ELKO, Nev. — A Twin Falls woman convicted of forcing a 13-year-old boy to touch her breasts was sentenced Monday to life in prison.

Michelle Lyn Taylor, 34, was convicted of lewdness with a minor under 14 in November after a week-long trial in Elko County, Nev., District Judge Mike Memeo’s courtroom.

With the conviction, Taylor faced a mandatory life sentence, and Memeo set parole eligibility after 10 years, the minimum sentence. If released on parole she must register as a sex offender and will be under lifetime supervision.

The district attorney’s office did not offer a plea agreement in the case, said public defender Alina Kilpatrick, who argued the sentence is unconstitutional and doesn’t fit the crime.

“The jury was not allowed to know the potential sentence in this case and the Legislature doesn’t know the facts,” she said, alluding to the minimum sentence set by the Legislature in Nevada Revised Statute.

Kilpatrick said despite the parole eligibility after 10 years, there should be no mistake that it’s a life sentence for Taylor.

“She is getting a greater penalty for having a boy touch her breast than if she killed him,” she said.

After he sentenced her, Memeo said he was bound by state statute to impose the life sentence, but said he isn’t sure why the prosecution chose to charge her under that statute.

District Attorney Gary Woodbury could not be reached for comment.

Taylor, who lived in Jackpot, Nev., at the time of the crime, kissed a friend’s child, forced him to touch her breast and asked him to have sex with her in February 2008.

Taylor claimed she was intoxicated and doesn’t remember what happened that night. She told jurors she roughhoused with the boy, but didn’t force him to touch her inappropriately.

Man arrested in Nevada on felony warrant

A Twin Falls man wanted on kidnapping and drug charges was arrested Friday on a warrant at Barton’s Club 93 casino in Jackpot, Nev.

Timothy L. Craig, 50, was located by an Elko County sheriff’s deputy based on information distributed by the sheriff’s office’s terrorism liaison.

“(Twin Falls law enforcement) thought he was headed our way,” Undersheriff Doug Gailey said.

Gailey said the information was distributed throughout the various law enforcement entities in the county, and it eventually paid off in Jackpot.

Craig’s felony warrant is for $75,000.

(26) comments

TwinAware
TwinAware

I am glad the punishment was so hard.I know a sex offender in the Wendell area who is allowed to drive long haul and is on all the social network sites , who is watching him and why add them to a list if no one is going to watch them!?

vwarren
vwarren

I think the punishment was fair... I personally think that child molesters dont EVER deserve to walk to earth at all. If you can do that to a child, then you shouldnt be allowed to be around people at all. Regarding this Wendell man, that's pretty scary!! They do need to keep a tighter leash on those evil people.

cpergiel
cpergiel

None of this makes any sense to me. I do not even see a crime. What's the matter with you people? ("You people" meaning the prosecutor, the judge, the jury, everyone who lives in the Magic Valley). Has living in Magic Valley fried your brains?

Raffkin
Raffkin

Well I certainly hope that all of you responsible for electing this worthless excuse for a District Attorney are pleased with the job he has done because your turn is next. Any person in such a position as the DA who evidently does not possess the discernment or discretion to administer the law appropriately should be fired. He is a menace to the community and the people that he is supposed to help to protect.

“District Attorney Gary Woodbury could not be reached for comment.” That statement alone speaks volumes about the content of this man’s character. He should be proud to defend this sentence – not sneak away into the darkness like a little mouse.

God help you people, is all I can say - Oh and I'm glad that I do not live anywhere near you.

justthefacts
justthefacts

Humor me please...a man leaves a bar intoxicated, gets behind the wheel of his vehicle, chooses to drive off and ultimately gets in an accident and kills a 13 year old boy, unintentionally, but still is blatently guilty of vehicular manslaughter. He is charged with the following in Nevada: $2000-$5000 fine, 25 years - Life prison sentence with a possibility of parole after 10 years. This is the actual sentence for a crime of this caliber. With that being said, should this woman really, seriously, get the same exact sentence for allowing (forcing? Give me a break, he was 13 and I'm sure curious, like any normal 13 year old boy would be) a 13 year old boy to touch her breast?! I agree she shouldn't had committed this offense, but to give her the same punishment as someone who murders someone by choosing to get behind the wheel of a car intoxicated...no, not right, not at all. I know a young person that was hit by a drunk driver at a young age, and never will be able to walk again. Basically ending his life as he knew it. Ask him if he'd rather have had an older lady "make" him touch her breast instead...

cfcamericadotorg
cfcamericadotorg

If you or any of your relatives or friends are being abused by Sex Offender Laws, come join Citizens for Change, America.
http://www.cfcamrica.org

You think this story is bad.. you should know about all the children , thousands of children being raped by federal, state and local laws.

Americans need to united and take back this country from the Tyrants now in power.
This is just wrong, life for a kid touching your breast.

cfcamericadotorg
cfcamericadotorg

Citizens for Change, America
Join Us if you are being harmed by the crazy sex offender laws.

http://www.cfcamerica.org

hillel
hillel

hey the video of the sentencing hearing is posted at www.coyote-tv.com it is something!!

cfcamericadotorg
cfcamericadotorg

Yeah, TwinAware, and going by your line of thinking...since you live in that same area, and you know of this person, you should be on the sex offender registry by association... right?
Who votes TwinAware should be on the sex offender registry by his or her line of thinking....
Just because 1 person commits a crime, does not make all of society guilty of the same crime.
This woman deserves NOTHING of what she got.
How about the 18 thousand alcohol related deaths in this country. What is being done about that?
The judge should be disbarred in this case. The Prosecuting Attorney should be disbarred in this case.

HonestOpinion
HonestOpinion

Woodbury says while it might be some adolescent male's fantasy to have sex with a woman, in this case it was a traumatic event.
According to the Law, Woodbury can legally and constitutionally punish this woman for 'LIFE', under 'Megan's 'MURDER' Law' and describe this woman's action as Having 'SEX'; When President Bill Clinton, who in fact signed Megan's 'MURDER' Law said 'getting "oral sex", is 'NOT' sex'!

I'm sure Woodbury believes this boy is an extremely traumatized child! But is he traumatized, like Megan, Jessica or Adam; those murdered, decapitated and violently sexually assaulted?
Should anyone care about laws being devised without the use of a Webster dictionary. Do Our US Representative have their own dictionary and vocabulary? How can anyone down here ever abide to their laws?

antimisandry
antimisandry

This sentence is terribly harsh for such a minor crime. BUT - this is the reality men face as a matter of routine.

Did anyone notice in the video, Kilpatrick almost slipped up by saying "was never intended for a woman", and had to change her words "was never intended for .... someone like Michelle Taylor". When she realised the Judge wouldn't sway with "but she's a woman", she had to rely on "boo hoo waaaaaaaaah".

This is the equality that feminists demanded, now it's biting them on the ass - deservedly so.

http://antimisandry.com/articles/equality-bites-woman-ass-hard-19.html

azcavalier
azcavalier

[quote]justthefacts said: "Humor me please...a man leaves a bar intoxicated, gets behind the wheel of his vehicle, chooses to drive off and ultimately gets in an accident and kills a 13 year old boy, unintentionally, but still is blatently guilty of vehicular manslaughter. He is charged with the following in Nevada: $2000-$5000 fine, 25 years - Life prison sentence with a possibility of parole after 10 years. This is the actual sentence for a crime of this caliber. With that being said, should this woman really, seriously, get the same exact sentence for allowing (forcing? Give me a break, he was 13 and I'm sure curious, like any normal 13 year old boy would be) a 13 year old boy to touch her breast?! I agree she shouldn't had committed this offense, but to give her the same punishment as someone who murders someone by choosing to get behind the wheel of a car intoxicated...no, not right, not at all. I know a young person that was hit by a drunk driver at a young age, and never will be able to walk again. Basically ending his life as he knew it. Ask him if he'd rather have had an older lady "make" him touch her breast instead..."[/quote]

OK, Justthefacts, here are the facts of the case.

The lady, previously convicted of felony theft, invited the 13 yr old and his 8yr old brother to her home with the promise of playing video games on a PS3. Their Mom (a co-worker) dropped them off, and the lady sat them down to watch TV and then went to her bedroom. The 13 came looking for her to see where the PS3 was. She told him to come in and shut the door, and so he did. Then she pushed him on the bed. straddled him, and removed some of her clothes. She started kissin him and asked him to have sex with her. He said no. She then grabbed his hands and directed him to fondle her. At some point, the 8 yr old cracked the door open to figure out where his brother was, and witnessed the accused straddling his brother in a state of partial undress. The Mom returned for her kids and caught the lady on top of her son, where she promptly removed her children.

You could argue that the Mom should have known better. But that's not the point. I agree that it may seem a little harsh to sentence her to life...but sexual assault on a 13 yr old is a heinous crime. And it's mandatory. Don't blame the DA. Don't blame the prosecutor. Blame whomever wrote the law. Also, the defense attorney is only partially correct when she says that they never offered her a deal. The prosecution told her that they wanted her to register as a sex offender. The defense said, "absolutely not", so the prosecution never offered anything. Why make an offer that will just be refused?

vr041
vr041

what's your source for this detailed account? I've tried looking for it but have come up empty with it.

tyciol
tyciol

This is a ridiculously extreme punishment. I don`t doubt that this boy received unwanted attention (her pic is shown in another article, not very attractive) and she should be reprimanded if she grabbed his wrists and manipulated him.

I wouldn`t be at all opposed to a jail sentence, but this just seems far too extreme based on the act when we give lighter sentencing to people who beat children up and injure them. We`re greatly embellishing the damage anything remotely erotic could be.

Comment deleted.
bonesidaho
bonesidaho

I AGREE this is bull s@@@ These laws there putting in place are causing alot of children to be murdered. These people will no longer leave witnesses. Its sad that these crimes take place. In the old days before these sorry sentencing laws were in efect the kids got over it and went on with there lives. Not all but most did.I read everyday were a child has been found murdered and assaulted.

Comment deleted.
bonesidaho
bonesidaho

What are your plans.? I would like to speak against the sorry laws. Just to save a few kids from murder. It has become a no witness left behind for a real sex crime type person. And this flippen law is causing them to kill there victims

Comment deleted.
bonesidaho
bonesidaho

What we have noticed over the years is this Vwarren. Anyone who is this harsh against a crime is normally one who is guilty of that crime. Grow up

Hazel919
Hazel919

These comments are very interesting to read...but here's some food for thought? Would any of you oppose a life sentence of a 34 year old man who forces a 13 year old girl to touch his genitals? Does your perspective change a wee bit when the tables are turned? Gender should play no part when it comes to abiding by the laws in this country. This is absolutely a harsh lesson for this woman and she should not receive any leniency for being a woman.

Sneakypete
Sneakypete

Thank God this was posted...I'll never go to Elko again! Nor will I allow any of my friends or relatives. The possibility of getting arrested for some idiotic "crime" looms too large to chance it. What fools!

hellsurvivor
hellsurvivor

One little item on display in the Musée du Louvre is a wonderful medieval steel device. It prevents contact between opposites.

36yrslater
36yrslater

My very first post ever! I pray that everyone who sees this can see what has really happened to this child! I am going back 36 yrs ago in a similar situation- I have spend the last 35 years of my life trying to figure out what was wrong with me. ALL because NOBODY protected me.
Any one who can say this person does not deserve what she got is an ignorant person. I am so grateful that God has exposed this woman for the PREDATOR THAT SHE IS!!! Thank God for the people who protected this CHILD!!! What kind of society do we have when we allow and excuse predators to harm our children? If this has ever happened to you,please know that you have done nothing wrong!!! THEY ARE WRONG AND SHOULD BE PUNISHED!!! If this has never happened to you, please quit protecting these predators!
You are 100% wrong if you believe this woman is not receiving exactly what she deserves!
She made the choices. She was the adult. She harmed a CHILD!!!
I have no clue what happened to the man who did this to me. If he is still on this earth, he is now a 65 yr old man and I'm left wondering how many more girls he has molested. If you have never had this happen to you or anyone you love than you should have zero say in the matter unless you are supporting this 13 yr old boy!!! May God bless All the people who support, love and took care of this child!!!

instant
instant

Well read the article "judge says women sex offender is making progress" & has been giving 4 chances & is in therapy at tax payers costs! She should have had the judge this women has because she keeps getting away with it & has all of a sudden became the victim! NO the innocent MINORS that THEY molested are the victims, so who is protecting them?

dranyamelknur
dranyamelknur

Jesus said, "He who is without sin, cast the first stone." This was in the case of a woman accused of adultery. They had buried her up to her neck and were going to start stoning her in the head. The people felt shame and showed mercy.
Do you realize she could spend fifty years in jail.? At twenty thousand a year to maintain her that will be a million dollars. Imagine what we could do with that money to help the "victim" and her.. This was her first sex offense. She needs probation. Do not blame any governmental group except the Nevada legislature. They made this law which amounts to cruel and unusual punishment.

ooobudog
ooobudog

this woman got EVERYTHING she deserved!!! She is a SICK AND TWISTED woman and a DANGER to society. we have places for people like her: STATE PRISON and thats where she belongs. and rest assured, she WILL be dealt with accordingly, as stater prisoners SERIOUSLY frown upon other prisoners with charges such as this ladys. Im pretty sure the remainder of her life will be a LIVING NIGHTMARE, EXACTLY WHAT SHE DESERVES. ALL sex offenders should be incarcerated FOR LIFE, NO EXCEPTIONS!!!!!!!

Comment deleted.
vr041
vr041

What's your source? I'm trying to find a source for this detailed account of this online but having very little luck finding it.

vr041
vr041

I’m not sure if you’re spinning it this way because you genuinely don’t have the facts or if you’re actively trying to engage in child sexual abuse apologetics, but your entire argument here is simply inaccurate.

Firstly the sentencing video has been altered. If you pay close attention to the dialogue and time stamping, you will find that the 3m40s of summations from both sides have been conveniently edited out.

However, in addition to the lie about the plea bargain which you uncovered; every claim that lawyer made is proven to be a lie by the evidence.

Firstly, the following article covered the appeal: http://elkodaily.com/news/local/defense-argues-unusual-punishment-in-lewdness-case/article_a32e1d84-e079-11e0-a3ec-001cc4c03286.html

Of interest is the following passage in it:

“Thompson said Taylor had lured the victim and his younger brother over to her residence with the promise of being able to play Playstation 3. After watching TV for some time, the boy went to ask Taylor about playing the game system. Taylor, according to Thompson, closed the door to her bedroom, gently pushed the boy down onto the bed and then straddled him.

Thompson said she then took off her hooded sweatshirt and placed the boy’s hand underneath her bra. Thompson said there was contact of her groin against his against his will, and there was skin-to-skin contact of her forcing his hand upon her breast. She then attempted to remove his clothing. Thompson said Taylor also demanded the boy have sex with her, which is contrary to other claims by the defense that she requested it.”

By my count, there are three instances of child sexual molestation and child sexual assault there- the forced groping (tantamount to child molestation), the forced grinding (sexual assault) and trying to rip his clothes off whilst repeatedly demanding sex (attempted rape). It should be noted here that she lost both the trial and the appeal, meaning that her actions pertaining to the child have been proven beyond reasonable doubt; not once, but twice: http://elkodaily.com/news/local/supreme-court-to-decide-on-elko-appeals/article_41994a10-4778-11e1-97f7-001871e3ce6c.html

You also need to consider the scope of what “Lewdness with a minor under 14″ or NRS 201.230 actually covers. As the following law firm FAQ page covers, NRS 201.230 covers any sexual act with a child under 14, of a sexual nature, upto and excluding, acts of sexual penetration: http://www.shouselaw.com/nevada/lewd-minor.html

What Taylor was proven to have been guilty of is on the very extreme end of this statue- meaning that even if there was an argument for a lesser lesser charge for acts on the opposite end of the scale (and such an argument is of dubious merit); it still wouldn’t apply in Taylor’s case.

Furthermore this is a woman who as you have pointed out, is in denial about her sexual tendencies (eg “just rough housing”) and has demonstrated a desire to go under the radar (eg her refusal to accept a plea deal being based entirely on her refusal to voluntarily register as a sex offender). As the above link on the outcome of her appeal also notes, she appealed solely on the grounds of an evidence review, rather than also appealing on the grounds of a sentencing review.

In this case, common sense says that it is only a matter of when this woman would prey on a child again and that therefore she needs to be kept locked away from the general public until such time that she admits she has a problem and is willing to accept help with it. That is precisely what a 10 year minimum (arguably not a true life sentence as a true life sentence is “life without the possibility of parole”) does in this case; every minute she spends locked up past 10 years, will be almost entirely the result of her choices and hers alone.

Then there’s the whopper Kirkpatrick went into about the severity of the sentence as compared to murder. Unless Kirkpatrick got her law degree out of the bottom of a cereal box, she would know that in Nevada, crimes against kids – particularly crimes against kids under the age of 14 – are regarded as especially heinous and punished accordingly.

Herein lies the rub. Kirkpatrick was referring to the sentence for murdering an adult, not murdering a child.

A quick survey of penalties for sex crimes against kids in Nevada reveals that the justice system there has little tolerance for such heinous acts. Any physical act upto rape gets a 10 year minimum, while raping a kid under the age of 14 will see you the offender get a 25 year minimum- or in cases where substantial bodily harm to the child occurs, life without parole: http://www.shouselaw.com/nevada/sexual-assault.html

Murdering a child under that age of 14 in Nevada is no exception. As people might be aware, Nevada still has the death penalty – in their case, death by lethal injection. However there are only a handful of exceptions where it applies. One of them is murdering a child under the age of 14: http://www.shouselaw.com/nevada/death-penalty.html

In short, this sentence was entirely just, and in terms of her conduct after she was arrested, in addition to her conduct when committing the crime, it was entirely self-inflicted. She committed acts which fall under the extreme end of what she was charged with, meaning the she was charged with precisely the right statute. Even then, in terms of the plea bargain and the appeal, she had 2 lifelines to get a lesser sentence and threw them both away.

However something in society’s chauvinistic senses wont let that process. People don’t see a child predator who is unrepentant, a menace to kids and a complete idiot who shot herself in the foot; they see a uterus which they are instinctively compelled to protect as though she were some perpetual damsel in distress, locked away in a giant tower guarded by a fierce dragon, in dire need of rescue.

People don’t see the child victim in all of this; they see a penis on legs, and therefore a much worse piece of chauvinism exists than blaming a woman for being raped based on how she was dressed – in people’s minds he must have wanted it because he has a penis between his legs. Radical feminists would even most likely claim that he must have raped her.

The double standard is so telling in the United States, that in multiple cases where children as young as 12 have been raped by female pedophiles and the pedophile has gotten pregnant as a result of raping the child; the child victim has been forced to pay child support, to the pedophile.

Ultimately, either people consider violating a child to be a heinous, deeply traumatising event, or they are of a mind that child abuse is acceptable- in some cases, no doubt believing it is a positive thing. Either all child sexual abuse is unacceptable to people – including the molestation and attempted rape of a 13 year old boy by a 34 year old woman, or people have no problem with child abuse – including grown adults raping 6 year old children.

However to complain about this sentence on one hand and then, as many people have, to complain about the recent case in Montana where a man got 30 days in jail for raping a 6 year old boy, is the height of hypocrisy.

I’ll be very interested to see not only whether this comment gets published, but whether you use the evidence listed to amend the article in the interests of journalistic integrity.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.