Most Read
    Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

    Only one brother in Cleveland kidnapping to be charged

    Only one brother in Cleveland kidnapping to be charged

    Police just held a press conference.

    Only one of the three brothers was aware of and involved in the kidnapping.

    The Cleveland Plain Dealer reports:

    Cleveland police this afternoon announced that they have charged Ariel Castro with four counts of kidnapping and three counts of rape in connection with holding Amanda Berry, Gina DeJesus and Michelle Knight captive for the last decade.

    Police Capt. Ed Tomba said Pedro and Onil Castro will not be charged, though they have warrants on misdemeanor cases, to be heard Thursday morning.

    City Prosecutor Victor Perez said there was no reason to believe the brothers were involved. Kidnapping charges against Ariel Castro include the 6-year-old child found in home.

    Tomba also corrected previous speculation in the public that the women had been allowed out in public occasionally, saying that they were allowed to go into the garage — and only twice in 10 years, but they never left the property.

    Tomba said a paternity test would be given on Ariel Castro to determine if the young girl found in home is his daughter.


    Donations tax deductible
    to the full extent allowed by law.


    […] Why are they only charging one brother? […]

    abenson229 | May 9, 2013 at 9:29 am

    I guess this is one of those times where we’re just supposed to trust our government officials right? But it is absolutely unbelievable that the other two were completely in the dark.

    LibraryGryffon | May 9, 2013 at 9:42 am

    The NYTimes article that is on the front page of the New London Day this morning says that Pedro and Onil had no knowledge of or involvement in the crimes, based on the testimony of the victims.

    Can anyone with even half a working brain believe that?

    Henry Hawkins | May 9, 2013 at 11:44 am

    How do they know Ariel is involved? The victims confirmed it, of course. Obviously the victims didn’t incriminate the two brothers, so they face no charges – yet.

    The NYT is jumping the gun, drawing an unsupported conclusion. They could easily be conspirators unseen by the victims.

    I’m not sure how and why the two brothers were presented as perps by the media in the first place.

    Eliot Ness | May 9, 2013 at 1:43 pm

    Legal question: How could the brothers not be considered accessories-after-the-fact if the girls were, among other things, chained up?

    Leave a Comment

    Leave a Reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.

    Notify me of followup comments via e-mail (or subscribe without commenting.)

    Font Resize
    Contrast Mode
    Send this to a friend