ARCHBOLD WEATHER

Judge Denies Motion For Closure In Juvenile Court





Michael Bumb, Fulton County Juvenile Court judge, denied a request by attorneys for two Archbold teenagers involved in the Archbold sexting case to close the courtroom to the public and media in a hearing Wednesday, June 3.

Also, one of the two juveniles entered a plea of “true,” a rough equivalent of “guilty” in adult court, to a charge of juvenile delinquency by way of disseminating matter harmful to juveniles.

The crime is considered a felony in adult courts.

Garrett Grime, 17, who completed his junior year at Archbold High School, entered into a negotiated plea and was placed into the juvenile court felony diversion program.

Under the terms of his probation, Bumb postponed sentencing, or disposition, for six months.

If Grime completes all the requirements of his probation, the charge against him will be dismissed.

Among the conditions of his probation are the requirements that he complete any class or program recommended by the Juvenile Probation Officer, and spend three days of “rehabilitative detention” at the Northwest Ohio Juvenile Training, Rehabilitation, and Detention Center, located adjacent to the Corrections Center of Northwest Ohio.

Bumb said if Grime failed his probation, the disposition hearing would be moved up, and he could be ordered to be incarcerated with the Ohio Department of Youth Services, and possibly be required to register with a juvenile sex offender list.

Bumb asked Grime if he disseminated harmful material; Grime answered that he did.

Grime told Bumb, “Me and other males received photos from females, and we colluded to put them into a collaborative folder and shared them with others.”

When Bumb asked if the photos went into a “drop box,” Grime answered that was the application.

Sexting

The sexting case became public Nov. 12, 2014, in an article in this newspaper, after school officials confirmed that inappropriate photographs were being circulated among AHS students.

The practice is commonly known as sexting, in which one person takes nude photographs of himself or herself, and sends them to another for private viewing.

Such photos often end up on the Internet, where control over them can be lost.

School officials notified Archbold police, who turned the investigation over to the Ohio Attorney General office, Bureau of Criminal Identifi- cation and Investigation.

Results of the BCI&I investigation were turned over to the Fulton County prosecutor office in April, and presented to juvenile court April 13.

Bumb announced the charges in an April 21 press release.

Closure Denied

Lorin J. Zaner, attorney representing Grime, and Paul H. Dugan, representing Lukas Rufenacht, the second 17-year-old charged with a felony-level crime plus a misdemeanor count of voyeurism, each submitted motions for closure of the juvenile court proceedings.

In his filing, Dugan, of Bryan, said the publishing of Rufenacht’s name by this newspaper had caused “embarrassment and damage to his reputation,” and further that release of the names by the state was done in violation of juvenile court rules.

Zaner said that other than the allegations in question, his client, Grime “has (a) good reputation in the community. He is a good student and is involved in numerous community and school-related activities.”

Zaner said if the hearing is left open to the public, “it is anticipated there will be media dissemination of the juvenile’s name and age.

“It will destroy the reputation he has and will create a situation where his hard work in the other areas of his life will be discounted. This will have a permanent, negative effect on the juvenile.”

During the hearing, Laurie Rufenacht, Lukas’ mother, said, “different people had commented negatively about him because of what’s been published in the paper.”

She said there had been comments that Lukas had been in trouble before.

“Mostly, we have gotten support from the community, but Lukas has been excluded from some things in school and from other kids.

“Prom things, after-prom parties; he’s not allowed to go to things.”

She told the court, “If you Google Lukas’ name at this point, you pull up the Buckeye’s article.

“And having already plastered his name across the paper a couple of times, my fear going forward… you know there will come a day when… he’s going to apply for a job, and potential employers can pull his name up and have access to what’s already been written in the paper.”

She said many people had come to the family and said they know that Lukas is a good kid.

“He’s being blamed for something that really isn’t just him,” she said. “He’s taking the fall for it, but he’s taking the fall for a whole lot of kids, not just himself.

“And his involvement in this is nothing like what’s been printed in the paper, and that’s very frustrating to us.”

In response to questioning from Scott Ciolek, attorney representing the Toledo Blade, Laurie Rufenacht said her son had been mentally harmed.

“He reads his name in the paper. He’s a juvenile. And he’s put in the paper, plastered across the paper, he and Garrett both, and they’re good kids, they’re juveniles, they’re great kids, you people don’t have a clue on that.”

She said she appreciated “the papers that didn’t put his name (in). One paper in particular did, and I think that was very cruel. It was our own community newspaper.”

Blade Opposes

In his closing remarks, Ciolek told the court there are three requirements that must be met before closing a court hearing, and none of those had been met.

Further, he said the benefits of releasing news about the hearings benefits the public, by providing a deterrent to crime.

Bumb, in rendering his ruling, said in the 1990s, the state Supreme Court had addressed issues of the juvenile courts, and had ruled there is no presumption for closure.

“In fact, the presumption is the hearings are open,” he said.

Bumb said as a general observation, “I find it somewhat ironic, and again, I want to emphasize very clearly that the children are innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, but they’re charged… and if found guilty, beyond a reasonable doubt, with selling, delivering, furnishing, disseminating and providing harmful material.

“In simple language, with invading someone’s privacy, and now they turn around and ask the court to protect their privacy and the family privacy, when the gist of the offense is they provided harmful material and invaded someone else’s privacy. I find that somewhat ironic.”

Bumb also pointed a finger at the media.

The media, he said, “wants to be in the courtroom and they want to hear all the details and the materials, and, in fact, in my humble opinion, they might be aiding the offenders in further disseminating the material regarding the victims of this offense.

“And I truly believe that these are not victimless crimes.”

In denying the request for closure, Bumb said there may be a trial and that victims may have to testify, and exhibits might have to be submitted.

To protect the victims, he ordered that any exhibits submitted by the county prosecutor would be entered under seal, meaning the public is not allowed to see them.

Further, the court would be closed, and media representatives removed from the courtroom, if victims have to testify.

Bumb also barred the media from disclosing the names of any of the victims in the case.

No Action

There was no action on any of the charges against Rufenacht on June 3. A date for further hearings in his case has not been set.

Three other juveniles, not identified by the court, were charged with crimes connected to the sexting case.

Those charges would be misdemeanors if committed by an adult, Bumb said in his April 21 press release.

He said at that time those youths were all referred to the Juvenile Probation Department “for processing and diversion.”



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *