Johnstud56
New member
EDIT: Ive since talked to Dennis... he's fine in my book. I cannot delete my posts, I didnt think he would do something like that. If you guys read the charges were DROPPED. Sorry Dennis!
I guess I will reluctantly play devils advocate here.
I don't know this guy. Never spoke to him, emailed, or visited his facebook group.
With your post I did go check out what is being posted on facebook. What is being stated there and what people are calling him just like the posters are here. So I'm going to assume this is the same person. I haven't looked into it but I will assume all those on facebook and here have.
From what I gather some people liked him previous to this and some people really disliked him. I noticed the posts based on the same information you posted in the link and the original charges stating for fact he is a child molester. Not knowing anything but the charges leveled and this article.
I'm not defending a child molester but before I call someone that I would like some proof other than a charge. It is very easy to get angry when you here stories like this and immediately believe the charge is accurate.
So the original child molesting charge was dismissed. There was some sort of plea. One might think that in of itself is guilty sounding.
Here is the article you linked to
Sounds very inappropriate doesn't it? This site doesn't seem to fond of his plea deal so I wondering why they didn't include the original fondling charges as the original charges? Why would a judge take a plea for battery, on a child molestation case? Something doesn't add up.
So before I start trashing someone and there entire future I want to make sure it is just. The above article wasn't very supportive of Mr. Willis and it sounds very inappropriate.
While the finding of the court is much different than the original charge that still sounds like he had some girl in his house doing inappropriate stuff.
Well someone pointed out that this was his daughter he was tickling on another site. If true, the above statement seems to be written to shed a different light. Wrestling with your own daughter and tickling her is much different than some random girl.
Heck, I was very ticklish as a child and remember wrestling with a cousin who pinned me down and tickled me until I almost peed my pants. I tickled my sisters and it most certainly wasn't what is being made out here. It most certainly wasn't battery. It's common horseplay.
So before I take any part in trashing this man's name for life in this way I sure would like some more information. Why would anyone let a man walk on simple battery if he is a child molester? Was there just not enough evidence?
Was the story changed?
Unfortunately it isn't always cut and dry and questions like is he married to the mother? Is there a bitter divorce? A custody fight? I don't know but just saying this guy is a molester based on the fact he was tickling his child and didn't stop when she said isn't enough.
I hope those running around calling him this know much more than what I read.
If he was really just horsing around playing with his child and didn't stop tickling when she asked (which of course one never did) I think a big injustice is being done.
If he wasn't and is what he is being called and you knew for sure well then Burn his name into the ground.... Don't do it because you don't like the guy.
Charges may have been able to be bargained with due to not having enough evidence and or change in the story. Either by coercion or change of heart.
The fact is, is that he was charged with a crime of child molestation which has now been dropped to a sentence of two years on probation for battery. It was battery on a child. Still despicable. There is more to this story. Not sure but it doesn't sound like the girl is his own daughter, but maybe a step daughter.
We have never done business with him and now we never will, regardless of the Plea deal. A plea deal is not NOT GUILTY. He did not fight for that he did not admit the guilt but took a lesser charge. He avoided going on trial where he could have been convicted and sent to prison.
It isn't possible that it is because it was untrue? See that's the problem with automatic condemnation without any facts. He is guilty just because it was originally charged.Either by coercion or change of heart.
It was battery on a child. Still despicable.
But your stating it is good as guilty of a crime he wasn't convicted of because of the nature of the accusation. You state no knowledge of the case but because of what the accusation was it is good enough. It isn't guilty either.A plea deal is not NOT GUILTY.