Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Rape Charges Against Illegal Alien Teens Dropped in Maryland Case

Rape Charges Against Illegal Alien Teens Dropped in Maryland Case

New child pornography charges are being pursued

Back in March, two illegal alien teens were charged with raping and sodomizing a 14-year-old girl in a high school bathroom.  After conducting an investigation into the case, prosecutors have dropped rape charges against the illegals; they are still facing child porn charges, however.

The Baltimore Sun reported at the time:

The two teenagers accused of raping a ninth-grader at Rockville High School last week were among tens of thousands of young people who crossed the U.S.-Mexico border illegally in 2016.

. . . . But after time in federal custody, each was allowed to join relatives in Maryland, two more individuals in a backlogged, secretive immigration system who would put down roots in this country long before their first day in court.

Last Thursday, Montano, 17, and Sanchez Milian, 18, allegedly took turns raping a 14-year-old girl in a high school bathroom.

The two illegal aliens were enrolled in the public school and were not considered a high priority for deportation because they had neither criminal records nor gang affiliations.

The Baltimore Sun continued:

The teens enrolled in public schools, which are required by federal law to admit them. School officials said they were in a special program for students who don’t speak English. They were not in classes with the alleged victim.

. . . .  Border agents had given the teens notices to appear in immigration court. But Immigration and Customs Enforcement, which initiates deportation proceedings in immigration courts, never filed charges against Sanchez Milian, a court spokeswoman said. ICE officials said Wednesday that the teen was not a priority for deportation because he had no criminal record and “no known gang affiliations.”

ICE officials would not comment on Montano’s deportation case because he is a minor. He has been charged as an adult in the rape case.

Sanchez Milian and Montano are being held without bail bond. Each is charged with one count of first-degree rape and two counts of first-degree sex offense. Prosecutors say the girl was forced into a boys’ bathroom and raped as she cried out in pain and told them repeatedly to stop.

The initial details of the attack as reported in the probable cause document are heart-wrenching.

The Daily Mail reports:

The probable cause document described the assault in extremely graphic detail, recounting how the alleged victim grabbed onto a sink to avoid being forced into a stall, but the two suspects shoved her inside.

Once in the stall, the document stated that Montano allegedly opened the girl’s top and ‘pulled her breasts out to play with,’ then unbuckled her pants and pulled them down.

The two teenagers then allegedly proceeded to take turns holding down the young girl while forcing her to perform oral sex on them and raping her both vaginally and anally on the toilet multiple times while communicating with one another in Spanish.

Throughout the ordeal, the document stated, the victim screamed out in pain and repeatedly told her friend Montano, and Sanchez-Milian to stop.

After the attack, police said Sanchez-Milian covered the victim’s head with his coat and led her out of the bathroom as Montano ordered her to be quiet.

The freshman girl immediately reported the assault to school administrators and law enforcement officials were summoned to the scene to investigate.

The defense challenged the prosecution’s position that the acts were non-consensual, and following an investigation, prosecutors have decided to drop the rape and first-degree sex offense charges.

An attorney for the defense appeared on Tucker in March alleging that the acts were consensual.


The defense further argued that the  alleged victim had not “run immediately to some sort of security officer.”

CNN reports:

Defense attorneys had said that the sexual encounter between the defendants and the 14-year-old girl was consensual.

“There were no scratches, no bruises. There was no hitting, there was no screaming, there was no running immediately to some sort of security officer,” Sanchez-Milian’s attorney Andrew Jezic said at the time.

According to prosecutors, the charges could not be substantiated due to “substantial inconsistencies” from witnesses.

The Washington Post reports:

After a court hearing Friday morning, prosecutors said they will drop the sex assault case against Henry Sanchez Milian, 18, and Jose Montano, 17, who was ordered released from custody.

Montgomery County State’s Attorney John McCarthy said at a press conference that “the original charges cannot be sustained and prosecution is untenable” because of “substantial inconsistencies” from witnesses.

McCarthy, who was joined by the county’s top leaders, said the decision to dismiss the charges followed an extensive investigation that included additional interviews and a review of medical records, school security videos, and phone and computer records.

Prosecutors, however, are pursuing charges of distribution and possession of child pornography; the defense argues that the laws against child pornography are intended for adults.

The Washington Post continues:

Even as prosecutors moved to dismiss the rape cases, they are pursuing separate child pornography charges related to images discovered during the course of the investigation, according to court records and defense attorneys.

Jezic called such charges “selective prosecution of elective promiscuity,” adding that “it is hardly uncommon behavior for teenagers.”

The child pornography allegations, Jezic said, involved lewd images on Sanchez Milian’s cellphone, which Jezic said had been sent by the girl to Montano who forwarded them to Sanchez Milian.

Montano’s attorney Maria Mena said prosecutors told her Montano would be charged in juvenile court with two counts each of possession and distribution of child pornography.

She said prosecutors “did the right thing” by dropping the most serious charges, but called the subsequent child pornography charges a “gross misapplication” of a law intended to go after adults.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


my 1sr, 2nd, 3rd, and, likely my 4th comment on this would get me banned.

as would any honest comment on what i think their punishment should be.

so i’l just say “WTF? YGBSM!”

thanks Obola!

    redc1c4 in reply to redc1c4. | May 5, 2017 at 7:41 pm

    as for the scum defending them, and those not prosecuting them, don’t get me started.

    the problem with the American justice system (with apologies to our host) is that there are way too many lawyers involved and no where near enough rope.

      notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital in reply to redc1c4. | May 6, 2017 at 8:48 am

      Then I’ll make some appropriate comments for ya.

      “Moronland, Moronland, oh how the Morons love Moronland, and
      their dictators the Bidens in Moronland!

      Don’t go there.

      Everyone, EVERYONE, is entitled to a defense against a criminal charge, including an attorney if they cannot afford one.

      Don’t impugn the defense attorneys.

      Now, as for the Prosecution attorneys, we can argue about whether they are making the right decision by dropping the Rape charges. There may be significant issues in prosecuting, including testimonial issues. Also, it seems like the “Close-In-Age” Exemption applies here which reduces the charges, if not eliminating them altogether.

      I (as a defense attorney) have exploded prosecution cases because the “complaining witness” (read victim) of the crime was a terrible witness, and embellished the hell out of the event ~after~ the fact, because the parties were no longer dating.

      Moral of that story: Motive of the Complaining Witness to testify is ALWAYS relevant and can be explored before the Jury. ALWAYS.

No statutory rape charges? I doubt 14 is the age of consent in Maryland.

    JOHN B in reply to BuckIV. | May 5, 2017 at 8:56 pm

    Average American male. definitely statutory rape, and your life is ruined due to the federal sexual predator list.

    Immigrant does this and we have to be understanding of their culture.

    NavyMustang in reply to BuckIV. | May 6, 2017 at 5:49 am

    Some info on the age of consent in Maryland:

      NavyMustang in reply to NavyMustang. | May 6, 2017 at 5:54 am

      Even though it seems that statutory rape might not apply, and maybe the girl even wanted to have sex, it appears that when she realized what she got herself into that she withdrew her consent, which didn’t make a bit of difference to the accused. With all that in mind, I’d say it’s still rape.

      Another confusing thing about this case. I’ve read elsewhere that if the illegals are convicted of child porn, then that’s a deportable offense. What happened to the concept of someone being in this country being a deportable offense?

      Arminius in reply to NavyMustang. | May 6, 2017 at 2:04 pm

      I tried to access the sites you linked to and my security software said they were vulnerable and blocked me.

      Hopefully I don’t come across as accusatory or inflammatory. That’s not my intention. But if you could paraphrase that would be helpful.

The Pro-Choice Church, social justice adventurism, including elective regime changes, [class] diversity, extrajudicial trials, and selective child, are first-order forcings of Catastrophic Anthropogenic Climate Change that cause Catastrophic Anthropogenic Immigration Reform.

inspectorudy | May 5, 2017 at 8:58 pm

I say deport all three of them along with their parents.

I love the People’s Republic of Maryland. They choose to prosecute six cops, because a drug dealer hits his head in a police paddy wagon, fractures his neck and subsequently dies, but refuse to prosecute a 18 and 17 year old illegal alien who repeatedly had sexual intercourse [reportedly non-consensual], including sodomy, with a 14 year old girl in a school bathroom. Maryland, just another third world country.

    Gremlin1974 in reply to Mac45. | May 5, 2017 at 9:46 pm

    They also need to prosecute the school administration that stuck 2 adult males in a class full of 14 year olds.

    Arminius in reply to Mac45. | May 6, 2017 at 2:47 am

    The original charging document was extremely graphic. I hope I don’t get banned for referring to the details. The girl held on to a sink to avoid being dragged into a stall. Her rapists overpowered her, and dragged her into a stall where she was vaginally, orally, and anally raped.

    Again, not be gratuitously graphic, but I don’t know what kind of human being would consensually perform the sex acts described.

    But I do know the kind of human being who will let the rapists off the hook. They’re the same kind of pols who will say after a terrorist attack, “Londoners/New Yorkers must continue to lead their lives or the terrorists will have won.”

    What they are saying, if you haven’t gotten it by now, is , “We are moral cowards and intellectually bankrupt, and as long as we can get away with this act we won’t do a damn thing differently.”

      Ghostrider in reply to Arminius. | May 6, 2017 at 3:21 am

      From the WashPost: ““…the original charges cannot be sustained and prosecution is untenable because of “substantial inconsistencies” from witnesses.”

      Really? Help me understand something: Did the results of the physical examination performed on the girl by the ER and OB/GYN physicians not provide enough evidence to support the charges? Is the girl’s testimony inconsistent?

      I can still recall the press conference and town hall meeting when the arrogant superintendent lectured concerned parents. So, this is what celebrating diversity looks like?

        Gremlin1974 in reply to Ghostrider. | May 6, 2017 at 8:46 pm

        Inconsistent witnesses? How many witnesses could there be in a bathroom stall?

        What this most likely means is that people are lying to try to cover for these animals, because if they were convicted it would basically bring down the Superintendent, school board, and local politicians, not to mention lead to the firing of several teachers and staff.

        That may be part of the question (I haven’t been paying attention to this case):

        WAS there a SANE (Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner) who performed a forensic examination, or did the school merely call the local police department, who took a look in the bathroom and questioned the girl, and then did the girl go on about her life for the rest of the day. Did she wash up in the bathroom? Did the police immediately set up a CAC (Child Advocacy Center) interview (a video and audio recorded interview of the child by a trained forensic assault interviewer)?

        WERE there bruises / damage consistent with rape? This is an important one, as juries WANT to see some evidence of injury, struggle or damage to show the act was non-consensual, regardless of if it’s legally required or not.

        While the Daily Mail talks about her “immediately” going to a security officer, the Defense is stating that didn’t happen. I’ve seen some police reports try to pass off “immediately” as “four hours later….” Time-lag is important.

        There’s a LOT here that we don’t know. The fact that the defendants are illegals isn’t necessarily relevant to the Rape charges. Yes, yes, if they weren’t here, it wouldn’t have happened. That’s tangential to the issue at hand. That’s not an indictment of the local prosecutors, that’s a claim against the feds. Take the illegal immigration angle up with them.

just another case of a poor, young, immigrant who happened to bump into a 14 yr old girl while taking advantage of his right to use the transsexual bathroom privileges in terry mcauliffes version of Disneyland north…. nothing to see here,keep moving, hum along… its a small world after all..

Our time is short…prepare yourself and protect your family!

Bucky Barkingham | May 6, 2017 at 7:30 am

Isn’t The Free State a sanctuary state? Also Montgomery County?

This is one of those cases that makes a good case for familial vengeance. Lex talionis.

    Arminius in reply to Mannie. | May 6, 2017 at 2:13 pm

    You speak volumes friend. Perhaps more than you know, although I don’t any longer presume to have any special knowledge.

    European courts will not deport Muslim rapists back to Muslim countries because of Lex Talionis.

    What they’re saying, even though they don’t know it, is it works and we need to practice it here.

OllBlueEyes | May 6, 2017 at 11:45 am

If we pulled the ol’ switcheroo and it was two white males accused of raping a 14 year-old illegal…well, you know.

    Gremlin1974 in reply to OllBlueEyes. | May 6, 2017 at 8:48 pm

    Yea they would be in jail for their own safety, because all the violent leftist would be out for their heads.

This reminds me of a great quote from Charles James Napier, a British commander in India during the 1800’s. The locals had a custom of burning a widow alive on the funeral pyre of her husband. Napier’s response: “Be it so. This burning of widows is your custom; prepare the funeral pile. But my nation has also a custom. When men burn women alive we hang them, and confiscate all their property. My carpenters shall therefore erect gibbets on which to hang all concerned when the widow is consumed. Let us all act according to national customs.”

It is past time to enforce OUR customs.

lemme guess: “…substantial inconsistencies” from witnesses.”

her: “They raped me.”

illegals: “bitch wanted it…”

prosecutor (to apparently use a term loosely): “well, that’s that. no case here.”

they should charge them as accessories after the fact.

    Gremlin1974 in reply to redc1c4. | May 6, 2017 at 8:55 pm

    It was probably more like;

    Her: They raped me!”

    Illegals: “What? We no English so good. We no mean hurt.”

    Prosecutor: “Well seems like a misunderstanding due to language barrier, can’t prosecute for that.”

    To the girl I would say don’t do anything drastic it isn’t over yet.

    To the girls Family, get your ases out of there.

    To the potbellied savages (aka the accused) beware the vengeance of the patient.

A few years ago I read about a Soros initiative to fund prosecutors who would adopt a very libertarian attitude towards the sex laws. In one year he managed to get 11 of his candidates elected.

I wonder if this prosecutor is more than just an illegal supporter?