Teen Rape Case Moved to Juvenile Court, Closed to Public

Kyle Reddish, who was charged with rape in September 2011, appeared in court Monday.

A case involving an Abingdon teen—charged with raping a fellow student last fall—was moved to juvenile court during a hearing Monday morning.

The move effectively closes the case's outcome to the public, preventing media and community members from following further developments in the case.

, 17, of the 100 block of Kensington Parkway, was charged as an adult with two counts of second-degree rape and six related charges in connection with the alleged sexual assault of a girl who was 14 years old at the time.

Reddish had been facing a set of juvenile charges, in addition to the adult charges. Circuit Court Judge Maurice Baldwin granted a reverse waiver, moving the adult case to juvenile court and closing it to the public.

Juvenile court cases and outcomes are closed to the public. A motion to transfer the juvenile case to adult criminal court was denied.

See also:

CB9678 September 02, 2012 at 01:02 AM
Dave not sure about this specific case but if HCPS is following their own policy he would be at alt ed until this is resolved assuming he would not be found delinquient. His prescence is likely to cause a substantial disruption, cause obvious trama for his victim who has a right to go to school without that trama and poses a potential risk if he is a sex offender.
Eileen Siple September 02, 2012 at 03:47 AM
I find it appalling that you do not think others have a right to their opinions. And I have no idea where you got the notion that I think 16 and 17 year-olds don't know right from wrong. I never said anything of the kind, and, in fact, I absolutely believe most do know right from wrong. I have simply stated that the Supreme Court has acknowledged that there are basic differences in a teen's brain, as opposed to an adult's brain, making them unable to fully appreciate the whole situation and the ramifications of their actions, and additionally making it more difficult to control impulses. Teenagers act rashly. That's why they are not allowed to legally drink or vote. Further, teenagers, solely because of their young ages, are not allowed to serve on juries, meaning that, in an adult court, a juvenile cannot be tried by a jury of his peers, which is his constitutional right. The juvenile justice system came about because of these facts. And to be clear, I have cited facts all along, unlike you, who have simply spouted your opinions. You are, however, entitled to your opinion, just as I am entitled to my opinion that juvenile courts are for juveniles. And also to be clear, I never once said a thing about your grammar, but your spelling is atrocious. And one more thing, I am finished debating my facts with your opinions, unless you are actually confident enough about your opinions to sign your name to them. If you feel so strongly about your opinions, then own them.
CB9678 September 05, 2012 at 01:46 PM
I find it appalling you have a reading comprehension issue. If you read the post to which you replied you would clearly see that I said "Of course I recognize your right to have a differing opinion. I was simply trying to see how far you think this Juvinielle crusade should go!" It seems you missed that. I may think your opinion is crap but it is your opinion. I agree that the brain of a human does gradually grow and evolve but I DISAGREE. with your assertion that at 16 your brain is not capable of knowing and controlling actions like raping or killing. You point out as an example age requirements for voting, drinking and liscencing. Notice you can get a liscence to drive at 16. This means that it is recognized you are responsible enough to drive. If you get a DUI at 16 you go to adult court if you run over a kid you go to adult court. If you can not keep from shooting people or raping them you have no buisness driving a car! Secondly you talk about jury of peers. You use this as if age is a qualifier for a peer jury. It is not a garuntee you will be tried by a jury of only people your age, gender, race etc. All it means according to the supreme court, is that the jury is a cross section of the community.
Eileen Siple September 10, 2012 at 09:09 PM
As I have already said, I will respond to your inane comments when you feel strongly enough about your convictions to sign your name to them. Until that time, it is apparent that you are merely attempting to get a reaction. I will, however, point out that your definition of the word "peer" is incorrect; in fact, it means a person who is of equal standing. A juvenile is not of equal standing with adults.
Dave October 14, 2012 at 12:14 AM
I will be the first to admit. I defended this guy saying he needed a trail. Then today, I run a case trial on him and see a drunk driving charge, with many others. Still not sure what happened, but this "kid" needs a lot of help


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »