SULLIVAN – A local man has been charged with multiple counts of statutory sodomy in the second degree following an investigation into allegations that he had deviant sexual intercourse with a person under the age of 17.
John W. Stroup, 30, of Sullivan, who resides on Magnolia Road in Washington County, was arrested and taken into custody by the Washington County Sheriff’s Department on Tuesday, Oct. 14, 2008. Stroup is charged in Washington County Circuit Court with 10 counts of statutory sodomy second degree.
According to a probable cause statement filed with the court, Stroup had deviant sexual intercourse with a person that was (at the time) under the age of 17, on at least 10 separate occasions by performing an oral sex act on the victim. The statement also states that the defendant was over the age of 21 at the time of the occurrence and he had clear knowledge of the victim’s age at the time of the offense.
In the felony complaint filed Oct. 10, 2008 in Washington County Circuit Court, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney Tammy M. Steward states that Stroup committed the act(s) between Feb.1, 2007 and Feb. 10, 2008 in Washington County.
Bond was set for Stroup at $100,000 with the conditions that the defendant “have no contact with the victim and no contact with anyone under the age of 17 and not to be anywhere where children are known to frequent, such as parks, pools, playgrounds, schools, etc.” According to court records, Stroup is currently free on bond.
A Class C felony is punishable by imprisonment for a term of years not less than two nor more than seven, or by confinement in the county jail for a term not to exceed one year, or by fine not to exceed $5,000, or by any combination of fine and confinement.

Comments

Add New Search RSS

sleekmagic   | 216.229.70.xxx | 2008-11-09 09:56:27 This is a very well written article, full of facts. I don't think there should be any problem comments posted on this article about you ruining anyone's lives, this guy made his own disgusting choices. It actually makes me sick knowing the details of what he did with his victim though! But again, the facts are enough to make a great article!

Bob3185   | 216.229.70.xxx | 2008-11-09 09:55:36 These arbitrary age limits are so archaic they would be laughable if the punishments weren't so punitive. And the term "statutory rape or sodomy" are meant to invoke some visceral reaction. "Rape"! OMG! How about consensual sex with mitigating conditions or something? Then give the guy a fine and a warning. It's pretty obvious that both parties agreed to participate in the act(s). Now, if force or coercion was used that's a different story. In this case, that seems not to have occurred. To say someone nearly 17 years old isn't capable of giving consent is ridiculous. Man is the only animal that "forbids" their offspring from having any kind of sexual encounter for 6 years after reaching sexual potency. That in itself tells me it's a ridiculous law. It's artificial and only causes people to be branded as a criminal or a pervert for doing what to them, comes naturally. If this is printed I expect a lot of hate responses. For that reason I'd prefer my name not ...

L123456   | 216.229.92.xxx | 2008-11-09 18:27:13 I am amazed first of all that this "Sullivan Journal" has made it this long again. I believe a few years ago the editor tried but could not do it because it was a paper straight from the rumor mill! OH WELL! any one that knows this man in the above article like I do, knows that these charges are bogus! ! So every one needs to keep in mind "Innocent Till Proven Guilty", the truth will come out! And dear mister editor you need to get your facts straight before you print articles. Your choice of words make it sound as though he is convicted and has not been. Allegations have been made, that does not mean that he is guilty! You should report news but choose your words wisely when reporting. Everyone knows everyone in this small town your choice of words can confine him to a life of people looking at him as though he is a bad person. It is sad that you believe, that you and your partners in the journal have never done anything wrong, so that there would never be...

newseditor1   | 216.229.92.xxx | 2008-11-20 20:23:29 OK L123456: First of all, why are you on here perpetuating this "rumor mill newspaper?" Also, I haven't convicted anyone of anything. I didn't manufacture the charges, the prosecuting attorney did. She, and she alone, made the accusations - not some little newspaper editor in Sullivan. The same goes for all of us, guilty or not.

Sullivangirl   | 216.229.76.xxx | 2008-11-09 19:24:17 Bob--how do you know the victim was almost 17? I'm just curious, since I didn't see his exact age mentioned in the article. To L123456, I cannot believe you are accusing the editor of gossip because he prints a news story about an arrest. No newspaper or news show waits for a trial to determine guilt before they print/air a story on someone's arrest.

Bob3185   | 216.229.92.xxx | 2008-11-10 12:03:09 One thing L123456 is right about is the skewed perspective of papers like the Independent News and worst of all, The Missourian that is so far right it makes Jerry Falwell look like a Left Wing nut. So far, what I've read in the Journal has every earmark for journalism and reporting. It answers the Who What When Where and Why of every story. Journalism 101. The ones complaining the most seem to be those who have some personal interest in the subject. Can you say, "bias"? I am referring mostly to the Kody Heuer case where the man mutilated a calf and shot two other cows for amusement. I cringe and get sick to my stomach every time I even think of that happening. Yes, they are farm animals destined to become dinner. But they are not targets for sadistic sport! Far from it. Even to this day when I pass a pasture and see some cows or other livestock I smile at the beauty of it. It evokes some childhood awe in me even now.

M0679   | 216.229.92.xxx | 2008-11-10 12:02:12 Dear editor ~ Job well done. You said exactly what the proscuting attorney put out. It does not surprise me, John come out of the 'box' and announced he was GAY years ago. He choose to do this to a young child rather they were three or almost 17 or whatever age. This IS RAPE no matter how you look at it. No different from a man having sex with a girl under the age, it is still illegal. I hope John reaps his crime. THIS IS A CRIME. I will keep my loved ones away from this family which is a very well known family in Sullivan. I bet his dad is rolling in his grave over this!!!!

Bob3185   | 72.172.192.xxx | 2008-11-10 12:24:58 Bob--how do you know the victim was almost 17? I'm just curious, since I didn't see his exact age mentioned in the article. The article referred to the fact the victim was "then" under the age of 17 and it happened last year. Therefore he must have been nearly 17 when the incidents happened. As for MO679's contention that it was "rape no matter how you look at it." I have to disagree. Rape is a violent, usually non-sexually motivated crime of power over a victim. This was consensual and non-violent or it would have been reported as such. Again, I have a hard time pointing a finger at anyone accused of "statutory rape" simply because the word statutory only refers to a law on the books. It says nothing of the crime itself. As we all know, laws are arbitrary and the voting age, drinking age and other ages of consent are constantly being challenged and changed depending on a lot of factors. It wasn't that many years ago when girls married at age 14 or so and usu...

snafu4me - re:   | 216.229.70.xxx | 2008-11-10 23:53:31 newseditor1 wrote: . . . Ask the Independent about the time they put my name on the front page - I bet you don't know about that one, do you? . . . I don't know about this, but would love to hear you elaborate

Sullivangirl   | 67.142.129.xxx | 2008-11-12 15:16:09 Bob--I see now that you were guessing about the age issue. Either way, it's still against the law.

KMBUNCH   | 216.229.70.xxx | 2008-11-13 23:13:16 FIRST OF ALL..EVERYONE IS INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY....AND THERE ARE ALWAYS TWO SIDES TO THE STORY...AND MY BROTHER DIDN'T MUTILATE A CALF...HE KILLED IT...SO GET THE FACTS STRAIGHT..A HOLE....

Sullivangirl   | 67.142.129.xxx | 2008-11-14 10:42:56 But, KMBunch.....he did already confess, which puts a little different spin on the old "inncoent until proven guilty" excuse. While I'm at it: shooting, stabbing and torturing adds up to "mutilation" in my book.

Bob3185   | 216.229.92.xxx | 2008-11-14 17:19:09 MY BROTHER DIDN'T MUTILATE A CALF...HE KILLED IT...SO GET THE FACTS STRAIGHT And the difference is?! Killing a calf for fun is sick I don't care who you ask. And shooting the other two cows, one in the eye is good manners? I stand by my statement that this man needs professional help. Thank you.

brenda   | 216.229.70.xxx | 2008-11-15 12:13:46 where was this kids parents? at this age why didn't he tell? did he keep going back to the place it was happening? Or did john go to him? There's a lot of unanswered questions that I'm sure the court system will find out in the end.

ami89 - my brother didnt mutilate a ca   | 216.229.70.xxx | 2008-11-15 12:12:48 You know what, the family can spin it like they want. But the fact of the matter is there brother, son did something wrong and should have to pay for it. what if he had decided it would be "fun" to shoot someone elses dog? Or cat? what if the calf was someones pet and wasn't going to be killed for food? Please people i understand this boy is your family, but he did something illegal and needs to be punished for what he did. stop defending him and start apologizing for him. Better yet maybe he should be a man and apologize for himself and his actions. His family is making excuses for him and enabling his actions. Stop making him think he only klled a cow. He went on someone else's property and killed a calf and shot at others. In the economic times we are in he took away someone's livelihood. cows or calf for that matter are not cheap. What he did was "wrong" in every way. To the family i know you cant be held responsible for his actions and want to defend your brother a...

Bob3185   | 72.172.192.xxx | 2008-11-18 06:48:45 After this much time has passed and the family still doesn't get it, I'd say they'll never get it. One question I'd love to ask them all. If it had been your animal and someone shot it for sport, would you be defending them so vigorously? I think not. It takes on a whole new meaning when it's your property, doesn't it? APOLOGIZE!

brenda   | 216.229.92.xxx | 2009-04-18 14:18:37 why dont you all tell about the boy liying on john and john cleared of these charges? you should tell your readers,about this.johns namber has been smeared from this boy and the newspaper.do whats right help john get his life back.print the rest of the story.he was cleared by the police.

lamom   | 134.197.22.xxx | 2009-09-16 13:36:05 If this man was indeed cleared by the police, this story should be up-dated or removed. Not that it isn't accurate at the time, but the facts may have changed and should be added!

lamom   | 134.197.22.xxx | 2009-09-16 16:16:23 In addition to my last comment, how in the world does a story about an animal being killed get associated with a statuatory rape case?? Let's see, I have children and I have pets. Which do I think is worse???? I think i will save my children first. I love my animals, but let's get our priorities straight.

HADAM - omg   | 216.229.86.xxx | 2010-05-25 20:03:01 ok, so the KID decided to have sex with this MAN. so what, first of all the MAN should have known better and the KID isnt grown up enough to make an ADULT decision! that is why the laws are in place! John stroup, YOU SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF YOURSELF! and the people condoning this and minamizing this should also be ashamed of yourselves! do you think a child under the age of 17 is menatally ready to make that kind of decision by themselves? absolutely NOT! this is why they arent even of age to vote, drink, move out, untill they are 18! It scares me to have this many people in this town that condone this activity because i have 2 KIDS myself reaching the teenage years...and to think that there are this many sick people in this town is really disturbing to me

Only registered users can write comments!

Powered by !JoomlaComment 3.12

Copyright (C) 2007 Alain Georgette / Copyright (C) 2006 Frantisek Hliva. All rights reserved.