Former legislative candidate dodges sexual assault charge, due to uncooperative witness

@SoDakCampaigns

From KEVN, former Republican Legislative candidate Bud May has had his sexual assault charge from late last year dropped, due to the witness not cooperating:

(Click on the link to read the entire story)

May is the son of current State Legislator Liz May.

**Update**

The case might not be done, according to the story in the Rapid City Journal:

The case will be dismissed without prejudice, which means it could be brought against May again should the woman decide to cooperate with prosecutors.

Read that here.

7 thoughts on “Former legislative candidate dodges sexual assault charge, due to uncooperative witness”

  1. So, not guilty.

    Just like the election in AZ was not stolen?

    And Trump didn’t win in 2020?

    Or .. is this more like the CBF incident with BK?

    1. No, no, not guilty as in, he’s 6′-8″, everything is consensual. Not guilty as in, it was his daughter, but age of consent is 16 in South Dakota, so its okay. Like that…..

    3. I believe it became more of a “Family Matter” and Government has not authority beyond the public sector. “WE” can say al we wish about this man, or the situation, but ultimately, this was a civil dispute between family members, and I believe it was ruled as such, which takes the criminal aspect out of the equation. At that point, the State loses its case, due to the so called victim no longer cooperating with the State (the prosecution), which tells me that the matter became more private between the Father, the Mother, the Daughter. I believe as per other stories, the Daughter proclaimed, that she did NOT want her father prosecuted for any criminal activity, because she wanted the right to settle her disputes and controversies with her father privately, and behind closed doors, let alone she wanted her father to maintain a relationship with her siblings At this point, the STATE aka “WE THE PEOPLE” have no control of the situation, less of course in the future, the daughter comes forward to reopen a criminal case a public court room.

      She being between the ages of 13 and 19, gains a portion of her rights as a young adult.
      Remember in South Dakota, when you turn 13, you begin to progress forward as a Yougn Adult, thus restoring many of your Natural Rights, hence they begin to gain more power to speak on their own terms.

      At 13, you are allowed to begin employment outside the family business,
      At 14, you gain more ability to work outside the family, let alone gain the privilege drive, by beginning to get your driving permits, etc.
      At 15, you are able to work more hours outside the family unit, obtain a driver license let alone you gain more rights to enter into relationships with others,
      At 16, you become the legal age to get married with the consent of your parents, to drive full time, to beginning to purchase real property (like vehicles) for cash…
      At 17, you gain more rights.
      At 18, you gain FULL CONSENT POWER of yuour own decisions.

      Public Statutes really BLOCK the State from entering into Contractual Obligations aka Relationships with anyone under the age of 17 and under, which is the true intent of SDCL 26-2-1 – allows your parents to speak for the children under 18, to form those contracts or relationship, but beginning at age 13, the children begin to gain those rights back.

      If you also follow the SEX CRIMES vs persons 17 and under – you will see that the more aggressive penalties, fines, and sanctions are against people who commit sex crimes against children ages 12 and under, while those sex crime penalties, fines, sanctions against those persons ages 13 to 17 become less aggressive…

      For example, if you are convicted if first degree rape of anyone 12 and and under, you may NEVER be removed from the Sex Offender Registry, if you are convicted of first degree rape of anyone 13 and older, you can be removed from the Registry as per conditions set forth by statutes.

      Remember, if anything happens within the Family Construct – the government has no authority to investigate, UNLESS, someone comes forward with an allegation of something is occuring within that Private Domain …

      I think this is what happened here, this was a Private Matter, that somehow became Public , probally mainly due to Mr May running for public office, and political attacks vs his mother. I suppose, I am assuming, that one of his political opponents created a huge stink, an allegation, which led to the government having to investigate.

      I beleive, the FAMILY was attempting to handle this internally, as a private manner, but the political aspirations, and the allegations from outside the family forced the situation into the public light of public opinion. I am presuming, that his political opponent was behind this.

      However, when the daughter chose to tell the government, the courts to back off, and thanks to her NOT cooperating with the State, there was nothing the State could do. It could no longer prove the allegations, the charges to be true, due to the daughter basically tell the State to back off, stay out of it, and let it be a private matter.

      I think this was more of a Political Witch Hunt by the Republican Establishment, who do NOT like his mother, Liz May, and did whatever they could to detour his Political Run for Political Office.

      Now, he has the right to counter sue those involved in defaming his character in order to clear his name, and I bet his daughter will defend him in that situation.

      This was merely a Political With Hunt on a Family due to their Political Beliefs.

  2. Roxanne Hammond is prosecuting?

    Wasnt there a murder case she caused to be dismissed last year for prosecutorial
    Misconduct?….why is sne still prosecuting?

    Maybe the case is not as strong as they said

  3. Mr. Zittrich–This case became a Public Matter when the girl was raped in a Public Restroom in a bar.A Bar or Saloon is a Public Place. Rape is the public’s business.

Comments are closed.