Sex Offender wins lottery to aid victims of sex offenses

[vaskidmark]

http://www.ktuu.com/Global/story.asp?s=9652114

Aint irony ironic?

ANCHORAGE, Alaska -- The winner of the $500,000 lottery drawing came forward Saturday to collect his prize, and the man who will pocket a half-million dollars from a raffle designed to benefit a sex abuse victims charity is a three-time sex offender.

Alec Ahsoak of Anchorage was convicted of sexual abuse of a minor twice in 1993 and once in 2000, according to the Alaska Department of Public Safety Sex Offender/Child Kidnapper Central Registry.

The lottery, which had its drawing Friday night, was conducted by Lucky Times Pull Tabs. State law says all games of chance must benefit charity, and the organization Standing Together Against Rape, or STAR, was the designated beneficiary.

Ahsoak, who will turn 54 later this month, collected his winnings Saturday at Lucky Times in the form of a ceremonial check presentation.

He says he plans to use the money to buy a home and to improve his life, and late Saturday afternoon said he will donate $100,000 to STAR.

Attempts to reach STAR for comment on Saturday were not successful.

When Channel 2 News first met up with Ahsoak, he couldn't have been more excited. But as the day unfolded, Ahsoak's past came to light in an ironic intersection with the mission of the event.

Ahsoak says he's had a hard-luck life, and the money will help him turn that around. He grew up in foster homes and the Jesse Lee Home for Children in Seward.

In the past he said he has donated money to a children's home in South Dakota, but that could not immediately be verified.

Lucky Times' owners said they started the lottery with the best of intentions and really just wanted to help out a cause they believe in.

They hope just as many residents will want to participate in the charity lotteries to come.

After taxes Ahsoak took home about $350,000.

Contact Yvonne LaVoie at ylavoie@ktuu.com

Comments are split between "he has done his time" and "take it all away from him, he's evil."  I'm just wondering why he waited till Saturday afternoon to decide to donate 1/3rd of his take-home to the charity - could it have been the revalation about his past? [tounge in cheek]

stay safe.

skidmark

[MicroBalrog]

Is he a victim of sex offenses other than his own? If yes, he qualifies.

[Matthew Carberry]

The fact that "he did his time"  would carry more weight with me if he hadn't put himself in a position to have to "do his time" a second time.

Repeat offenders lose a lot of my sympathy, regardless of the circumstances of their past they bear the burden of creating a life that prevents them from succumbing to it repeatedly. 

If you have a contagious disease, you exile yourself somewhere where you will not be a threat to other people's health; and that's taking hard responsibility for something you have absolutely no control over.

If you know you are a child abuser, you go to live and work somewhere where there are no kids.  None.

You don't get to live a "normal" life anymore.

Now that he has the means to do so, he has no remaining excuses.

[BryanP]

The only relevant question is whether there is any provision in the lottery (or state law) to make him somehow ineligible.  If not, shut up and cut him a check.

[just Warren]

Was there a restitution clause in his convictions? If so, then take it. Otherwise he paid his money and he took his chances just like everyone else.

[Balog]

I think it's more sad that he kept getting released than any money he may win. "Oh, you were convicted of raping little kids? Let me introduce you to my good friend Mr Sparky the magical rehabilitation chair. Guaranteed to prevent repeat offenses!"

[MicroBalrog]

What does 'sexually abusing a minor' include in AK law? Does it just mean the obvious creepy molesting six-year-olds stuff, or some other things as well? It's possible there was something about the cases that persuaded the judge to give him a shorter term.

If you know you are a child abuser, you go to live and work somewhere where there are no kids.  None.

Where's... that?

[Declaration Day]

If you know you are a child abuser, you go to live and work somewhere where there are no kids.  None.

Where's... that?

Neverland Ranch, these days anyway. 

[Strings]

Umm, I gotta agree with Micro here: what are all the facts? Might just be looking at a guy that ended up with a couple statuatory convictions...

 As for him collecting the money: he's done his time. If he was required to pay restitution and has, then all's said and done. You can't keep kicking someone if they've paid their "debt to society": if you do, you remove any reason they have to reform...

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

i gotta go with mb too until i find out what the charges actually consisted of

[MicroBalrog]

i gotta go with mb too until i find out what the charges actually consisted of

Should I start quoting Revelations now?

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

one of us should   or at least talk in tongues as a warmup

[gunsmith]

i gotta go with mb too until i find out what the charges actually consisted of

you know, I really don't get you c&s, during the heated
FLDS thread I started last year you accused me of siding with pedo's when all I was doing was
questioning whether the state had enough evidence to haul away a ton of kids based on a spurious and proven false phone call.
It turns out I was quite correct, it was an abuse of the criminal justice system.
So C&S, why are you supporting pedo's?

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

cause the charge is one of those catch all charges  the type i've seen abused


It turns out I was quite correct,


and no

http://www.rickross.com/reference/polygamy/polygamy897.html

https://secure.deseretnews.com/user/comments/1,5150,705271025,00.html

https://secure.deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,705277102,00.html





That document contained a list of names, men and "wives", one of which showed one man had 22 wives, and at least 10 of those "wives" in that document were younger than 17 or had children listed with ages that placed conception at younger than 17.

One of the most troubling statements from the child protection investigator was when testimony was given that girls at the YFZ Ranch were forced into marriage and gave birth as young as 13.

Voss also testified of a 14 year old that was pregnant and a number of 15 year olds that were pregnant as well.

When Voss was asked point blank if in her professional opinion the children should be returned to the compound, she said she did not because "the sect members do not believe they are doing anything wrong."

http://wwwwakeupamericans-spree.blogspot.com/2008/04/update-on-flds-custody-hearing.html




According to an AP report, documents seized from the Eldorado, Texas, Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (FLDS) identify at least 10 other men (besides the six who have already been charged) who were married to girls 16 years old or younger.

The documents identify 20 underage girls — some as young as 12 — who were married to members of the FLDS.

In all cases, the fathers or step fathers were in agreement with the underage marriages and, in some cases, actually presided over the ceremonies.

The AP report stated that the marriage certificates, Warren Jeffs’ journal entries, photos and family records show that these underage marriages were not isolated events.

Documents in separate child-custody proceedings confirm that even men who have not been charged with abuse had married girls who were 15 or 16 in FLDS church ceremonies. And four girls, ages 12-14, are shown in marriage certificates, photos and notes as married to Jeffs, age 52.

Under Texas law, even purporting to be married to more than one person is illegal. Investigators there are believed to be working on about 50 possible bigamy cases involving FLDS men.

Even so, prosecutors will have a difficult time getting convictions without the cooperation of the young girls involved, who believe their eternal salvation depends on their participation in polygamy.


http://www.custercountynews.com/localnews/2008/08/more-flds-men-engage-in-underage-marriages/

12's a bit young for me ymmv

[MicroBalrog]

[BlueStarLizzard]

What does 'sexually abusing a minor' include in AK law? Does it just mean the obvious creepy molesting six-year-olds stuff, or some other things as well? It's possible there was something about the cases that persuaded the judge to give him a shorter term.

Where's... that?

he's 54 now. he was convicted in 2000, so he was, what, 45 or thereabouts. and 1993, so what, mid thirtys?

even if the girls (or boys) where teens, its still creepy. really creepy.

[MicroBalrog]

he's 54 now. he was convicted in 2000, so he was, what, 45 or thereabouts. and 1993, so what, mid thirtys?

even if the girls (or boys) where teens, its still creepy. really creepy.

It may be creepy to some people, but it's not the same as sick, pedophiliac perverts who abuse children because they're so terribly broken themselves they can't even abstain from their terrible act. A man (of any age) can be sexually attracted to a teenager - there's a reason 'barely legal' videos are so popular commercially. Again, I'm not saying this guy is a nice person. I'm just saying, let's not declare him a pedo until we have the facts.

[BlueStarLizzard]

It may be creepy to some people, but it's not the same as sick, pedophiliac perverts who abuse children because they're so terribly broken themselves they can't even abstain from their terrible act. A man (of any age) can be sexually attracted to a teenager - there's a reason 'barely legal' videos are so popular commercially. Again, I'm not saying this guy is a nice person. I'm just saying, let's not declare him a pedo until we have the facts.

no. its creepy. girls that age are at a very vulnerable. An adult can be very persasive in a insudious manner. A guy who has done it repeatedly is not just attracted to younger women, he is a predator and teen girls are his prey. that is a pedo.

[MicroBalrog]

A pedophile is someone who is attracted to pre-teen girls. That's the medical definition.

And it is TRUE that certain people - teachers, relatives, etc. etc. can exploit their relationship with a minor (or, indeed, an adult) to get sexual benefits. We don't know what happened here though.

Which is my entire point. We don't know.

[Strings]

Sorry bluestar, but I'm aware of more cases where an "innocent young girl" sleeps with a "creepy older man" at HER instigation, often with the express purpose of "getting someone in trouble", than I am of cases where "creepy guy" takes advantage of "innocent young girl".

 One's someone I know VERY well, who picked a girl up at a bar... even asked for ID (which she had). Couple weeks later, he was invited to her 15th birthday...

 Or the girl in Appleton, who has gotten several guys put away for statuatory: picks a guy up, sleeps with him, and reports the "rape" the next day. Has a couple kids, herself...

 Or the two girls overheard at a friend's coffee shop, talking about picking up some guy outside a nearby bar "to get him in trouble" (literal quote there)?

 Not saying there aren't creeps out there, who will use whatever "hold" they can to get into a teens pants. But it CAN cut back the other way (and does)...

[jackdanson]

no. its creepy. girls that age are at a very vulnerable.

There are a lot of dumb 20 year olds too.  When I was 18 I was with a girl that was 15, we stayed together for 4 years and she matured exactly ZERO in that time. (she was very mature in the first place) A 25+ year old that is hitting on someone under the age of 20 obviously has serious social issues, but I don't put it in the same category as someone who takes advantage of a 10 year old.

My grandma married my grandfather when she was 14, it wasn't even an issue at the time, and they raised a completely(well, fairly!) normal family.  People were getting married at that age for thousands of years before that too.  Now all of the sudden people are expected to wait until they are 25 to get married and/or have sex.  It's ridiculous.

As far as the guy goes, hopefully he's genuine.  He's paid his debt, hopefully he won't reoffend.  We don't know what he did in the first place.  Maybe he should still be in prison, maybe not.

[Matthew Carberry]

His crimes are probably public record, but, up here, given his lack of complaint about miscategorization it is most likely his offenses were against underage family members.

Sad but true.

That is the previously dark secret of Alaskan village life.  Bad uncles, step dads and step brothers are endemic.

He's 53 in 2009.  In 1993 when he was convicted of two counts of statuatory he would have been 37.  In 2000 on his third conviction he was 44.

The age of consent up here is 16 at either of those ages.  That isn't a defensible "my girlfriend is just 3 years younger" situation.  That's a predator with a big black f-ing fin on his dorsal.

If it were a case of just "I didn't know she was 17" it wouldn't have happened three damn times and he wouldn't have not defended himself.

I'm as militant against the needless expansion of what constitutes a "sex crime" as anyone else and that's documented by my previous posts, but given the totality of the circumstances this guy is a scumbag who needs to go live on an island without kids around.

That said, good on him for the donation and hopefully moving on in his life.  Better though that he use the money to create a situation where he can avoid girls of any age under 18 though, no matter the personal discomfort it might cause him.

[Matthew Carberry]

Here's the crime he committed at least three times, remember this guy was my age at the time of his first offenses.

AS 11.41.436. Sexual Abuse of a Minor in the Second Degree.

(a) An offender commits the crime of sexual abuse of a minor in the second degree if


(1) being 17 years of age or older, the offender engages in sexual penetration with a person who is 13, 14, or 15 years of age and at least four years younger than the offender, or aids, induces, causes or encourages a person who is 13, 14, or 15 years of age and at least four years younger than the offender to engage in sexual penetration with another person;


(2) being 16 years of age or older, the offender engages in sexual contact with a person who is under 13 years of age or aids, induces, causes, or encourages a person under 13 years of age to engage in sexual contact with another person;


(3) being 18 years of age or older, the offender engages in sexual contact with a person who is under 18 years of age, and the offender is the victim's natural parent, stepparent, adopted parent, or legal guardian;

(4) being 16 years of age or older, the offender aids, induces, causes, or encourages a person who is under 16 years of age to engage in conduct described in AS 11.41.455 (a)(2) - (6);

• Sec. 11.41.455. UNLAWFUL EXPLOITATION OF A MINOR.
  
  (a) A person commits the crime of unlawful exploitation of a minor if, in the state and with the intent of producing a live performance, film, audio recording, photograph, negative, slide, book, newspaper, magazine, or other printed material that visually depicts the conduct listed in (1) - (7) of this subsection, the person knowingly induces or employs a child under 18 years of age to engage in, or photographs, films, records, or televises a child under 18 years of age engaged in, the following actual or simulated conduct:
  (1) sexual penetration;
  (2) the lewd touching of another person's genitals, anus, or breast;
  (3) the lewd touching by another person of the child's genitals, anus, or breast;
  (4) masturbation;
  (5) bestiality;
  (6) the lewd exhibition of the child's genitals; or
  (7) sexual masochism or sadism.
  (b) A parent, legal guardian, or person having custody or control of a child under 18 years of age commits the crime of unlawful exploitation of a minor if, in the state, the person permits the child to engage in conduct described in (a) of this section knowing that the conduct is intended to be used in producing a live performance, film, audio recording, photograph, negative, slide, book, newspaper, magazine, or other printed material that visually depicts the conduct.
  (c) Unlawful exploitation of a minor is a class B felony .
  (d) In this section, "audio recording" means a nonbook prerecorded item without a visual component, and includes a record, tape, cassette, and compact disc.

(5) being 18 years of age or older, the offender engages in sexual contact with a person who is under 16 years of age, and


(A) the victim at the time of the offense is residing in the same household as the offender and the offender has authority over the victim; or


(B) the offender occupies a position of authority in relation to the victim.


(6) being 18 years of age or older, the offender engages in sexual penetration with a person who is 16 or 17 years of age and at least three years younger than the offender, and the offender occupies a position of authority in relation to the victim; or


(7) being under 16 years of age, the offender engages in sexual penetration with a person who is under 13 years of age and at least three years younger than the offender.


(b) Sexual abuse of a minor in the second degree is a class B felony.[/i]

This isn't an "I didn't know" offense, this is either incest, position of authority or a massive age difference.

[vaskidmark]

When I posted this little tidbit of an article I was not really concerned with just how icky the guy was.  I've dealt with that sort both before, during and after they go to prison, and the ickyness just never changes.  I learned to get beyond the ickyness.

I thought it was ironic that "late Saturday afternoon" he announced that he was donating $100K to STAR.  That was "late Saturday afternoon" after he came forward earlier in the the day to claim his prize.  It seemed to me that his charity gene only kicked in after he had been outed as a repeat sex offender.

As an aside, does it strike anyone else as "strange" that it seems that news reporters are running names through sex offender registries and other offender registries to see if there is any dirt on someone who has become newsworthy?  (Why else would his name have been run through the registry, and why else would the TV station report on the registry "hit"?)

stay safe.

skidmark

[Tallpine]

As an aside, does it strike anyone else as "strange" that it seems that news reporters are running names through sex offender registries and other offender registries to see if there is any dirt on someone who has become newsworthy?  (Why else would his name have been run through the registry, and why else would the TV station report on the registry "hit"?)

Perhaps one of the reporters actually remembered one or both of the original incidents ...?