A 5-Year-Old Pulled Down a 3-Year-Old's Pants. The Preschool Workers Are on Trial.
"We are here because one preschooler pulled down another preschooler's pants," says defense attorney Jason Flores-Williams.

Two Colorado child care workers will go on trial this June for presiding over a day care center where a 5-year-old pulled down a 3-year-old's pants.
Amy Lovato and Roberta Rodriguez of The Schoolhouse day care center in Poncha Springs face criminal charges for not reporting this incident to the authorities quickly enough, and for putting the children in danger.
"Let this fact not be obscured: We are here because one preschooler pulled down another preschooler's pants," Jason Flores-Williams, Lovato's attorney, told 11th Judicial District Judge Brian Green on Thursday, asking him to dismiss the charges.
Added Flores-Williams, these charges "criminalize preschool behavior by turning a 5-year-old into a deviant and a 3-year-old into a victim for acts that are neither sexual, abusive, criminal, negligent, or against any reasonable person or community standard."
Judge Green denied the defendants' motion, according to The Colorado Sun.
"This is the perfect case for the jury to hear," he announced to a courtroom that was packed with school parents who came to support Lovato and Rodriguez. The attendees expressed their feelings so loudly—sighing and groaning with exasperation—that the judge had to warn them to be quiet.
"I understand the great importance to the community, but I don't want to be sidelined or distracted," he said.
Green is presiding because the first two judges assigned to the case had to recuse themselves; their kids attend the day care center in question, Flores-Williams tells Reason.
The case against Lovato and Rodriguez seems to involve four charges, but even the judge found the case so muddled that he instructed the prosecutors to present it more cogently.
No one disputes that on January 16, Lovato was filling in as a classroom teacher because the center was short-staffed. When one of the kids wet their pants, Lovato left the classroom for between 3 and 5 minutes to clean the kid and deposit the wet clothes in the laundry. When she returned, she saw the 5-year-old "crouched over" a 3-year-old who later told Lovato that the boy had tried to pull her pants down and touch her butt.
The next day, when Lovato went into the center's bathroom, she found three kids there, including a girl with her pants down and the same boy. He was touching her butt.
The school did not ignore this misbehavior. It called the parents involved. It planned an all-school meeting on the topic of keeping your hands to yourself. Rodriguez took it upon herself to call the Chaffee County Early Childhood Council to find out what else she should be doing. She also reported the touching incidents to the child welfare department and the kids-briefly-in-a-room-without-a-teacher incident to the state licensing office.
But as the toddlers themselves discovered, sometimes there is just no way to cover your rear end. The authorities shut down the day care center midday on January 24, calling parents to immediately come pick up their kids. Terrified moms and dads raced over to find six armed deputies and a slew of cop cars.
"When they realized their children were safe, they wondered if they had been molested," reported The Colorado Sun. "Neither the sheriff's deputies or Chaffee County child welfare authorities who joined them in the raid of the child care center were providing information."
It was only two days later, during a meeting at the sheriff's office, that the parents learned what had happened.
In summary, the potential wrongdoing seems to involve not reporting the incidents immediately enough—these were officially reported to the authorities about three days later—and leaving the kids unsupervised for the briefest of moments.
The defense attorneys argued that the question of how quickly a school must report an incident of abuse is vague. So, it seems, is the definition of abuse. And so is whether leaving the room to clean off a pee-soaked kid constitutes neglect.
The problem, says Flores-Williams, is that we give child care workers enormous responsibility, "and yet we afford them no discretion in the way they handle those responsibilities."
It's also a problem that the authorities would seek to punish a preschool for being a place where there are preschoolers. Unruly kids are a fact of life, and treating a common occurrence like a criminal matter is absurd. A trial is not in the best interests of the kids, their parents, or anyone else.
"In some ways, this perfectly illustrates a system we set up that winds up leaving nothing but trauma and harm in its wake, and yet we justify it in the name of 'protecting the children,'" says Richard Wexler, executive director of the National Coalition for Child Protection Reform. "An awful lot of time has gone into this: The police had to investigate, child protective services investigated, there's a trial that's about to happen. All that time and money and effort is, in effect, stolen from finding the relatively few children in actual danger."
Wexler added that Colorado has set up a task force to study the mandatory reporting issues.
"They should look very closely at this case," he says.
But for now, the case is going to a jury. Expect more groans and sighs.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
And now, let's have a LOUD chorus from ALL of the Angry Trumpaloos, Authoritarians, and Self-Seeking Totalitarians, of: "WHO were the GROOMERS here, and WHEN can we BURN them all!?!??"
(Our punishment boners, punishment clitoruses, etc., all need to be satisfied NOW!!! WHO shall be our scapegoat!??!)
Great article, Mike. I appreciate your work, I'm now creating over $35,000 dollars each month simply by doing a simple job online! I do know You currently making a lot of greenbacks online from $28,000 dollars, its simple online operating jobs.
.
.
Just open the link------------------------------------------------->>> http://Www.JobsRevenue.Com
I am so lucky that I was 5 in 1963 and female because I loved playing doctor with my little boy friend! Of course, I was the doctor and I kept my pants on...(sure foretold of things to come!)
Didn't get in trouble but I had 'normal' parents and so did my friend and I don't know about him, but I grew up to be successful, married and raised some spectacular children, who are now raising even more outstanding grandkids! And it all started with me being curious about the opposite sex and parents who didn't act like freaks! I will see my parents at Easter and yes, I have the privilege to have both of them still alive, and I'm going to thank them over and over for being the parents they were and didn't teach me child abusers and the Devil were around every corner!
My heart breaks for those Daycare Workers...another American Tragedy played out in our courts because someone didn't get enough attention and hugs when they were a child! What a waste of time and money and you know those children will never be the same.…you just destroyed every part of 'real' person they were ever going to be! Numbing with drugs, sexual addicts, it will run the gambit, that's what they did when they say they are protecting the child! Pure, bull, attention is what it is! I can smell it a mile away and it stinks...
I am making a good salary from home $6580-$7065/week , which is amazing under a year ago I was jobless in a horrible economy. I thank God every day I was blessed with these instructions and now it’s my duty to pay it forward and share it with Everyone,
🙂 AND GOOD LUCK.:)
Here is I started.……......>> GOOGLE WORK
I thought this headline would bring you in like a moth to a flame, you old unrepentant pedophile.
Why don't you tell everyone here again about how you think minors can consent to sex with adults.
Why don’t you tell everyone here again about how Perfect You thinks that death, disease, and SUICIDE are the BEST things on our planet?
Try domesticating Your Perfect Self sometime, perhaps? Things might go better for you that way!
https://www.science.org/content/article/elephants-may-be-domesticating-themselves
From there....
Via self-domestication, we lengthened our childhoods, came to prefer more gregarious men (and to dislike bullies), and increased our ability to communicate and share complex ideas with language.
I am making a good salary from home $6580-$7065/week , which is amazing under a year ago I was jobless in a horrible economy. I thank God every day I was blessed with these instructions and now it’s my duty to pay it forward and share it with Everyone,
🙂 AND GOOD LUCK.:)
Here is I started.……......>> GOOGLE WORK
I basically make about $14,000 to $18,000 a month online. It’s enough to comfortably replace my old jobs income, especially considering I only work about 10-13 hours a week from home. I was amazed how easy it was after I tried it copy below web
HERE ——–>> https://salarycash710.blogspot.com/
The prosecutor needs to do some corner time.
The judge should go to prison both because he failed to dismiss this case out of hand, and because he failed to toss the prosecution in jail for a few days for contempt of court for filing the frivolous charges in the first place.
Insanity is the new normal…
Thank You.
The judge seems unduly interested in investigating the great importance to the community of a 5 year old pulling down a 3 year old's pants. Maybe we have a friend of buttplug in this judge.
Too bad the daycare center didn't just have drag queen story hour and let adult men without any pants at all entertain the children. The judge would have immediately dismissed the charges.
The judge feels this is an issue of such importance that truth can only be determined by a jury. And if establishing that truth costs the defendants $75,000-$100,000 in legal fees that the dumbass prosecutors office will not have to reimburse them for - well, just remember, while our justus system may be "good", it's a helluva long way from either fair or perfect.
The cause for this tempest in a teacup can be found in the 11th paragraph of the article - I was looking for it because I was pretty sure that somewhere in the article you'd find the explanation. Read again to note the gender/sex of the touched/viewed and the gender/sex of the toucher/viewer. Does anybody here think, upon reflection, that if those facts were reversed there would have been all the hysteria or a court case, never mind the ages of these sexual malefactors? The accused adults are damn lucky this trial isn't being brought to court in Maplewood, NJ or Los Angeles, CA where reports of butcher knives and charges that a Satanic incubus supervising the cutting would be included.
Izzis an elected judge? THAT's easily fixed. But if the judge-impersonator is appointed by some looter politician funded by the Powerhouse Temple of the Presumptuous Assumption of the Blinding Light, who dat politician?
You rang?
Colorado is another state that should probably be put under martial law until their democrats can be sorted out.
But it's the natin's 4th most libertarian state! Makes me sad for the the 46 that follow it.
https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/most-libertarian-states
It planned an all-school meeting on the topic of keeping your hands to yourself.
The Georgia Satellites will give a presentation at this meeting.
"I never thought about pulling anyone's pants down, but after the Georgia Satellites sang at school it's all I can think about"
Ha! I got that reference.
Was hoping that my brain had purged that song. Apparently not.
"I understand the great importance to the community, but I don't want to be sidelined or distracted," he said.
I understand that you all think your opinion matters but let's not let that distract us from what's really important here; my opinion.
When she returned, she saw the 5-year-old "crouched over" a 3-year-old who later told Lovato that the boy had tried to pull her pants down and touch her butt.
I'm gonna need to know skin colors and see notarized confirmation of pronouns before I can pass judgement.
Poncha Springs is a town of less than one thousand, 95% of its inhabitants are white with the rest being Hispanic. There are apparently no black people in Poncha Springs.
SPB liked this story.
Of course, he’s favorable towards anything that lowers barriers to small children’s anuses.
Sign on a stick addressed to Reason editors: MORE LENORE!
And less Hank!
Duh. Just claim this was drag queen instruction hour. Do I have to think of everything?
If for any reason you’re not being punished by the state, find a reason.
If you become the subject of any government workers focus, god help you. You’re in for a world of pain because it’s that persons job to relentlessly, and with great joie de vivre, fuck you in the ass until they’ve had their fill.
They stuck their necks out by being human around humans and they’ve now got to pay so that government can demonstrate its worth, and it’s might.
If you ask me, reporting this to the authorities was what actually put the kids in danger. Just what kind of lunatic thinks it's necessary to send armed cops to deal with a little inappropriate touching by a pre-schooler?
They're not out of the woods yet. Don't underestimate the capacity of jurors to be fucking morons.
Even if the jury finds them innocent within five minutes of reading the jury rules, the prosecutors, the judge, and everyone else there walks free.
Meanwhile, the defendants get to pay very expensive attorney's fees for all of the time put into the trial and the trial prep and have zero recourse to recoup those costs. Despite being preschool substitute teachers, not exactly the sort who can afford $300 an hour or whatever lawyers charge there.
If they have a GoFundMe I'll contribute.
Telling the jury that they can object to the entire process and acquit on principle is not allowed.
So the jury will be told that if the prosecution proves that whatever reporting window was not met, they must convict. And the jury will not be told what the consequences are. So they will not know whether "guilty" means a $35 fine or 2 years in jail and lifetime on the sex offender registry.
Dear Prospective Juror-
Aggressive prosecutors particularly like to have stupid people on a jury, the stupider the better. Doan be askin' for no proof, now. The D.A. make the implications and inferences for you. Jus' take what he say as gospel, cause he the D.A. and he wouldn't lie to you, no. An' you cain't vote not guilty 'cause you think the law is stupid, and if you do an' admit to it, he'll come for you, too. And never - never, never - ever look up what's the penalty the D.A. wants you to convict the defendant to serve. You doan need to know that. Whatever the law says the sentence is - well, it's just, it's right, and remember, the D.A. wouldn't lie to you or trade someone else a good deal for the right testimony. He's got a witness from the jail who's a good citizen that wants to sing, just out of the goodness of his heart. But he wouldn't compose - nosiree - he jus' wants to sing to tell you about how the defendant confessed to all of what he is charged with, and some more, late one night in the their cell.
Bribery - the exchange of something of value for a desired action, usually illegal or unethical. But the D.A. would never bribe a stool pigeon to get the testimony he wanted with the promise of a good deal. Is the promise of a good deal something of value that would fit in the definition? Would the D.A. do that?
And if you believe all that, then you really don't need to know about jury nullification, or the fact that no juror should ever vote guilty until they've had their significant other look up the penalty for "X" crime, (unless they are pretty much totally worthless in part of their role as a juror).
But the judge won't like that, you say? Phook him, what he doesn't know - he doesn't know. Beware of what you say or admit to - admit nothing, deny everything, demand proof.
Sincerely
The Informed Juror
In the spirit of full disclosure, the above advice and cautions apply only in certain jurisdictions and with certain color defendants or with overly aggressive D.A.'s to whom convicting you and locking you up is just score-keeping in a big celestial game. There are other jurisdictions where, especially for certain defendants and violations, the D.A. is their best protection against incarceration, but that's another story.
Yes, more Lenore. My favorite writer!
Maybe I have higher standards, but twice a boy pulled down the pants of a girl and touched her butt.
That's kinda a big deal. I'm not saying the 5 year old should be locked away and labeled a sex offender, but it's pretty weird and something should have been done, not just ignore it as just kids being kids.
"Ignore it", my ass! Did you READ the article?
"The school did not ignore this misbehavior. It called the parents involved. It planned an all-school meeting on the topic of keeping your hands to yourself. Rodriguez took it upon herself to call the Chaffee County Early Childhood Council to find out what else she should be doing. She also reported the touching incidents to the child welfare department and the kids-briefly-in-a-room-without-a-teacher incident to the state licensing office."
Reporting on what happened may have been their biggest mistake, because it unleashes all of the vengeance-thirsting witch-burners and groomer-hunters!
Well a five year old can decide to change their sex now, so maybe he just needed some information on what his new sex organs would look like before he decided on the operation?
Maybe we should look at where society and schools are at rather than the inquisitive kid?
So... something was indeed done. Long before the state became involved.
Now what?
Maybe I have higher standards, but twice a boy pulled down the pants of a girl and touched her butt.
Uh, where I come from, "convicting" someone, even just in the court of public opinion, based on the testimony of a 3 yr. old and a 5 yr. old is a *lower* standard.
Kids pull the "They did it!" finger point game all the time and as you well know from the Title IX, Duke Lacrosse, Jackie Coakley, #MeToo, Christine Blasey Ford, bullshit, for every boy out there learning pathologically to pull down girls' pants, there's approximately one girl out there learning pathologically to point the finger and say "He did it."
You actually have lower standards. The school called the parents, that is all that is needed in a free society.
If she hadn't been wearing THAT diaper...
The judge says this is the perfect case to send to a jury.
But…
Arguing for jury nullification is specifically prohibited.
So, there is that. This judge will be instructing the jury that they must convict if XY or Z happened, which in this case will apparently mean “if they didn’t file paperwork with the state in X hours where X is less than 36.
(And exactly how is precluding telling the jury that the entire case is jnjust from the jump legal?)
if I were on that jury I"d lay low, ask some probing questions in some random order, and when its time vote to axquit on all charges. It is plainly obvious the adults in view did NOT perform or condone the"acts" alledged. Adults cannot be held responsible for the actions of chidlrenm particularly when those chidlren are NOT those of the accused.
Hey,
When a 5-year-old pulls down a 3-year-old's pants, it can be a concerning behavior that should be addressed by parents or caregivers. Here are some steps that can be taken:
Talk to the children involved: It is important to have a conversation with both the 5-year-old and 3-year-old about what happened. Use age-appropriate language and ask open-ended questions to encourage them to share their feelings and perspective.
Explain appropriate behavior: Help the children understand that pulling down someone's pants is not appropriate behavior and can hurt others. Use positive language to reinforce positive behaviors, such as sharing, playing nicely, and using kind words.
Reinforce boundaries: Set clear boundaries with the children involved to help them understand what is and is not acceptable behavior. This may include reinforcing rules about personal space and privacy.
Monitor the children: Keep a close eye on the children involved to ensure that the behavior does not continue. It may be necessary to supervise their interactions more closely or limit their contact if the behavior persists.
Seek professional help if necessary: If the behavior continues or is severe, it may be necessary to seek professional help from a counselor or therapist who specializes in child behavior. They can provide guidance and support to help address the underlying issues and develop appropriate strategies for behavior management.
It is important to address inappropriate behavior early on to prevent it from becoming a pattern. By taking proactive steps to address the behavior and reinforce positive behavior, parents and caregivers can help children learn appropriate social and behavioral skills.
BS. Little kids are impulsive, fascinated with butts and all things bathroom, and pants-ing is just something funny to them. For God's sake, get a life. They're CHILDREN. Get it? CHILDREN.
You're replying to a chatbot.
Though a well-timed bot. I was just searching for a company to do garage door maintenance in Allen. As soon as I finish up with these transexuelles from France.
No! Firing squad and then on the sex offender list!
The day care center should be prosecuted for being groomers and promoting child sex.
(That’s what the reich-wing yayhoos would say if the two children involved were of the same sex, but since it’s a boy and a girl, deviant behavior of this sort is just fine and dandy. Just ask teen mom Lauren Bobert, mom of another teen mom)
That is the dumbest straw man I think anyone has ever posted.
Why are these arguments so incredibly stupid? Do you have an actual argument in favor of teaching gender theory to 4 year old kids? Or do you actually conflate two kids of the same gender touching butts at the age of 4 with a teacher decorating her preschool with Trans Pride posters and telling the children that they can choose whether to be a boy or a girl or both or neither?
I mean, there are arguments there... But I really don't think anyone is staking out "it is OK to pull down the pants of another kid as long as their gender is different" as an actual position. Nor do I think the reverse is true.
That's one of the new retards that has started hanging out here to make utterly braindead comments. Just ignore it. Hopefully it will go away.
I don't need an "actual argument in favor of teaching gender theory to 4 year old kids" because IT'S NOT BEING DONE. ANYWHERE. Or do you have your head up your... Faux News so high and hard that the truth escapes you?
Why bother to reply to a thing like this?
Unsurprisingly, Poncha Springs is majority Democrat, as is the county it's in.
The prosecutor needs to do some corner time.
Jesus God. Please indulge me in a little story:
In second grade - that would have been about 1957 - my new best friend Joey approached me with a plan. "Let's go over to the slicky-slide (I guess they call them sliding boards now...) and sit at the bottom. When the girls slide down, we can see their panties."
Sounded good to me, and we proceeded to put our plan in action, which if I remember correctly, worked perfectly.
A shadow appeared. It belonged to Mrs. Parolari, the second-grade teacher on playground duty. She crooked her finger in a "come over here" motion.
"Boys, I see what you are doing. That's not nice and the little girls don't like it. If you don't stop immediately, I'm going to take you to the office and let Mr. Barrett deal with you."
Well, we knew that Mr. Barrett had an Electric Paddle, whatever that was, and we didn't want any part of it. "Yes, ma'am," we said in unison. We left immediately for some other adventure somewhere else. Case closed.
That's how adults handle child problems. Not by acting like children themselves. But of course we are talking Colorado here, so lunacy is the norm.
1950s America was a white male heterosexual cis gender dominated era, so it is racist, sexist and homo/transphobic of you to expect adults to act like adults in the present day.
Adulthood is white supremacy.
In first and second grade, we had a boy in our class who delighted in showing his wang to any boy or girl who was in front of him in line. He would get sent to the office, but that was the extent of it. No authorities got involved beyond the principal and his parents. I imagine I’m the not too distant future that all kids will be non-gendered and any external genitalia will be removed at birth (just a bit more extreme version of circumcision), so it will be a moot point of who pulls down who’s pants.
I imagine I’m the not too distant future that all kids will be non-gendered and any external genitalia will be removed at birth (just a bit more extreme version of circumcision), so it will be a moot point of who pulls down who’s pants.
Having external genitalia will be a privilege, like heating your home or eating anything other than crickets.
The more I read the more I'm happy to be disabled and retired. I don't think I could deal with the working world anymore as it has clearly gone insane.
Anyone else want to bet the handsy five year old voyeur belongs to one of the judges that recused?
Before I was 6 years old back in the 1960s I actually had something resembling a sex life as my little friends and I played doctor. It's been all downhill since then.
You should be telling that to a qualified clinician, rather than sharing it here.
Stupid judges exist too.
"But as the toddlers themselves discovered, sometimes there is just no way to cover your rear end."
Sentences like this make me sick to my stomach that I ever gave Reason money. You guys write like the teenage interns at Vox and TYT.
Touching someone else's but without their permission is bad, whether you are 5 or 65. But it sounds like the school staff notified the proper authorities and did everything that any reasonable person would do in this scenario. This sounds like a lay up victor for the defense. The fact that the judge told the prosecutor to re-write their case is just gravy.