• Comment

Harlem 13-year-old will face aggravated child molestation charges

Posted: July 15, 2013 - 8:40am  |  Updated: July 15, 2013 - 8:43am


A 13-year-old boy accused of molesting a 4-year-old neighbor will be charged as an adult, authorities said.

The boy, Jacob Staffey, was arrested Friday during a hearing in Columbia County Juvenile Court at the request of Assistant District Attorney Natalie Paine. Juvenile Court Judge Doug Flanagan ordered sheriff’s deputies to take Staffey into custody to face aggravated child molestation charges related to a June incident in Richmond County.

According to a sheriff’s office report, Staffey and another boy are accused of sexually assaulting a 4-year-old girl on June 7 in the backyard of a home on Highview Court. The child’s mother told police her daughter came to her complaining that her genital area was hurting and eventually told her the boys pulled down her pants and molested her. The mother said she had repeatedly warned the two boys to stay away from her home.

At the time, Staffey was supposed to be under the supervision of his father, Stephen Staffey, Paine said. The boy and his three brothers had been sent to their father’s home after being released to him by the Department of Family and Children Services, which had taken them into protective custody after the arrest of their mother, Angela M. Staffey, 42, Paine said.

Angela Staffey, of Harlem, was arrested March 1 by Columbia County authorities after being accused of having sex with two juvenile boys in her home. An indictment in April charged her with 13 counts of child molestation, two counts of aggravated child molestation and one count of incest.

Paine told Flanagan the boys were not being properly supervised at their father’s home and they were communicating with their mother in jail who had been “threatening and scolding” the boys by phone. Paine said they were also being supervised and disciplined by their father’s girlfriend, whose own children had been taken away by state authorities.

Flanagan ordered DFCS to take custody of the younger boys and told Stephen Staffey he would appoint a lawyer to represent him in the custody matter. A hearing was set for July 22 for the father to plead his case.

“I have to do what is in the best interest of the children,” Flanagan said.

Paine said expects the 13-year-old will be charged with aggravated child molestation in the June assault, one of the so-called “seven deadly sins” in Georgia that allow authorities to charge children as young as 13 as adults. A Superior Court judge has the discretion to order the case returned to Juvenile Court, under that law.

In addition, Juvenile Court officials said they had also planned to charge Jacob Staffey with sexual battery related to a separate incident at a hearing this week.

Flanagan said, based on those charges and the new ones raised Friday, he found the boy a “danger to himself and to the community,” and had deputies remove him from court. Paine said he would remain at the Regional Youth Detention Center and an official warrant detailing charges would be issued Monday.

  • Comment

Comments (7)


Charging Children

Natalie Paine should be the one charged with child abuse. This disgusting example of charging a young boy with a crime that will follow him for the rest of his life, instead of making a best effort to help the boy and better maintain public safety is a horrible example of the overreach of prosecutors in Georgia. This prosecutor obviously cares more about press releases and a fictional "tough on juvenile crime" record than she does about protecting society and insuring that a child gets the help he needs.


Let's look at the other end of the spectrum

with an example of a molestation occuring with an 8 yr old forcing a 3 yr olds pants down (both boys) at a private sitters home. It took several weeks to find an investigator to listen to me. DFACS from two counties blew it off as did a county sheriff's office until I called the guardian ad litem and a friend (also a police chief) who worked in a county 50 miles away who made a call to find out why noone had followed up. I finally got an interview with the county the sitter lived in where the molestation occurred. I agreed to not charge the 8 year old if this child was sent to counseling so someone could find out "why" an 8 yr old knew so much about what he was doing. My son was in counseling for over a year and at 3 passed a forensic interview with flying colors. So, fyo JPOSBORN, you are very underinformed personally and should realize victims that many times the case is very underreached and my child has to live with it. Fortunately, he's thrived and we even have him far enough away where there is no danger of seeing the former sitter or her family who allowed this to go on by not doing her best to keep children safe. Have never gotten a straight answer about the other child from the investigator to see if counseling was followed through with. That's being addressed soon by the juvenile court in my county. So, truly if you don't really know what you're speaking about, don't make judgements. I know there are alot of 13 yr olds who need to be away because time shows it gets worse when nothing is done. Good job Natalie for making it safe for a few more childlren. Wish you'd been there to listen when I went through this with my son.


molestation charges

why did the mother even allow the boys in
If they were not welcome .
She just as at fault and nelget as well.

frank speering



Obviously "sugarbutton" is more interested in insuring that the public see vengeance done on an offending child (assuming he is even guilty) than in assuring that child receive help; making sure that public safety is preserved. Taking a 13 year old boy and putting him in prison, thereby raising the potential that he is physically or sexually abused himself rather than helped is counterproductive and produces an individual who will re-enter society as an embittered victim with greater potential to re-offend, places everyone in danger. The function of prosecutors is not to represent the wishes of victims, it is to provide corrective measures to ensure the rehabilitation of offenders and the protection of society. "Sugarbuttons" single experience with the justice system does not constitute some level of greater knowledge about what should or should not be done, but rather is an example of someone's need to "see" punishment performed. The rehabilitation of the 8 year old in that example is not a subject for public consumption, but something which needs to be handled in confidence, as providing that information to the world will result in the permanent cast of the offender as a pariah, which, at the age of 8, is utterly unjust. I have been involved with the justice system for over 30 years and have been directly and indirectly involved with prosecutors, defense attorneys, judges and our system of criminal justice for a long time. You have a choice when dealing with children that young; you can either lock them in prison and insure that they are destroyed by an arcane system of punishment, or you can attempt to change their behavior (at a point when their behavior actually can be changed) by providing them with the programs and tools to do so; the first choice represents an almost sadistic desire for vengeance, the second represents a concerted effort to rehabilitate and actually protect society. Obviously Natalie Paine is interested only in showing she can slap a child around in public, rather than doing the work necessary to insure a change in that child and truly protecting society and potential future victims.

joe nuke

Stop and Think Why?

sugarbutton...You're thinking seems inconsistent. On the one hand you "agreed not to charge the 8 year old" (btw, "you" shouldn't even have any say in that even if there is the possibility that an 8 year old could be charged with a crime by authorities...if that's true, that's another discussion and it's utterly absurd!). On the other hand, you say "good job Natalie for making it safe for a few more children."...Natalie, shouldn't be in the job she has with that kind of ridiculously insane judgement...there's probably a mental health issue she should be dealing with!
JPOSBORN...i agree with your comment back to sugar, but ask if you (or anyone who commented) have sat back and wondered why we are hearing of so many children at young ages involved in such atrocities...i have an opinion:
and if any of you are of the liberal persuasion you should probably re-evaluate your alliance, given the characteristics of this new progressive, ultra-radical kind of liberalism that this administration has unleashed (especially in the 2nd term of guy that wears the presidents costume).
In their effort (along with their enablers: the media, black liberal leadership, hollywood celebrities, etc) to divide "US" by race and social status (which is a key ingredient in the success of achieving their goal), all morals, ethics, humanity has been tossed to the wind and even promoted by our so called leaders...so, young folks with young kids behave in a certain manner...they see that the government and the news and their favorite celebrities condone such behavior...if that's the case "it must be ok to introduce that behavior into the family"...the kids are sponges and pick up on the behavior! It's systemic and i just summarized the cause. Anyone that suggests it's the kids fault is as bat [filtered word] crazy as natalie...it's a societal problem.
The fix isn't complicated at all...this is one example of why it's so important for us "temporarily" come together, shed our labels of Dem vs Rep; Lib vs Cons; Black vs White and unite against the evil we face that wants to radically destroy our country and our freedom. The more unfortunate masses love the message of being taken care of forever by the government, but don't realize that it's just an enticement...they are being used now and if he's successful, the "tyrant" will show his true colors and all of us will be end up in the same class (and be controlled rather than "taken care of")...and it will not be the "political, elite, permanent class" that we're in!
If we do this and libs and dems can say "i still believe that social reform is necessary and my core values and views are lib...fine; just help get "this" regime out and send a message that the "furthest to the left type" of lib "radical" is not what the people want, rather one that will implement some of the "real" social injustice out there balanced with the need to fix the economy, instead of believing all the phoney exaggerations of what's broke just to stir up hate and discontent1
if we could do this and the people decide another dem as our president i'm fine with that...but this regime is not for any of us...believe it!