corruption

Joseph Aaron Young – Update of alleged pedophile case

By Linda Sutter

June 18, 2015 the following charges except for one was pressed against Joey Young, Director of Del Norte County Human Resources, and serves on the Board of Trindel Insurance for Del Norte County:

COUNT 1: Contact of a minor with intent to commit sexual offense in violation of section 288.4(b) of the penal code. A felony

COUNT 2: Contact of minor with intent to commit sexual offense, in violation of section 288.4(b) of the penal code. A felony

COUNT 3: CHILD MOLESTING, in violation of section 647.6 of the penal code. A misdemeanor.

On July 15, 2015, Mr. Young picked up a new charge:

COUNT 4: Disobeying Court Order, in violation of section 166(a)(1)(4) of the California Penal Code, a misdemeanor.

On July 17, 2015 the People of the State of California revoked recognizance status and placed bail of $30,000 on Joey Young.

The Court Record shows that on April 6 and 7th, 2015 the defendant Joey Young allegedly met and did in fact meet with the underage male for the purpose of engaging in a lewd and lascivious act.

Young is also charged with a misdemeanor violation of Penal Code 647.6 for the time period of October 1, 2014 through June 12, 2015, the date of filing. The People’s case is based on an ongoing inappropriate and illegal relationship between the defendant, who is 40 years of age, and the juvenile victim who is still, at the time of filing, a minor.

District Attorney Dale Trigg sent a letter dated June 12, 2015, to Young and was given a court date of June 30, 2015 for arraignment and was told to book and release at the jail before that time, which Young failed to do. The people agreed to continue the arraignment for one week to July 7, 2015. During the June 30, 2015 appearance the People of the State of California requested a Criminal Protective Order requiring Young to have no personal contact with the juvenile male victim, WHO ALSO APPEARED IN COURT with Young and stated that he does not feel victimized and asked for the Criminal Protective Order not to be issued.

The Court, nonetheless, issued the Protective Order.

At the booking and release, Young executed a written Own Recognizance agreement pursuant to Penal Code 1381, where Young agreed to “OBEY ALL LAWS,” by his signature. Less than one week after signing said document, Joey Young was caught alone with the juvenile at a camp fire on the beach. The juvenile victim, lied to law enforcement and attempted to get his friend to join in his lie. Thus the People added the 4th count as a new crime.

This is a felony sex case with a minor victim that carries a state prison and lifetime registration of 290 upon a conviction. This is a public safety concern, particularly given Young’s clear difficulty in grasping the seriousness of it.

At beginning onset the District Attorney’s office felt that Joey Young would show sensible good judgement and discontinue his ongoing relationship with the juvenile male victim once this case was filed. The grace extended by the District Attorney’s Office was misplaced as Young showed up at his first court appearance with the juvenile victim, and even after being ordered by the court to have no contact, was arrested at midnight rendezvous with the juvenile victim at a camp fire on the beach.

Court on this matter has been prolonged by something as simple as Young’s new attorney from the County, McLaughlin, because McLaughlin’s computer was not compatible with the 3mp drive. There are currently 5000 pages of data from Young’s cell phone.

Court for trial setting is September 3, 2015 at 0830 hours in Department 1.

9 Responses to Joseph Aaron Young – Update of alleged pedophile case

  1. Linda Reply

    September 2, 2015 at 12:55 pm

    I also have a question…why does Joey Young now have a public defender? He is working, …what happened to his last defense attorney Mike Riese? So now he works for the county and only has to pay county priced attorney fees ??? Who authorized that??? Is this a political scam??? You know, the kind that says if you’re a Democrat and your job is important than no matter what you do, you do no wrong????

  2. Wesley Nunn Reply

    August 31, 2015 at 11:10 am

    If the alleged ‘victim’ invited Young to meet with him, Young’s not a “predator”. Sounds like Young violated a protective order no matter what, but there’s no ‘predator’ where there’s consent. What has me most curious is why there’s no statutory rape charge, unless there’s just no evidence to support it. I’m not defending any alleged acts, I’m just a strong advocate for having all the evidence weighed fairly for anyone charged with a crime.

  3. Linda Reply

    August 31, 2015 at 7:59 am

    obviously there is strong evidence or the District Attorney’s office would not be wasting tax payers money….and you have to look at each count and what the elements are in each count….the victim is 17…he may or may not be 18 when the prelim is set…his attorney’s keep moving the date because his birthday is in September….there are pages upon pages of written documents….they probably do not need the victim to testify…but the kicker in the pants is that the District Attorney and the Court were very lax thinking Mr.Young would have common sense to obey the laws when the protective order was given…however, Mr. Young chose to intentionally disobey those laws again ergo was caught on the beach at midnight with the victim…looks very predatory to me….if you were really “in love” with someone under age….why couldn’t you wait only two months until victim is of age??? Because you’re a predator that’s why.

  4. CONNIE Reply

    August 30, 2015 at 5:13 pm

    So how do we get from a young person insisting he is not a victim and because of his teetering status of being a minor a crime exists to an actual minor who allegedly killed another person and is being tried as an adult?

    • Wesley Nunn Reply

      August 30, 2015 at 10:53 pm

      Here here.

  5. Wesley Nunn Reply

    August 29, 2015 at 10:57 pm

    What about evidence? Apparently someone believes Young should be convicted on opinion? If the evidence at trial proves Young guilty, so be it. But, until that point, I just don’t believe in convicting someone without their day in court. At least Young hasn’t shown violent tendencies as you have by threatening “they would be spitting out teeth”.

  6. Young is Scum Reply

    August 28, 2015 at 9:31 pm

    Joey Young is a piece of trash and should be thrown out as such. With the good work of the DAs office he will be off to prison where he will be treated to what he deserves. Joey is a scum bag predator who needs to learn how to be a man and confess and stop costing the County money.

    What is up with him still being able to work in a position of authority (sure hope they don’t have any high school interns where he works). I am sure that he spends his days in his plush office fantasying about young boys {and who knows what else…wacka wacka wacka) and all on the tax payers dime.

    Also, whats up with this kids parents? If I had a teenage (minor) son or daughter that was in a relationship with a 40 year old, that person would not be walking around acting like he or she did nothing wrong. They would be spitting out teeth.

    HEY JOEY AARON YOUNG WHY DON’T YOU TAKE A SHORT DRIVE OFF A LONG CLIFF!!!!!!

    • Wesley Nunn Reply

      August 29, 2015 at 4:29 pm

      Uh, evidence?

  7. Wesley Nunn Reply

    August 28, 2015 at 8:08 pm

    Good article, but just wondering — how old is this ‘victim’ who apparently consented to the meetings and does not consider himself a victim? Will the alleged victim be over the age of 18 by the time this goes to trial (opening at least some of the trial proceedings to the public)? Who made the complaint, the parents? Who is the protective order protecting? I’m not defending Young’s acts, but is there any real evidence of “intent to commit a sexual offense” without the so called victim’s testimony? Is there real evidence of “child molesting”, or does all evidence rest on texting? Is prison time or registration applicable if any acts prove consentual? Does Young have any prior history whatsoever of being a sexual predator? Right or wrong, Young must abide by the court protective order, but something sure sounds odd here without a bonafide victim. I guess we will find out at trial.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.