Bodenweiser Case Ends In Mistrial

Eric and Cindy   Almost two years of lead up to the trial, and over two weeks of trial, have ended  in a mistrial, after mere hours of deliberation on the part of the jury who heard the case of Eric Bodenweiser, due to a hung jury.

Eric Bodenweiser, who could be seen as the proto-type for the radical TEA movement in Sussex County was charged back in 2012 with child molestation, which was alleged to have taken place nearly twenty-five years ago, when the victim was  ten years old.

When an indictment was handed down by a Delaware grand-jury the case seemed to hinge on the accusations made by the alleged victim. A victim that the defense attorneys for Bodenweiser went to great lengths to discredit. However the real bombshell of the trial may have come from Eric Bodenweiser’s  own pastor, who was the first person to testify in the trial.

Pastor Duane Smith testified that after the charges were brought against Bodenweiser,  Bodenweiser came to Pastor Smith and confessed, “I did it”. ”  There is some truth there to what he is saying.”  Pastor Smith also testified that Bodenweiser in an Oct.  2012 conversation stated, ‘The boy touched me, and there was some oral sex.”

Outside of the courtroom a lot was made over the fact that a pastor had come forward with information that many felt was gained during a “confession”, but few questioned the pastor’s integrity, or honesty.

One comment made on Facebook by the Sussex  County GOP Communications Director, Duke Brooks is illustrative of the sentiment of many of Bodenweiser’s die-hard supporters.

Brooks said, One might wonder what kind of a “pastor” would divulge something told to him, presumably, in a pastor-penitent confession. That having been said, one can presume that Bodie did at least some of the things with which he’s charged.” 

So as you can see, even though Duke Brooks, the Communications Director for the Sussex GOP felt that Bodenweiser did  “at least some of the things”, he seems more concerned that the pastor came forward. This is not a  unique opinion for Bodenweiser supporters to have.

Brooks went on to say, “Since it was literally DURING THE LAST MILLENNIUM, I’d like all the professional leftists to now join me in a chorus of “What difference, at this point, does it make?” And, while we’re at it, those who advocate “rehabilitation” and “forgiveness” should also join in that same chorus. I mean, that’s ‘consistent,’ right? I’m just sayin’…”   This statement also seems to echo the thought of many Bodenweiser supporters in that if simply enough time passes,  then all is forgotten.  I also find it telling that Mr. Brooks seems more concerned with the politics of the matter, rather than with finding the truth.

Another such Bodenweiser supporter has been Sussex County Councilman Sam Wilson, who has attended nearly, if not every day of the trial. Mr. Wilson has been a long time supporter of Bodenweiser, both before and during and one can assume, will continue to support him.  Not surprising, another long time supporter of Bodenweiser is Sussex County Register of Wills Cindy Green, I say not surprising since Eric Bodenweiser’s wife Patty works in the office of the register of wills as Green’s deputy. Patty Bodenweiser has been at her husband’s side from the beginning, which begs the question, how much paid leave does a county employee get?

Bodenweiser’s defense attorney Joe Hurley worked extremely hard to tear down both the alleged victim’s credibility, which honestly was not hard to do, and that of pastor Smith, which one would have thought would have been beyond question. But in doing so brought forth the admission by Eric Bodenweiser himself, that he had watched, or at the very least, had supplied a child with pornographic material, both magazines and videos, and had engaged in wrestling matches.

Early on in all of this the lines were clearly drawn. Because Bodenweiser was a political figure, and a member of the radical TEA movement within  Sussex County,  and was even supported by TEA movement darling Christine O’Donnell,  bodie and o'donnell  the lines of those who felt he was innocent, and those who felt he was guilty, were drawn just as clearly as the factions within the GOP of Sussex.

I am sure that little has changed in the views of the those who made up their minds early on.  Bodenweiser’s friends and supporters will still think him innocent, and his detractors will still see him as guilty.  And that is why we have the jury system that we do, so that we can at least attempt to keep out the built-in biases. The problem with the hung jury is that it proves neither innocence, nor guilt. But it does call into question something that many Bodenweiser types have been saying for several years now. Are the courts corrupt? Was this a miscarriage of justice? Did Bodenweiser deserve to spend the rest of his life in jail, only to be let off because he has money and political influence?

There are still some questions beyond guilt or innocence in this matter. The first being whether or not the state of Delaware will retry the case? My opinion is not likely considering the cost of the first round. That leads to the question of how long before the state files a motion to drop the charges, since Bodenweiser is still under all the rulings of the court since his arrest, including electronic monitoring.

One has to wonder will the victim now move to sue Bodenweiser in a civil case, since there is now a confession under oath that Bodenweiser watched with, and or supplied pornographic material to a child.

Those who may not know Bodenweiser, may think after such a public humiliation, he would simply want to fade away into a more private existence. However, those who have had any contact with the man have to be wondering, will he again run for elected office? While you may think not, after admitting to giving porn to a child, do not be surprised when he shows up at Jimmy’s Grill to announce that he is back. He has proven on many occasions that his arrogance has no bounds.

I am sure that many of Bodenweiser’s supporters will cleave unto him as they always have. Some will do it because of some sense of loyalty, some because he has a little money to throw around, (if Joe Hurley didn’t get it all?), some because of his profession of Christianity. For whatever reason they may cling to this sinking political dingy, I would ask them one question.

Since Bodenweiser confessed to having watched and or provided porn to a child, and in Duke Brooks’s words, “did at least some of the things with which he’s charged.” ,  would you Sam Wilson, Cindy Green, or Duke Brooks, leave your child, or grandchild alone with him? It is easy to say yes, but I wonder in your heart of hearts, would you really?

Top Photo From Wilmington News Journal

 

76 Comments on "Bodenweiser Case Ends In Mistrial"

  1. Laffter says:

    1. Fact – Bodie is a perv and no one should EVER EVER EVER allow their children near him

    2- best quote of the story from the news journal- Don Ayotte a frequent political candidate
    Was in the courtroom

    Can’t wait for the Phillips trial- regardless the outcome these people need to pack up shop
    And move far far away.

  2. “The problem with the hung jury is that it proves neither innocence, nor guilt.”

    It should be pointed out that a jury never proves innocence.

  3. kavips says:

    Good reporting here. Better than any other. One can quibble now over the verdict… But one verdict is quite clear…. Those who supported him in the courtroom are now tainted, if only for this one tiny thing…. They see the rape of a child, as no big thing…. Certainly not something to get in the way of pushing radical politics into Sussex County….

    Maybe I’m different. But I do think the rape of a child is a big thing. And I think that there is only one alternative for the voters of Sussex County to do, which puts this behind them forever and lets them move on. Heaven knows, they have real problems to worry about…. That is to unelect all those who see things as do Sam Wilson and Duke Brooks. which is basically…..” Aww… all he was doing was having just a little fun… Give the guy a break, it was 25 years ago…..”

    If that is what Sussex County wants running itself, then keep them in… But I think Sussex County is much better than that…..

  4. Frank Knotts says:

    Rednecks, true, I should have said “decided”.

  5. Honi Soit says:

    A mistrial on grounds of a hopelessly deadlocked jury occurs in about 6% of cases, according to a study I came across. I cannot easily fathom how the judge could accept that the jury was hopelessly deadlocked when the deliberations lasted only 8 hours. I also could find no mention that the judge addressed the jury and gave them an Allen instruction–an encouragement to keep at it.

  6. Rick says:

    …and that of pastor Smith, which one would have thought would have been beyond question.

    The clergy doesn’t exactly have a spotless record. Getting a conviction thirty years after the event is difficult if not impossible. The DA should forget a retrial.

  7. Frank Knotts says:

    Honi soit wonder if the early declaration of a mistrial was the Judge imposing his will and opinion on the case in a jury trial. Maybe he felt that the state had failed to make their case. If the judge had felt more confident maybe he would have instructed them to go back at least another day.
    Rick, I meant Pastor Smith in particular, not the clergy in general. But again, the state may have done a better job showing that Pastor smith is a respected member of the local community, but didn’t.

  8. Old Sussex County Native says:

    More than twenty five years ago I was the manager of a College Health Center that provided health care and EMS Service to the community where it was located. Every single case of “twenty-somethings” I ever had as patients who were coping with their history of having been raped or sexually molested as a child was quite simply a mess, and thank God it wasn’t too many. But, Their lives were destroyed by what happened to them, and they all too often just couldn’t get their lives together existing as a living train wreck. It was horrible, horrible, horrible to be around. I don’t even work as a medical practitioner anymore, and God knows I am not qualified today to make too many pronouncements in the modern medical culture, or today’s legal system. But anybody who is so callous and without a soul as to think that the rape or abuse of a child is no big deal, or that they should “just get over it” makes my blood boil. I barely saved a boy in the nick of time from killing himself in one case, and the last I knew of him he was so tormented, I really wonder if he has survived, or if he ended up doing it later. May God have mercy on all these, the most innocent of human beings, poor children, who have been poisoned and ruined by sex perverts. I just broke down in tears crying for Tommy, that poor boy. This damn Bodenweiser trial being in the news every day has haunted me, making me remember those cases that I worked with all those years ago…

  9. Green says:

    Going to beg the question back…. Wouldn’t a responsible employee seeing this coming from
    nearly two years, save vacation and sick time for such a time as this?

  10. herewegoagain says:

    Eric is done!!!!! Makes no difference what happens form here out. Sam Wilson continuing to support him only shows us all what an ignorant individual he is. They can praise god all they want. Both are embarrassments to the State of Delaware politics and their respective districts!

  11. Frank, that is not how our legal system works. One is innocent until proven guilty. The burden is on the prosecution to prove guilt, not on the accused to prove innocence. Presumption of innocence is our fundamental right and one we shouldn’t carelessly toss aside, although, in modern times, we seem willing to toss the principle aside. That’s why we casually walk through metal detectors or submit to drug testing. We have given up our right to the presumption of innocence each time we walk through a metal detector or take a drug test, although lawyers and politicians have found loop holes to make us believe we haven’t given up that right.

    In Bodenweiser’s case, Bodenweiser was presumed innocent the moment charges were levied, for the two years while waiting for a trial, the moment he walked in the court room, all during the trial, and now that the trial is over. Like it or not, the law considers him innocent.

    That’s an important concept.

    If the jury had returned a verdict of “guilty”, they wouldn’t have proven Bodenweiser did it. All the jury would be saying is given the evidence as presented, they are sure he did it. That doesn’t mean the accused did. One only need to look at the many cases that after serving years for a crime the accused always maintained they didn’t do, DNA evidence exonerates them.

    On the flip side, if the jury had returned a verdict of “not guilty”, they wouldn’t have proven innocence, either. All they are saying is that given the evidence, as presented, they cannot say beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused did it.

    When the jury can’t agree, as in the Bodenweiser case, the jury has still spoken loudly. They just didn’t give the answer some wanted. What the jury did say was if the state brings a 25-year-old case to trial that relies solely on what the accuser claims with no corroborating evidence of any substance, you’re going to end up with some saying there is enough evidence to say he did it and some saying there isn’t enough evidence to say he did it.

    And so, as of today, Bodenweiser is still innocent and those who support him aren’t some sort of sick perverts who don’t care about kids.

    Really, what should scare everyone about this case is the idea that a quarter of a century later (or presumably more if you’re an old fart like me), someone can make an accusation against you and the state will press charges on nothing more than what the accuser says. Once accused and charged, no matter what verdict is returned in the end, your reputation and career are ruined.

  12. herewegoagain says:

    “Really, what should scare everyone about this case is the idea that a quarter of a century later (or presumably more if you’re an old fart like me), someone can make an accusation against you and the state will press charges on nothing more than what the accuser says”

    Kind of like when the accuser said Vance Phillips raped her? Police didn’t prosecute him! That case in itself disproves what you say. Police and prosecutors don’t take cases to court if they don’t feel they have the evidence to convict. Bodenweisers accuser wins either way. In a civil trial a preponderance of the evidence is all that is required to convict ( maybe he did, maybe he didn’t). They have that!

  13. Vance Phillips’ case is completely different. The two cases cannot be fairly compared.

  14. kavips says:

    Again… Sussex County can do something about it… ie, …Not vote for the past… Go all new. and put this sordid affair behind us…. That means no Wilson. That means no Phillips…. Sussex has a bright future, but will go nowhere with two gigantic boulders tied around their necks….

  15. Frank Knotts says:

    Green, is that an official statement? I was just pondering the question. If you would like to make an official statement just give me a call.
    Rednecks, you spent a lot of words to say what I had already said in the post, that this mistrial neither declares innocence or guilt.
    And this case was not brought based simply on the alleged victims say-so, they had a collaborating witness that testified that Bodenweiser had confessed the crime. Now it can be argued that the state did not present its case in the best form, and I would agree, but to say it was a frivolous case is not accurate.
    As for your view that walking through a metal detector means we have given up our right to the presumption of innocence? How so? That presumption is only relevant to a court of law. Metal detectors are placed at the entrance of buildings that you have a choice to walk through or not, you have the choice not to carry weapons through them, as for drug testing? As far as I know a private company is free to install any policy they choose to protect the safety of their employees and customers, and the employees are free not to work there.
    I have to agree with herewegoagain that the two cases are the same at least in the fact that you have one person making a claim against another person about something that took place between just the two of them with no witnesses. The difference being, that in the Bodenweiser case you have the Pastor, and that may be why the state chose to bring that case while not brining the Phillips case.
    Let us also remember that in the jury we had at least one person who felt Bodenweiser was guilty, and we had at least one person who felt he was innocent. He is still indicted, which means that there was enough evidence originally for a grand jury to do so. So yes, we are presumed innocent, but this is our system, and unless you are calling for no law, and no trials, and simply are calling for law of the jungle, this is still a good system, with flaws admittedly, but better than being brought before the “decider”.

  16. Frank, we’ll leave it that you believe Bodenweiser is guilty and you wrote the article to drive home that point and lay a charge of guilt by association on anyone who may think that Bodenweiser is not guilty. As for the similarities between the Phillips and Bodenweiser cases, no, I don’t see how sex between two consenting adults two years ago compares to the rape of a child twenty five years ago.

  17. herewegoagain says:

    The scary
    , sad pathetic and disappointing thing is, I believe the majority of folks in their districts
    ( Wilson and Bodenweiser) would still vote for them! That is a travesty!

  18. Rick says:

    …anybody who is so callous and without a soul as to think that the rape or abuse of a child is no big deal, or that they should “just get over it” makes my blood boil.

    And falsely accusing someone of rape makes my blood boil.

    Perhaps we should ask why the supposed victim waited so long to come forward. Was it a political decision; when Bodenweiser became a candidate, did someone in the Delaware political establishment suggest that this matter be pursued? If so, who contacted the victim? Who initiated the investigation? Did the AG’s office act on it’s own initiative, or was it prodded by someone in the legislature or the Socialist-Democrat hierarchy?

  19. anon says:

    There was no evidence and no testimony that supports this theory that the Bodenweiser accusations, indictment or trial had any ties to politics or was any kind of political conspiracy.

    You all can discuss the importance of “innocent until proven guilty” all day long, but in the end the reality is that whether or not the AG retries Bodie, no sane parent in Delaware would allow him near their child and no sane parent in Delaware wants to see Bodie knocking on their door running for office, sitting in their church, hanging out at a water park, or walking his dog through a neighborhood.

  20. littlepeople says:

    Amen Anon! I hope you’re correct but I fear the Sam Wilson, Eric Bodenweiser Christian folks on the west side of the county ( the bible belt of Sussex County) will stand by their men. Quoting some bible verse to justify why one should continue to support them!

  21. Frank Knotts says:

    Rednecks, you point the finger at me for judging Bodenweiser, yet you make a claim to know what happened between the two people involved in the Phillip’s case. I am not sure why you seem to think that the passage of time lessens the accusation.
    Rick says,
    “Perhaps we should ask why the supposed victim waited so long to come forward. Was it a political decision; when Bodenweiser became a candidate, did someone in the Delaware political establishment suggest that this matter be pursued? If so, who contacted the victim? Who initiated the investigation? Did the AG’s office act on it’s own initiative, or was it prodded by someone in the legislature or the Socialist-Democrat hierarchy?”
    Sure, people were afraid of Bodenweiser in Dover. Even if he had been elected he was going to be nothing more than a side show, I seem to remember him saying that he would take a bullhorn and stand on the steps of Leg hall. Now if that would have scared people I guess nothing would.

  22. Frank, I made no such claim. The time difference is important. In Bodenweiser case, the only two people who may have been able to corroborate any of the accusations are dead. In the Phillips case, finding someone to corroborate the story should be a lot easier, but, apparently, couldn’t be found. .

    Actually, I haven’t expressed what my personal opinions of the players in either case are. All I pointed out was that the two cases couldn’t be fairly compared. One dealt with child rape twenty-five years ago, the other dealt with sex between two adults two years ago. Could you imagine how many lives would be ruined if every time an adult wanted to get even with someone they felt wronged them, all they would have to do is claim some sort of sexual misconduct or sexual crime and drag them through court on he said-she said evidence?

  23. Laffter says:

    Rednecks- you are forfeiting the other all important “court”

    The court of public opinion….. Bodie admitted to watching porn with a 14 year old boy when he was 32a enough said right there….. Done- he is a PERV .
    No one needs a judge and a court and a jury to determine that

    It’s that’s simple

    What else is simple is a middle aged man grooming an underage girl and waiting until she reaches her “legal” age and the COERCING her into a sexual relationship
    Two consenting adults? Really? One was double the others age and in a position of social and political power- not quite an even playing field

    I would ask why a married “Christian” man would involve himself with a girl younger than his own children- to the point if visiting her at her private school
    Consensual sex? Yeah – I’m sure a girl passed out from drinking or partying would be consenting in to sex in your book too ……

    Like I said- the court of public opinion -would you leave your underage or much younger child alone with either if these men? If so, you might want to examine your patenting skills

  24. HTM says:

    HTM asks Five Drunk Rednecks to explain the difference between the Catholic Church pedophile lawsuits, both criminal and civil, to this particular case. Give it a shot. Too many to count have come forward and gotten convictions of long ago abuses from priests over the years. What’s the difference with that and Bodie? We await your wisdom.

    Regrets to TMV…we had to ask this wacko to explain since you won’t.

    Clown car prosecution.

    Love the question being posed to DA that he won’t answer on that other ‘site’. Pastor Smith is a hero here at HTM.

    Laffter! As always you’re correct. Perv is a perv is perv and like leopards they don’t change their spots.

    Where’s the usual suspects on this?

  25. Frank Knotts says:

    Rednecks, you did make such claims when you said, “Frank, we’ll leave it that you believe Bodenweiser is guilty and you wrote the article to drive home that point and lay a charge of guilt by association on anyone who may think that Bodenweiser is not guilty”. And you are correct, I do feel he is guilty, and anyone who is now out there doing the victory dance is guilty by association, and for being extremely naïve, or criminally blind.
    You then make a completely false statement when you say, ” In Bodenweiser case, the only two people who may have been able to corroborate any of the accusations are dead.” This is not true, in the Bodenweiser case you have a third person who testified that Bodenweiser confessed the acts to them, firsthand. And as Laffter pointed out, we have Bodenweiser’s own testimony that he at the very least participated in some unusual behavior, behavior that is unacceptable to most people in our society.
    And yes I think you have expressed your opinion of the cases, but that is okay, we all have opinions, and that is why I would never have been placed on the jury, because I have personal history with Mr. Bodenweiser that both biases my views, but also informs my views, information that the jury did not have, but would have also given them a different opinion. Maybe even the one person who held out for innocent.

  26. Lafter: Court of public opinion is a fancy term for mudslinging and hoping something sticks. Again, I never expressed what my opinion of either man was.

    HTM: One big difference is the priests in the Catholic Churches had many victims come out and make the accusations. It’s really hard to say you didn’t do something when more than one person is accusing you and all the stories more or less match.

    Frank: Because I stated that you believe Bodenweiser is guilty and anyone who supports Bodenweiser is guilty by association is not my saying I think Bodenweiser is innocent nor my way of giving some sort of victory dance. By Bodenweiser’s own testimony, he made some questionable decisions when the accuser was 14, but those actions were hardly worthy of sending one to jail for life nor does his actions mean that he raped a child five years earlier. Yes, the minister testified to something, but exactly what is unclear. Look at how what we have written and we both don’t really understand what each of us has really said. You really believe that I expressed an opinion of innocence or guilt and I’ve done neither.

  27. Rick says:

    There was no evidence and no testimony that supports this theory that the Bodenweiser accusations, indictment or trial had any ties to politics or was any kind of political conspiracy.

    I know there’s no “evidence.” That doesn’t meaning didn’t happen, especially in a state where the press is merely a mouthpiece for the Socialist-Democrats. This looks like a typical Delaware hatchet-job. My guess is that someone in the Socialist-Democrat hierarchy pushed this investigation and subsequent arrest.

  28. anon says:

    Rick: I know there’s no “evidence.” That doesn’t meaning didn’t happen.

    Despite “no evidence” Rick believes there was a political conspiracy to destroy Bodie – but when we have Bodie on the stand saying he was watching porn with a child, we have Bodie’s pastor saying that Bodie “confessed” to having sex with a child, we have Bodie’s first wife testifying that the child was around the house back when he says he was molested – that’s not enough to convince Rick that Bodie is a child molester.

    Responsible parents will not take any chances with their children around Bodie, we don’t give a f**k how much your good old rich boy Bodie prays to Jesus today to keep his foul soul out of the Eternal Fires of Hell.

  29. HTM says:

    HTM needs to wrap our heads around what Five Drunk Rednecks states. Does it take more than one accuser to be brave enough to come forward to stop a person that abused them many years ago to get justice, achieve a position of power, or prevent continued abuse once in power?

    One isn’t enough? If not…how many?

  30. HTM says:

    YAY Anon!! You will be toasted tonight by the few that remain here!! Laffter as well. We even toasted Mr. Knotts when he posted on this subject for a well done column.

    Rick apparently thinks what Bodie admitted to is OK so long as that’s as far as it went.

    We beg to ask the same question of Rick that is asked of that dolt DA asked first by Anon and then by Mr. Knotts: “And since you are saying this is all a political ploy, are you Rick telling us that the pastor went on the stand, swore on the bible and then lied?”

    Kudos to both Anon and Mr. Knotts for that yet to be replied to question. Maybe Rick will take a shot at it…

    We don’t question Pastor Smith’s intention for anything more than doing the right thing and his legal obligation considering his knowledge.

  31. Frank Knotts says:

    Rerdneck, the court of public opinion is not mudslinging when we are basing our opinions on the same evidence and testimony as the jury was given. We are giving our opinions of that evidence, and yes, you are giving your opinion, you feel that there was not enough evidence to convict, that is your opinion, just own it. I on the other hand have stated that considering the testimony of the pastor, which I believe, and my personal history and knowledge of Bodenweiser, I feel he is guilty. So if we were on the jury together there is a good chance that we would have again had a hung jury. That is our system. I am not condemning the person who hung the jury, I am just saying that personally I think they were wrong. People are asked when put on juries to make the best decision they can based on the evidence they are given, I think that happened here. It unfortunately does not give closure to either the alleged victim, not to Mr. Bodenweiser.
    And I will echo the question to Rick, “And since you are saying this is all a political ploy, are you Rick telling us that the pastor went on the stand, swore on the bible and then lied?”

  32. Honi Soit says:

    And here is a second question for Rick: If this was a political ploy to deprive Bodenweiser of a Senate seat, then wasn’t that objective reached on October 17, 2012 when he withdrew from the race in favor of Pettyjohn? There was no further need to indict on Oct 22 and take the case to trial.

    Sept 11: Bodie won the Republican primary over Booth
    Oct 1: Pettyjohn filed as a write-in candidate and began actively campaigning
    Oct 12: Bodie announced the suspension of his campaign following weeks of being incommunicado
    Oct 16: Pettyjohn was officially nominated by Sussex GOP as their candidate
    Oct 17: Bodie officially withdrew from race and endorsed Pettyjohn.
    Oct 22: Bodie was indicted

  33. Honi Soit says:

    Two jurors have spoken to 105.9, saying that the vote was 11-1 guilty.

    http://www.delaware1059.com/story.php?id=10072

  34. Frank Knotts says:

    And the other shoe may have just fallen!

  35. Toot toot! says:

    Bodie says, looks like Green is blue. Wonder why? Toot toot!

  36. Anon says:

    Just an FYI Ayotte still refuses to answer the questions asked of him. He has since made a claim (that he quickly deleted) that Frank mad a threat against him, has deleted numerous comments I have made, threatened me with legal action, and now finally banned me from DP by blocking me from commenting. So basically just another Sunday.

    We as Sussex Countians who have followed the trial need to be able to ask questions, if we have elected officials or wannabe elected officials who support people who at the very least watch pornography with children, and accuse a pastor of being in the governments pocket and lieing under oath, they should be publicly called out on this behavior and given a chance to explain themselves. Of course in some cases like Ayotte, they just think they can make claims and we all have to believe them. At least if asked Sam Wilson will talk to me, not hde behind bullshit legal threats that he got from Wolfgang while they were shopping at Redners today and in the Walmart garden center looking at flowers. Really they do make a cute couple.

  37. Frank Knotts says:

    Anon, and I hope that is why you come here to Delaware Right, where the delete button is still shiny and new from lack of use. I am a little troubled that you admitted to knowing where the duo of dolts was today. Careful next Don will charge you with stalking.

  38. Anon says:

    Believe me Frank I was troubled being in the same area as them as well, I heard that sort of crazy is contagious.

    And I am a fan of the site as well as Delaware Liberal, I fall quite nicely I the moderate category but I appreciate reading about local politics and peoples opinions. I don’t comment regularly on any site, but I have felt a need on DP a few times because I get sick of the constant bold face lies. First it was lynchings, then Don’s made up story regarding DSP shooting a suspect (remember that was the one only Don knew the truth and he referred to a member if the DSP as sociopath), the “chromium gate” Don created (still waiting on Erin Brockovich to show up) now his claims regarding Bodie and this trial. Someone has to call him in his BS and not the loonies sit around and circle jerk each other with no one to point out their true colors.

  39. sussex countian says:

    anon and Frank I witnessed the whole exchange today in DP. It'[s unfortunate that the only acts a desperate man knows is to blanket threaten people including the moderator at DP and others. When that fails he blocks the people. I was visiting the moderator today after his recent surgery, when Ayottes 4 phone calls came in one after another for 8 minutes. The moderator never answered the calls yet Ayotte immediately posted that he was threatened.

  40. anonnie says:

    What if Bodie had admitted to watching porn with a 10 – 13 year old girl? I doubt anyone would be stepping up to defend a grown man watching porn with a young girl, so why are people defending a grown man watching porn with a young boy?

    Did Bodenweiser use his inherited fortune to buy the vote of one juror? His family has wealth, power and connections in Sussex County and Bodie is fighting for his life, he’s willing to throw his own pastor/campaign consultant/friend under the bus and he’s willing to finish what he started in the late 80s – destroying the accusers life – does anyone think that bribing a juror would be where old Bodie draws the line?

  41. Frank Knotts says:

    anonnie, anything is possible. But it may be as simple as just a Fringe TEA person on the jury. When you consider the statement of the juror who has gone public saying that the hold out said, “that’s my opinion and it’s my right to have it”, with no attempt to make their case. Sounds a lot like most of the TEA Patriots political arguments. Weren’t we just talking about Not Don Ayotte?

  42. sussex countian says:

    Now Hurley’s team wants the AG to charge the victim with perjury according to Not Don.

  43. Frank Knotts says:

    Sussex Countian, don’t take anything Not Don Ayotte writes seriously. He may say it came from Hurley, doesn’t mean it did. Hurley is smart enough to know that a hung jury is not proff that the accuser lied, Don Ayotte is not that smart. Just think about why a candidate for office would inject himself into such a volatile issue? Don and other supporters of Bodenweiser, like Register of Wills Cindy Green have been taking a victory lap. They don’t get that they were one vote away from a conviction on one of the charges.

  44. One vote away does not make Bodenweiser guilty no matter how you try to spin it.

  45. Anon says:

    Not Don Ayotte is again claiming that this entire Bodie trial is a government conspiracy from the highest level. Of course I am still blocked so I wasn’t able to post my question over there yet again so I’ll ask it here since we all know Don reads to see what an active blog looks like. But please smoke cut and paste if they want.

    Don since the entire trial was a government conspiracy against Bodie as you claim that would mean the pastor who testified for the state is in on it. So are you Don Ayotte calling the pastor a liar? And will you demand that the pastor be tried for perjury as well? You can’t have it both ways if the government us behind this entire trial and made up all the charges as you say then the pastor would have to be a part right?

    Man up and answer the question Not Don Ayotte.

  46. Frank Knotts says:

    Reneck, I didn’t say it did, but it does say that the state made a good enough case to convince eleven people that he was guilty of at least one charge, and good enough to force him to admit that he watched porn with a child. But of course you don’t care about that because it was so long ago, and the accuser couldn’t remember what he had for breakfast the first time Bodenweiser wrestled with him.
    And I guess that you believe it is more likely that eleven got it wrong, and one got it right, even with the testimony of the pastor, and the confession of watching porn. WOW! Oh that’s right, you aren’t giving your opinion here are you.

  47. No, I am not giving my opinion now nor have I ever expressed my opinion on Bodenweiser’s “guilt” or “innocence”.

    The statute of limitations on watching porn with a 14-year-old expired. Yes, he’s guilty by his own admission, but the law can’t do anything about it. As for the alleged sex, that’s all it is – alleged. Like it or not, Bodenweiser is still innocent despite the fact that eleven people didn’t think so.

    So our debate is whether we think the legal system failed or succeeded, not whether Bodenweiser is guilty or innocent. I believe (yes, now I’m expressing my opinion on the case) our legal system succeeded. The state can look at the evidence it has, maybe find more evidence, and present its case again to convince all twelve jurors, not just eleven, that Bodenweiser is guilty as charged.

    So, see? I don’t think eleven got it wrong and one got it right nor do I think that eleven got it right and one got it wrong, like you apparently think. I strongly believe that the state needs to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt and that means all twelve need to arrive at the same conclusions. That means the state-paid prosecutors have to work really hard instead of working just hard enough to convince most of the jurors

    Majority rules shouldn’t apply in criminal cases, despite what at least two states have decided. I firmly believe that non-unanimous verdicts violate the due process clause of our Constitution. Over the generations, we have given up enough rights. Due process is one we shouldn’t give up.

  48. Frank Knotts says:

    Rednecks says, “The statute of limitations on watching porn with a 14-year-old expired. Yes, he’s guilty by his own admission, but the law can’t do anything about it.”, and that is where the rest of society should step in and hold him accountable. There was a time when a person made such an admission that they would be ostracized at the very least, but here we have people pointing out that the statute of limitation has run out. How long before poor Eric Bodenweiser will be claiming to have been abused himself?
    You are correct, and I actually agree that a verdict should be unanimous. I also think that if even one juror felt they should have done what they did.
    My point is not that the system got it wrong, but in my opinion one juror may have.
    And with due respect, you have given your opinion, though you may think you have tried not to, but that is just my opinion.

  49. Ahh, the fine line between justice as meted out by society and the wearing of the scarlet letter. Age old debate, huh?

  50. Frank Knotts says:

    BODENWEISER ADMITTED HE WATCHED PORN WITH A CHILD. Written large for emphases. Anything you say in defense of that makes you sound as if you are condoning it. To liken an actual confession of perversion to a fictional act is troubling also.

  51. Frank, I never said anything in defense of Bodenweiser’s admission other than that as far as the law was concerned, the statute of limitations ran out. Please don’t put words in my mouth.

  52. Frank Knotts says:

    “Ahh, the fine line between justice as meted out by society and the wearing of the scarlet letter. ”
    you are comparing the admission with a fictional act, as if my statement, “There was a time when a person made such an admission that they would be ostracized at the very least”, is likened to wearing the scarlet letter. In the Scarlet Letter, Hester Prynne becomes a sympathetic character, and rises above the perceived wronging of being forced to wear the “A”. So are you saying that it would be wrong for people to not want to be around Bodenweiser considering his admission.

  53. How one decides to think of Bodenweiser and whether one would want to be around him or not is up to the individual and the individual decision is neither right nor wrong.

  54. Frank Knotts says:

    Rednecks, you see if we go around long enough, we come to an agreement.

  55. Frank, we probably agree more than you think. It’s just through written communication, a lot gets lost and misunderstandings are born. If I didn’t agree with you more than I disagree, I wouldn’t be following your blog. And if I were to agree with everything you write, I would have to buy you a beer. I’m a cheap b#%@*&! so I’m not going to be buying you a beer. :)

  56. Frank Knotts says:

    I’ve been told I am a bit thrifty myself.

  57. ZYCLON says:

    KKKnotts:

    Once again we have an inferior legal analysis (if not blatant buffoonery) from an inferior mind.

    Notwithstanding Delaware judicial precedent to the contrary, the prostitution introduced a pastor’s account of an alleged confession on the part of the defendant without first establishing a prima facie case that a crime was in fact committed. This was obviously done in an “ex-cathedra” attempt to establish the state’s case , ab initio by invoking the authority of the church to convince a jury as to the guilt of the defendant. During cross-examination, the Pastor actually admitted that the defendant’s alleged confession was mainly based on his own interpretation — not on the defendant’s actual statements.

    As the transcript indicates, the trial even took on aspects of the Inquisition and/or the Salem Witch Trials as DAG David Hume asked Pastor Smith detailed questions regarding the church disciplinary process and whether it was his theological opinion if the defendant had committed a sin ( thus raising potential appellate church/state separation issues in a patently secular trial).

    To top it off, the accuser admitted under oath that he had, in fact, committed perjury.

    So, the emergent issues of this mistrial mainly center corpus delecti (a legal concept way beyond your limited grasp) as well as perjury.
    ————————————————————————————————————————————-

    FranKKKie,

    Go back to school. Learn to write and develop your analytical ability; and maybe some day we will begin to take you seriously. Until then, you will always be in way over your head.

  58. anonnie says:

    Blah blah blah…doesn’t change the cold, hard fact that no parent in their right mind would ever allow Bodie near their kid. 11-1 jury and the 1 juror had their mind made up the minute they walked into deliberations. Maybe someone needs to see if any large deposits were made into that juror’s bank account lately. Bodie comes from a rich Sussex good old boy family and Bodie himself thinks that under the table dealings are how things are done in Sussex.

    My advice to Bodie is to move somewhere where no one knows him and stay there, Sussex County doesn’t need any more perverts.

  59. ZYCLON says:

    And WE don’t need any more perversion of the courts, AG’s Office, due process and the Delaware Constitution….

  60. sussex countian says:

    you set the bar to a new height for what you consider acceptable perversion that no one else in Delaware will ever achieve

  61. TrutheBeKnown says:

    People that agree with Frank Knotts actually don’t care whether or not Mr. Bodenweiser is guilty or not. Their concern is imprisoning him for the rest of his life. The jury was 11-1 on only one “third degree” count and they weren’t even close on the rest of the charges.
    When hatred runs as deep as Knotts’ crew, it readily shows and they are branded as hate mongers. The prosecution faced a serious defeat in the Bodenweiser because they had no hard evidence that a crime had been committed and attempted to sidestep the law of “corpus delicti” which states, that a crime must exist before a trial can proceed.
    The blind hatred of many attempted to imprison an innocent man and failed and they believe their hatred will still prevail.

  62. sussex countian says:

    TBK any person who is a parent or has had children would or should have a problem with an adult man viewing pornographic material with a minor. If you knew 1/10 of what you think you do about corpus delicti you’d realize your as full of crap about that as you are trying to justify what Bodenweiser admitted to doing is acceptable.

  63. TrutheBeKnown says:

    Sussex Countian
    I agree with your point, however I’m talking about the law!! Mr. Bodenweiser was not charged with the offense of “contributing to the delinquency of a minor” and therefore legally that charge is not a consideration.
    My main point is the pure hatred that is emanating from this site continuously. The pure hatred seems to emanate from this site, mainly from Frank Knotts and is directed toward Christian Conservatives such as Bill Colley, Don Ayotte and now Bodenweiser. It show that this truly is a garbage site not worth the trouble reading.

  64. Frank Knotts says:

    Ah! And the garbage bags come out once again. Okay, so Bodenweaiser was not charged with watching porn with a child, but he did admit to it, so he “IS” guilty of it by his own admission. And anyone who defends that act by saying the statute of limitations has run out, or that he wasn’t charged with that crime, is as guilty of being a pervert as the pervert who committed the act. That would include Don Ayotte and Bill Colley if they choose to defend the act of watching porn with a child.
    You come here and call me a hate monger for discussing a public trial, based on the public information, and giving my opinion, and then call me names and racist. You people are hilarious.
    But hey, you all climb aboard the good ship Bodenweiser along with Sam Wilson, Vance Phillips, Cindy Green, Doug Beatty, Don Ayotte and all the rest who don’t seem to have a problem with Bodenweiser admitting to having watched porn with a child. You make your excuses for him, all while he drags you down with him.
    Maybe Bodenweiser was innocent of raping a child, but by his own admission he is guilty of watching porn with a child. So all of you good Christian parents who want to defend him, why don’t you help him get back on his feet by starting a Christian day-care Center, and send all of your kids and grand kids there. You could put a video screen in every room.

  65. TrutheBeKnown says:

    Frank
    I am not who you think I am. Every time you open your mouth or touch the keyboard, you prove my point by spouting evil and hatred. I will pray for you/

  66. sussex countian says:

    Christian conservatives?!!?!?!?! Are you flipping serious?!?!?!??! I won’t bother to single out each person by name about their UN-Christian acts and deeds that everyone is well aware of. They only fly the banner of Christian Conservative when it benefits them. What speaks volumes and defines their true Christianity as a member of God’s flock are their actions. I suggest you pray for those people you perceive to be good Christians.

  67. sussex countian says:

    Who’s law specifically are you talking about? God’s law that the sheriff and his followers claim their rights come from? It is impossible for one be a good Christian Conservative when they violate God’s law and the defenders of the person also violate God’s law, by defending the persons actions..

    Matthew 18:6
    “But if anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a large millstone hung around his neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea.
    7 Woe to the world because of the things that cause people to sin! Such things must come, but woe to the man through whom they come!”

  68. ZYCLON says:

    KKKnotts et.al.:

    Huff and puff all you want, but the truth remains that the state blew the trial by introducing the pastor’s testimony before establishing a prima facie case that a crime had in fact been committed. The prosecution was thoroughly inept and the judicial process, itself, has been seriously compromised to the detriment of all Delawareans.

  69. Frank Knotts says:

    TruthBeKnown, I don’t remember stating that you were anybody, in fact you are no body to me.
    Thanks for the prayers, but I got that covered, pray for yourself.
    Zyclon, I find it funny you keep inferring I am a racist, though you come here under the screen name Zyclon, though you miss spelled it.
    You say, “Huff and puff all you want, but the truth remains that the state blew the trial by introducing the pastor’s testimony before establishing a prima facie case that a crime had in fact been committed.”
    And you can deflect and ignore all you want, but Eric Bodenweiser admitted to watching porn with a child, so he is guilty.
    And because the state failed to convince the jury does not prove innocence anymore than it proves guilt.

  70. ZYCLON says:

    The guilt or innocence of the defendant is largely irrelevant. The discussion focused on defective prosecution and judicial ineptitude in the face of stupid bloggers…

  71. Frank Knotts says:

    Zyclon says, “The guilt or innocence of the defendant is largely irrelevant. The discussion focused on defective prosecution and judicial ineptitude in the face of stupid bloggers…”
    Zyclon, the discussion is what the discussion is. Okay, I am a stupid blogger, what are you? Someone who would completely ignore the fact that Eric Bodenweiser admitted that he watched porn with a child. What does that make you, and all those who feel the same as you? What does that make Sam Wilson? Vance Phillips? Doug Beatty? Cindy Green? Bill Colley? It makes you and them hypocrites at best, or conspirators possibly.
    You dare to call me names and infer that I am a racist, while you come here under the brand name of the gas used by Hitler to gas the Jewish people? And you misspell it, and call me stupid?
    Shouldn’t you be visiting your hero at home instead of writing on a stupid blog?

  72. anonnie says:

    Again, blah blah blah. Bodenweiser ADMITTED to watching porn with a child, that makes him a HUGE PERVERT in the eyes of any responsible parent. I would not let him near my children. I would not let him near my worst enemy’s children. Get it?

    All of you lovers of Bodie and his sick proclivities need to wake up, you claim a political conspiracy? Well I’m claiming a possible case of juror tampering. Bodie comes from one of the rich, good old boy Sussex families – it wouldn’t surprise me if he paid off that one juror. What’s the juror’s name and what connection does that juror have to Bodie and his followers?

    The AGs office needs to retry the rich pervert in Kent or New Castle County.

  73. Frank Knotts says:

    anonnie, while a pay-off is possible, it is more likely that the one juror is simply another TEA fringe radical. Take into consideration they stated that, “it is my view and my right to have it”, and the fact that they didn’t even try to convince other jurors, most likely because they had no reason beyond they felt that way.

  74. Dave says:

    The wheels of justice turned and even if they turned the wrong way this time (and I can’t opine one way or the other since I wasn’t a juror and did not have the benefit of all the evidence), there is a silver lining. We hopefully will not be subjected to anymore public displays of Bodie’s hat in hand or praying the Lord’s Prayer at school board meetings. Perhaps he will instead focus on saving his own soul and not everyone else’s soul.

  75. anonnie says:

    Thankfully Eric will end up in Hell despite his proselytizing because God isn’t stupid and Satan needs another cabana boy.

    I wonder what Eric will be thinking while he’s on his knees, looking up at Satan?

  76. Andy says:

    Looks like Mr. Bodenweiser and his attorneys were willing to try anything to keep the pastor’s testimony out.

    http://www.delawareonline.com/story/news/local/2014/06/28/bodenweiser-fought-pastors-testimony/11684077/

Got something to say? Go for it!