I don’t see the evidence against Pamela Rogers
I don’t agree with Standard editor James Clark regarding his recent column, “Did Rogers get enough jail time?” published in the Aug. 12 Standard.
The reason I disagree with Clark is that his viewpoint was too far slanted in the direction of Rogers being guilty and he didn’t address any facts that raise questions about her possibly being innocent.
From day one, the sensationalism that surrounded this case stemmed, to a large degree, from sex appeal. Rogers is an attractive woman, and television news stations and newspapers couldn’t show enough of her parading around in a revealing bathing suit when she won the “Miss Nitro” title at spring break 1997, or her leaving Warren County jail after she first made bond.
I don’t recall ever seeing a media shot of Rogers in her role as teacher in the classroom. Had the accused been a homely, fat-bottomed, can’t-get-a-date teacher, I doubt the media would have been eager in displaying her to the public.
Now to the evidence against Rogers. Several editions back, the Standard reported the DA’s office didn’t have any concrete evidence against her and was going to rely on witness testimony to prosecute her.
When the grand jury met to hear the evidence against Rogers, did any member ask, “Where is the evidence?” And when I say evidence, I mean solid evidence — DNA, photographs, sexually themed e-mails, or someone swearing under oath that they witnessed Rogers and the 13-year-old boy engaging in a sexual act, not second-hand hearsay fueled by the media displaying Rogers as a sex-starved vixen.
Obviously no member of the grand jury did so, and the reason could be they didn’t want to suffer the wrath of fellow grand jury members and the legal system in McMinnville. After all, they have jobs and reputations to keep up, and we wouldn’t want to disturb their precious existence for the well-being of another.
I’ve heard some say, “She pled no contest, so she must be guilty.” Not necessarily true.
Since this mess first started, January-February 2005, Rogers and her family were under constant strain, emotionally and financially. The total charges against her amounted to more than 100 years if she went to trial and was convicted, and she easily could have served 10-15 years had she gone to trial and been convicted. Also, she probably wanted to get the matter over with so her family wouldn’t have to endure any more suffering.
The Standard said District Attorney Dale Potter said Rogers had sex with the 13-year-old boy at Centertown School, at the boy’s home, at Roger’s home and en route to some school functions. Remember, Rogers never voiced that she in fact had committed the above crimes. Instead, she had to remain quiet as Potter read those charges against her, as part of her no contest plea bargain.
When did we get away from demanding evidence to convict someone? By all accounts, that’s what happened with Pamela Rogers.
Other than credible evidence, it seems that sex-fueled footage from CNN, Fox, “Today Show,” and local media prevailed here. Since she can’t tell her side of the story for eight years, part of the plea agreement, the system covered its behind pretty well. I’ll give them that much credit.
Tom Scott
Cherry Lane
McMinnville