular gift for identifying criminals nor would I presume to be a judge and jury. But we can still have a conversation about bad actions and actors in our midst without it having to first rise to the level of a trial and conviction.

Pasting this here from below because of MP's crazy posting limits:

Ryan Squaw wrote:

Sorry, I misunderstood.  But it's good to hear from a lawyer that we can expose the creeps before waiting until it's proven. I get sick of all these people talking about the rights of criminals. The police and courts don't always protect us from these creeps and sometimes the only way we can fight back is to spread the word.

No need to apologize, I just want to be clear that I don't see myself as any sort of vigilante or judge. But I do think people need to be accountable for our actions. And part of that is being an upstander, not a bystander. There are WAY too many people who could have helped these victims years ago and did not, because they didn't think it was their place to judge or to speak up. That cowardice led to there being MORE victims over time.

Finally, I'm not a lawyer, so you can stop calling me one. 

Alan Rubinwrote:

Concerning sentencing, a lengthy delay between conviction and sentencing is routine in Federal criminal trials; in fact, it is built into the system ( this is not the situation in most state criminal proceedings). The delay is to permit the US Probation Service to complile a lengthy pre-sentence report. In Federal Court, as others have mentioned, there are quite strict sentencing guidelines that a judge is essentially required to follow. These guidelines take into account various aggravating and mitigating factors, and the purpose of the pre-sentence report is to obtain and document the information regarding these factors for the judge to consider in determining where the defendant 'fits' within those guidelines. Among the aggravating factors are the nature and statutory penalty range of the offenses for which the defendant was convicted ( very serious in this case), his prior record of convictions ( Barrett has prior incarcerations), his history of probation and restraining order violations, remorse or lack thereof, mental health and substance abuse history, in this case his history of witness intimidation and threats will very likely also be considered.

I strongly doubt that climbing ability or accomplishments are among the mitigating factors the judge will be considering.

Given Mr. Barrett's history as has been reported, I anticipate the guidelines will require and the judge will impose a very substantial period if incarceration---over 15 years, quite likely substantially more, in Federal prison. Given some of his documented threats of retaliation against victims, witnesses, and law enforcement, it is quite likely that he will actually serve his sentence in one of the high security Federal penitentiaries---not at all pleasant places. That location will be determined by the US Bureau of Prisons once he is sentenced.

Thanks for this, Alan. I really appreciate your insight and expertise. 

Andrew Ricewrote:

Uh, this isn't my point at all. I have no particular gift for identifying criminals no would I presume to be a judge and jury. But we can still have a conversation about bad actions and actors in our midst without it having to first rise to the level of a trial and conviction. 

Sorry, I misunderstood.  But it's good to hear from a lawyer that we can expose the creeps before waiting until it's proven. I get sick of all these people talking about the rights of criminals. The police and courts don't always protect us from these creeps and sometimes the only way we can fight back is to spread the word.

Ryan Squawwrote:

Sorry, I misunderstood.  But it's good to hear from a lawyer that we can expose the creeps before waiting until it's proven. I get sick of all these people talking about the rights of criminals. The police and courts don't always protect us from these creeps and sometimes the only way we can fight back is to spread the word.

It's not that simple, Ryan. I am writing as one who has spent his career working in the criminal 'justice' system as a public defender. We have to tread carefully. Absolutely, we must take reports of these crimes ( or negative behaviors that might not reach the level of being criminal) very seriously and not cover them up just to protect our friends or well-known individuals ( in climbing or other fields), but at the same time we have to be very careful not to create a 'lynch mob' atmosphere---as false accusations do happen (even for sexual assaults). So there is a very delicate balance that needs to be maintained and, very much including the presumption of innocence until proven guilty in court as the final word, but while simultaneously not using this concept as an excuse to ignore or justify bad behavior.
It is worth noting in this context that Mr. Barrett himself was making false accusations against those he victimized, and many chose to accept his word over theirs--which compounded their victimization. So just 'spreading the word' can be a two-way street. Hopefully the trial and verdict will now finally resolve this situation ( though sadly that isn't always the case).

Edit to add: I'm at my daily post limit so need to respond to PWZ here: Why did you quote only part of my comment without the modifying  second part or noting the comment I was responding to? 

Austin Grantwrote:

You read that one wrong, bud. But if you look back over the last 32-pages, you'll find a handful of people who ARE defending or explaining away this behavior. Start there with your ignore list. 

I’m glad I was just reading that wrong, it was kind of a broad brush. Considering, as you say, that Barrett has had a fan club, it could be read either way.

Alan Rubinwrote:

So there is a very delicate balance that needs to be maintained and, very much including the presumption of innocence until proven guilty in court as the final word

Presumption of innocence is a legal construct. There is no reason to extend that privilege in interpersonal relationships given the accusations we've been discussing.

when it comes to pro athletes and sexual assault where there's smoke theres fire. especially in the football world. these guys are so protected and entitled  their whole lives simply because they have talent that they get away with a ton of bad stuff that  ordinary folks would get called out on. when it finally does break that they are predators you know its been happening a very long time..  

Becca Joy S wrote:

Would be neat if we did more than a slap on the wrist for these violent crimes. Why are we so tolerant of male anger and tantrums?

Fixed it for you. Although in this case it was, it is most definitely not just men that get away with violence/anger/stalking/tantrums. 

EMFR Iwrote:

Fixed it for you. Although in this case it was, it is most definitely not just men that get away with violence/anger/stalking/tantrums. 

As the article states, statistically women have fatalities from domestic abuse at a higher rate than men

Becca Joy Steinbrecherwrote:

As the article states, statistically women have fatalities from domestic abuse at a higher rate than men

I think you're making a false correlation here. While that is true, the fatalities tend to be prosecuted/convicted, thus the "tolerance" you mentioned isn't correlated. Before the fatality stage (ie stalking, violence, etc), both sexes get away with a lot more than should be tolerated, not just men. In fact, a lot of women are given the benefit of the doubt as to whether or not they're actually a "threat" to a male (or female) partner, by virtue of them being a woman. 

Edited to add: this is not a statement of "women are just as bad as men." I'm merely pointing out that it's not solely a male on female abuse issue - this certainly goes both ways, and is tolerated far too often, regardless of the sex of the violator. 

PWZwrote:

Presumption of innocence is a legal construct. There is no reason to extend that privilege in interpersonal relationships given the accusations we've been discussing.

That's what I'm saying. If you know someone is a criminal, call them a criminal. Get the word out here or on IG or whatever. Don't wait for them to be arrested or some judge and jury that could take forever.

EMFR Iwrote:

Fixed it for you. Although in this case it was, it is most definitely not just men that get away with violence/anger/stalking/tantrums.

However, only men can “mansplain”.

Tradibanwrote:

However, only men can “mansplain”.

Ah yes, because any counterpoint to "men are bad" statements is inherently wrong.

What is the best way to help victims of Charlie at this point?

I'm watching the Dirty John, based on a true story, TV series now and it sounds so much like this. I commend the victims for having the courage to face the truth (very difficult with all the gas lighting) and also to confront their abuser (that is the only thing that can stop him from hurting new victims) bravo! Some unsolicited and maybe already heard advice I feel I'd be remiss if I didn't mention: If this guy gets out of prison I'd recommend: taking a self defense and situational awareness class. Have pepper spray all the time. Consider a CCW. Men are bigger and stronger than women but you can even the playing field and be comfortable knowing that you can be in control if you're prepared. It sucks that someone may need to do that, but I think the peace of mind and safety factor is worth it.

Ryan Squawwrote:

That's what I'm saying. If you know someone is a criminal, call them a criminal. Get the word out here or on IG or whatever. Don't wait for them to be arrested or some judge and jury that could take forever.

What you’re “saying” is ignorant in this and similar cases (I think your point has sailed over a few heads).

You  seem to have both a misplaced faith in the legal system, an unfounded fear of false accusations.  

When it comes to sexual assault and rape, it’s not even close the numbers who get away or are not even prosecuted compared to false accusations.  On the scale of worries, false accusations is right there with killer bees and jellyfish stings.  Meaning they fret me not.  

EMFR Iwrote:

Fixed it for you. Although in this case it was, it is most definitely not just men that get away with violence/anger/stalking/tantrums. 

#notallmen, there you go. or was it #alllivesmatter?

Becca Joy S wrote:

Would be neat if we did more than a slap on the wrist for these violent crimes. Why are we so tolerant of male anger and tantrums?

While what you are saying is profiling men. What Mr Barrett has been found guilty of is bad. Why do you accuse all men? Are you another victim of abuse from men? Sorry. We are not all bad.