Banner
71-Year-Old to Stand Trial for Unnatural Sex Print E-mail
( 2 Votes )
Written by Administrator   
Thursday, 17 July 2014 00:00

david popper.jpg - 44.04 KbBurrell Boom’s David Popper, 71, of Riverside area will stand trial in the October session of the Supreme Court for committing an unnatural crime upon a 23-year-old man in April of 2013.

The victim reported to police that he visited Popper at his home in the Riverside area at about 3:30 p.m. on Saturday, April 13, 2013, where Popper offered him a drink. The man said he took the drink and after drinking he suddenly lost consciousness. He said he later woke up and saw Popper standing up next to him, but he lost consciousness again. It was not until 5 hours later that he woke up at his mother’s home, where police came to detain him because of an allegation of assault Popper made against him. Police took him into custody where he slept for eight more hours before he woke up in the cell and had to use the toilet. He used the toilet and realized that he was passing blood. He alerted the officers who took him to seek medical attention. The doctor who examined him certified that he had been sodomized.

The young man told his story to police and Popper was arrested. In addition to being charged with committing an unnatural act, Popper was charged with wounding upon the 23-year-old and committing a mischievous act for making a report to police that he was assaulted by the alleged victim when that turned out to be a lie. In the Preliminary Inquiry on Monday, July 14, Inspector Hector Rodriguez represented the prosecution and produced a number of statements which he entered into evidence against Popper.  Those include nine statements from witnesses and seven forms of documentary exhibits. In the PI, Popper did not challenge any of the evidence put forward by the prosecutor; however, he said, “I didn’t do it. I am not guilty of that.” He told Senior Magistrate Sharon Frazer that he has three alibi witnesses but did not give any names to the court.

Magistrate Frazer ruled that there is sufficient eveidence for the case to proceed to trial and set trial for the October session of the Supreme Court.

Last Updated on Thursday, 17 July 2014 15:09