The State will tell Jurors they would like for them to be fair and impartial. How can that happen when the State disallows the Jury from seeing the most important evidence associated with the case? Below is the evidence that the Jury will not see at Bryan Tucker’s trial. Is this fair? Is this justice? How could anyone determine beyond a moral certainty that Bryan is guilty after seeing all of the evidence below?
By US~Observer Staff
One could write a book about the travesty of justice brought against Bryan Tucker, as the details are abounding. Much will come out at his upcoming trial (May 15 – 17, 2018 at the Josephine County, OR. Courthouse) but the most important evidence won’t; details regarding the alleged victim, Kaite Rogers, who covered-up her age, will be kept secret. In fact, it is mandated by the Oregon law itself that not knowing the person’s age is not a defense. Shockingly it states, “it is no defense that the defendant did not know the child’s age…”
Back in the summer of 2015, Bryan Tucker was riding his six-foot-tall unicycle around Grants Pass, Oregon. On one of his many outings, he was approached by two girls. After a short conversation, the group parted ways.
Days later, one of the girls contacted Bryan on social media. According to her multiple profiles on different sites, she was 17-years-old, born on April 3, 1999 (in truth she was born in 2003) and worked for Dutch Bros. Coffee, an establishment that requires employees to be at least 16-years of age for employment.
The two became on-line friends before meeting up again – in fact, when they did meet again she asked him to meet her at her high school. This was dishonest as she was in junior high at the time. After meeting, they shared intimacy, but according to Bryan Tucker, never had sexual intercourse.
In an attempt to build this into a meaningful relationship and be inclusive, Bryan called to invite Kaite to his 18th birthday party. It was Kaite’s mother, Beverly Boeh (pronounced BAY), who answered the phone, and she reacted with shock that Bryan was almost 18. Boeh admonished Bryan for being with such a young girl, and she went on to tell him that Kaite was just 12-years-old. For Bryan, it came as an absolute shock. Everything he had seen and been told stated she was much older – within months of his same age.
According to Bryan and others who have known her, she carried herself as “older”, she even had facial piercings (which in Oregon are illegal to administer to anyone under 18 without consent of a parent) – she tried to pass herself off as older than she was according to witnesses, unless it was in her best interest to feign helplessness.
Needless to say, the “relationship” ended abruptly after Bryan found out Kaite’s real age, not to mention her propensity for telling lies. And while he stayed her on-line friend, he reportedly never sought to be intimate with her again.
Almost two years later, Bryan was arrested and charged with 16 felony crimes. Even though he has no previous criminal history, and no history of sex related issues, Bryan has been locked up since August 29, 2017.
Bryan’s case is now set for trial on May 15, 2018 and he has just been told his only defense – which is the truth of the matter, that a deceitful Kaite Rogers lied to him and everyone else online – will not be allowed. Seemingly there’s no hope that Bryan will be found anything other than guilty of the 16 felonies he faces – stacked charges that don’t reflect the nature of the contact. Remember, they never had sexual intercourse, and never even took their clothes off completely.
What Could Jurors Do to Help Serve Justice?
The only chance Bryan essentially has at trial is that of jury nullification. The jury can decide that the law does not apply for this young man, as it violates his constitutional right to mount any defense. The state has to prove each crime beyond a reasonable doubt. The fact the court is precluding the defense the right to refute the element of Kaite’s age would mean that Bryan is being denied due process. Bryan has now been denied the right to enter exculpatory evidence which is unjust. With this being done, it presents a great case for appeal should Bryan be convicted.
Presumably, the jury could simply determine that the laws Bryan is accused of violating do not apply because there is no way for the jurors to know that Bryan and Kaite’s “mutually consensual” involvement was illegal. Kaite lied about her age, and because she lied about her age, Bryan never knew he was breaking the law. His state-of-mind was that of someone obeying the law. Because of the amount of times Kaite lied about her age, she cannot be believed. Therefore her testimony should not be believed. The jurors can, and should nullify this unjust law. Regardless of the legality of the law, the government should absolutely allow Bryan the right to enter evidence of Kaite’s deceit about her age. Unfortunately, that will not be allowed to be seen by the jury.
Why Now Almost 3-Years Later?
Apparently, Kaite’s mother had contacted the police after finding out about Kaite’s “voluntary” involvement with Bryan. Two years went by without the police pursuing the matter, or ever contacting Bryan, though he lived in Grants Pass and was never hard to find.
One day in early 2017, Bryan was pulled over for a minor traffic violation. To his surprise he was asked to talk with a Detective with the Grants Pass Department of Public Safety. Willingly and without reservation, Bryan sat with Detective John Lohrfink and divulged what he could remember about the short-lived youthful romance from the summer of 2015. Bryan was honest but recalling every detail from nearly two years prior wasn’t easy. When this April of 2017 meeting adjourned, Bryan was thanked for his honesty and cooperation and told not to worry. Months later, on August 29, 2017, Grants Pass police arrested him in the early morning hours at his grandmother’s, without being given time to dress.
The indictment against Bryan stated that the alleged crimes were committed between June 1, 2015 and August 31, 2015. A large gap in time and convenient for law enforcement, as Bryan turned 18 on August 12, 2015. The State will further allege that Bryan committed more crimes between Oct. 1 and Nov. 6, 2015. This is simply not true according to Bryan, who, “never made physical contact with Kaite after finding out her real age.” Kaite was allegedly 12 when the two initially met. She’s now 15 (according to police reports).
Lies told to Detective John Lohrfink by Kaite
Kaite Rogers has met with Detective John Lohrfink on at least three occasions, that the US~Observer is aware of. It’s obvious that Lohrfink was trying to build a case against Bryan, and he needed Kaite to provide him with certain facts before he could proceed with criminal charges. He voiced the need for “honesty” multiple times during the meetings. Repeatedly, Lohrfink would reassure Kaite that, “she was not in trouble” and would not get in any trouble for anything she said. Lohrfink purportedly did this because each time Kaite talked with him, it was his opinion that she lied. See, Bryan had already willingly told the detective what happened, because he had been deceived by Kaite and felt horrible about it, and Lohrfink needed Kaite to verify his story. But Kaite kept giving differing accounts as to what happened. Lohrfink methodically led her into changing her narrative of what happened on MULITPLE occasions until her story was enough to support charges.
Kaite’s behavior while with Lohrfink appeared to be that of a scared child. Knowing how she acts outside of police presence, Kaite was obviously devious during the meetings with Lohrfink. Each meeting was recorded. Although Kaite told many lies to Lohrfink, she did get one thing right. Kaite stated that Bryan looked like a 13-year-old when they met – even though she knew his real age. She was accurate in her description that Bryan was both physically and socially immature.
Regardless, Kaite’s behaviors before and after meeting with Lohrfink were anything but that of a scared child. Her true self was confirmed by evidence the US~Observer obtained on social media.
A Profane Young Woman?
Kaite posted a message on Facebook about the difference between, “the right guys from the f**k boys.” Kaite also had another Facebook page with her profile picture and the caption “HMU. I’m awesome. Let’s Netflix and chill (an innuendo for watch movies and have sex).” In fact, Kaite was dating Bryce Anderson off and on during this time frame. As of January 13, 2018, Bryce began staying over-night at Kaite’s home, reportedly with her mother’s knowledge. Kaite’s mother had reportedly met with Bryce’s mother in person regarding their two children dating each other and having a sexual relationship.
According to a witness, Boeh told Bryce Anderson’s mother that her daughter was already 15 and that it was okay for them to date – it wasn’t statutory rape since there was only two years difference. These statements were not true as Kaite was still 14 at the time.
Recent video obtained when Kaite was 14-years-old shows Bryce (a then 18-year-old male) and her kissing, all while Bryan Tucker was incarcerated. Sadly, this was Kaite’s actions after acknowledging to Detective Lohrfink that she understood it was wrong to be intimate with older guys. She even cried during her talks with Lohrfink. The Department of Grants Pass Public Safety was provided this information, along with supporting evidence and they did nothing. In fact, Sgt. Waite, while talking to Bryan’s father, reportedly stated, “She’s 16 years old…he’s 18, there’s a three year defense, leave it alone.” The detective obviously doesn’t know, or possibly doesn’t support the fact, that Kaite was 14-years-old when she was caught kissing the 18-year-old Bryce Anderson. Kaite still isn’t 16-years-old.
Obstruction of Justice By Detective John Lohrfink?
Once aware of Kaite’s true age, Bryce Anderson’s mother reportedly told multiple witnesses that she had discussed her son’s actions with her ex (Ziegler-Anderson), who was retired law-enforcement, and the detectives involved in Bryan Tucker’s case. According to those witnesses, Bryce’s mother clammed-up after initially disclosing damning information (sexual behavior) about Kaite and said there was nothing more to be told. Essentially, her son had done nothing wrong. Her follow up phone call with Bryan’s father can be heard by clicking here (listen to all of it). Was Detective Lohrfink and other’s obstructing justice to protect Kaite, “their so-called victim?” One could easily assume so. Lohrfink’s report of his interview with Anderson was clearly driven toward protecting Kaite and 18-year-old Bryce Anderson. Unfortunately, this is another damning piece of evidence jurors won’t likely hear about at trial.
Kaite’s own cousin (admittedly) disclosed to the US~Observer that she, “walked in on Kaite (then 14) having sexual intercourse with Bryce (reportedly 18) several times.”
Kaite has also purportedly had relationships with other older guys. Bryan’s father delivered this evidence to District Attorney Ryan Mulkins via Bryan’s attorney. DA Ryan Mulkins never sought justice with this information. Instead of conducting a real investigation, Detective Lohrfink guided Boeh and her daughter to file stalking charges against Bryan’s father, who discovered Kaite and Bryce being intimate in public. It went to court on April 17, 2018 and the stalking charges were dismissed against Bryan’s father. This happened after Kaite and Boeh stormed out of the courtroom and never returned. All reportedly because they felt like it wasn’t going their way.
Manipulating the System?
Shockingly, Kaite’s own mother reportedly stated, “Kaite has had daddy issues since she was younger, you know…all these older men…it doesn’t surprise me. I am single, I used to date, but I can’t date anymore because of the situation she has me in…” This was in her initial police interview with Officer Artoff in 2015. Boeh also reportedly stated that her daughter is sneaky and secretive, deletes all her texts and history and does not give over her cell phone without clearing it.
According to witnesses, Boeh continued by stating that her daughter has many Facebook aliases she uses to reach out to older males, and in fact, she called her, “The Chameleon” in this interview. But now, according to witnesses, Boeh has done a complete 180 and condones her daughter’s adult behavior. Yet, she keeps up the facade by crying foul and putting on dramatic and overly emotional displays in court proceedings.
Boeh is allegedly receiving “victims assistance” payments according to a statement purportedly made by Bryce Anderson’s mother. In Oregon, “victims can be paid upwards of $60,000.00 annually” according to sources. Could this be why Kaite is playing the role of a victim, while doing the exact opposite of what she knows to be right?
Further Evidence Bryan Had No Intent to Commit a Crime
Although Bryan ended the relationship, the two would occasionally chat on social media. During one chat session, Kaite offered to sell Bryan weed (marijuana). Bryan refused, likely because he knew contact with her was inappropriate. On another occasion, Bryan stated that if the two were older, they could possibly be together, but they could not be because of her age. He wanted to remain friends with Kaite, as he felt bad for her. She’d reportedly attempted suicide, being admitted to the hospital twice after Bryan ended their relationship, and he thought that being supportive of another human being who hurt was the right thing to do.
Kaite continued to reach out to Bryan on Facebook for almost the next two years. When she fought with her mom, she reportedly sought his advice and comfort. She even complained about dating Bryce Anderson and how he wouldn’t acknowledge their relationship in public and at school events, such as football games, where he pretended not to know her. At this point Bryce was reportedly only using alias accounts on Facebook to chat with Kaite and arrange dates.
Simply put, Bryan had no intent to commit any crime, whatsoever. He was greatly deceived. He ended the short-lived relationship once he found out the truth. To this day there has never been any other intimate physical contact between the two – of any kind. Sadly, now, a young 20-year-old Bryan Tucker sits in a jail cell. His fate will be in the hands of jurors who won’t even be allowed to know the true story.
Bryan is still just a boy in many ways – a boy facing 16 felony crimes without ever having sexual intercourse with Kaite Rogers. If convicted, and given the full sentence, Bryan could face a total of 200 years in prison. After release (if he’s ever granted parole), he will be labeled a sex offender for the rest of his life. He will be shunned from communities, places of employment … seemingly life itself, all because he was deceived and didn’t know the age of a girl he liked when he was 17.
And the person who “entrapped” him into a relationship pays no price for her lies. In fact, she reportedly benefits from them. Does that sound like justice? One thing is certain, no law that excludes a defense is a “just law.” Furthermore, anyone who faces being convicted of an unjust law is deserving of only one thing – a Not Guilty verdict!
What if This Happened to Your Child?
I would ask our readership to stop and think for one moment – what would you do if your child was facing prison without ever intentionally doing anything wrong? Worse yet, what if your child faced life in prison without even being able to offer a defense? One can just imagine what Bryan Tucker’s parents are going through right now!
What kind of people would attempt to unjustly prosecute a young man who is just beginning his life? The answer is quite simple – Josephine County’s corrupt D.A. Ryan Mulkins with the aid and assistance of Prosecutor Matthew Wojcik and John Lohrfink, Grants Pass’ corrupted detective. How could they expect a jury to convict this young man, “beyond a moral certainty?”