By Taylor Smith
WOODLAND, CA – Behavioral evaluations of the accused were reviewed here in Yolo County Superior Court Friday regarding his attempted sexual assault charges from 2018, and the court determined that, despite his developmental disabilities, he remains a danger to himself and others.
Judge David W. Reed reviewed the testimony and presented the evidence on which the claim was made to the court. He recalled evidence from previous hearings that, since the accused has been in custody, he has presented alarming behaviors with little improvement since 2018.
The judge determined that the accused’s developmental issues serve as sufficient evidence that he has severely limited control over his actions.
The court noted that, after the accused was arrested, he reported that he had been angry, and told the deputy he thought the victim would be happy with his actions.
Because of this statement, the court decided the accused’s mental struggles likely contributed to this irrational and inappropriate behavior.
It was then revealed to the court that the incident occurred in the middle of the day, and the victim and the accused had never met each other; he is said to have approached her in her place of work, as he was allegedly inquiring about housing opportunities at the apartment complex at which the victim was working.
“The defendant’s actions were brazen, unprovoked, and alarming. The defendant traumatized the victim,” said Judge Reed.
The judge explained why the accused should still be considered a danger, noting, that following his arrest, there were several incidents in which the accused was a danger to himself, including taking his mother’s antidepressants and discussing suicidal ideations.
“The evidence supports a conclusion that the defendant’s developmental disability was a substantial factor causing him to have serious difficulty in controlling his dangerous behavior. The defendant has shown a difficulty in controlling his anger, impulse control, making and keeping friends, recognizing and respecting boundaries. The court record documented his IQ to be 50,” continued the judge.
The accused was reported to have consistently shown “difficulty adjusting to his placements, immaturity, disrespect towards staff and women, aggressive behavior, lack of impulse control, inability or unwillingness to follow rules, socially or sexually inappropriate conduct or comments, being manipulative, and testing limits.”
In September of 2021, his doctors documented decreasing frequency of such incidents, but the same behaviors continued, they said.
“It is troubling that the defendant is charged with very serious charges that are considered violent sex crimes and he has not yet realized or accepted that inappropriate sexual or social comments to women around him makes him appear to be unwilling or unable to act appropriately,” said Judge Reed.
“Comments that he made about the crime since it happened suggest that he does not understand or accept the seriousness of his actions during the sexual assault. Because of that, he presents as a dangerous person. Because of that, the court finds that he is currently still dangerous to others,” he concluded.
As a result, the court extended the accused’s incompetency commitment for one year. Although both of his doctors recommend that with restrictions he can be placed in a community facility, the accused will be confined to as least restrictive residential placement necessary to achieve the purposes of his treatment—so long as such a facility is available.
The accused is scheduled for a review in late September and will remain in custody until further notice.
