The Virginian-Pilot
©
VIRGINIA BEACH
A judge on Monday rejected a second plea agreement for a Chesapeake woman charged with taking indecent liberties with a teenage girl in her care.
The new agreement called for Melina McPherson to serve 60 days of active jail time in return for her guilty plea. Her last plea deal, of 40 days in jail, was rejected in November.
McPherson, 38, has admitted to molesting a teenage girl she supervised at Hope Haven Children's Home in Virginia Beach in the late 1990s.
She and her husband, Stephen McPherson, worked at the home and later adopted the girl and her two sisters. Stephen McPherson, a former assistant dean at Regent University, is serving 19 years for molesting the girl's two sisters.
He was sentenced in September in Virginia Beach to three of those years because of a plea agreement on charges of taking indecent liberties with two of the sisters. He already was serving 16 years after pleading guilty in January 2009 in Chesapeake to charges of forcible sodomy and object sexual penetration involving the girls.
Melina McPherson has no prior criminal record.
The couple admitted to using Bible verses to manipulate the victims into engaging in sex acts, according to court documents. Commonwealth's Attorney Harvey Bryant said during Monday's hearing that the victim in Melina McPherson's case, now a married mother of two who lives in New Hampshire, supported the terms of the new agreement.
She had wanted to testify, but was unable to come because of the weather, Bryant said. She and her sisters were reluctant to see the McPhersons prosecuted because of their Christian beliefs and because they did not want the McPhersons' two young sons to grow up without being cared for by their natural parents, Bryant said.
"In effect, they feel like they're charging their own parents," Bryant said.
McPherson's attorney, Franklin Swartz, said that sentencing guidelines call for probation in the case.
Circuit Judge H. Thomas Padrick Jr. noted during the hearing that now-retired Circuit Judge A. Joseph Canada Jr. had rejected the previous plea agreement in the case.
Canada had described it as a "travesty of justice," particularly after the sentence Stephen McPherson had received.
Padrick questioned whether it would be appropriate for him to consider the second plea agreement because a judge in the same circuit had already rejected the first one.
Padrick said he had told attorneys in the case that he thought the best way to resolve the issue would be to have the case go to trial.
"There are some pretty egregious facts in this case," Padrick said.
Padrick said he would ask the Virginia Supreme Court to appoint an outside judge to the case. Padrick also allowed McPherson to remain out on bond.
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Twitter
Google
Yahoo
Cont from below
visiting the local dance school? Who is to say those children are safe and no other crimes will occur? No one expected these crimes to occur.
The victims may forgive, but is that sufficient for our society to not expect due punishment? Is it okay to believe that because one has community influence that she can walk away from her crime? What would this say to other sex offenders?
Let it go to trial--
to see what a jury of her peers decide. The points are clear--she plead guilty, as did her husband, and they both deserve their punishment, which should be equal.
These two did not come from harsh or abused childhoods, they know right from wrong, yet both committed these crimes and used religion as their weapon of choice. They have been together at least 25 years. Yes, she was a school teacher, she was also Miss Chesapeake, Miss Indian River, and given the world by her family; her mother runs a local dance school. Her husband is the son of a local now-deceased businessman, the grandson of a prominent pastor, as previous articles state. I remember him on the community baseball fields in his early years, on stage singing and dancing with her at the prom. She was performing solo routines at age 3, dancing and singing on stage until she was in college. Both well educated and honor students. Look all of this information up and try to prove it untrue.
And, ultimately, here is the question: should those boys be around their parents, or should the parents be in jail and the children raised by extended family? Do you want her at the local school's bake sales with your family or visi
why 19 years
I can't understand why it seems like a majority of people here want to see this woman get 19 years like her husband. Some people seem to be making the assumption that the additional abuse that the husband inflicted on the girls once they adopted the girls was known to this woman. Unless you can prove that she knew of the abuse, then the only crime she needs to be punished for is the one she committed. I don't think the amount of time is fair, but I don't think the same sentence as her husband is fair either.
Thank You Pilot Staff
I would like to thank the Pilot Staff for removing the comment directed at me by another poster.
Your response was swift and correct.
Thank you!
she used to teach sixth
she used to teach sixth grade at crestwood middle school in chesapeake.
IN JAIL
This woman needs to be locked up and she needs to get just as much time as her husband or more. Do you really and truly believe that this is the first time for these two? LOCK HER UP......
Byrant brought the first
Byrant brought the first joke of a plea before the court last summer.
He was re-elected in November...which the Pilot erroneously reported he won with 100% of votes.
March he brings another joke plea to the court.
This guy needs to be run out of office now not wait for another money bought election.
B)
lol christians
Gender-based enforcement
It is time the justice system stopped punishing men and women differently for the same crimes. Whether a flasher is prosecuted often depends on the gender of the flasher. Or the more lenient sentence for the 35 year old female teacher having sex with the 16 year old male student, as opposed the the 35 year old male teacher having sex with the 16 year old female student. There are actually two case decisions: one where a man was sipping coffee naked in his kitchen at 6:00 am and a female neighbor cutting through his yard saw him; and another where a man was walking through a females yard while she was visibly naked in her own house. The man in the first case was charged with indecent exposure, the man in the second case with peeping. This gender-based sex crime enforcement has got to stop.
One can only hope
That the third time Harvey Bryant brings a slap on the wrist plea deal in front of one of our good judges, that judge throws in in jail for contempt of court. How is it not contempt of what Judge Canada told him to appear in front of Padrick with this sham deal?