RAP*D Scout Boy Then Left Him Screaming — Now Wants Probation | Judge Sends Him Straight To Prison

Added: 2026-05-23

[00:00:00]This sentencing hearing starts with one of the most uncomfortable and intense exchanges you'll ever hear in a courtroom. A Texas judge is about to question a man who already pleaded no contest to aggravated sexual assault of a child. And what makes this case especially disturbing is the contrast between the allegations and the defense strategy. On one side, you've got a defendant surrounded by supporters, pastors, church friends, family members, even his wife of more than two decades, all describing him as faithful, kind, spiritual, and deeply involved in the community. But on the other side are the details inside the PSI report. And those details completely change the tone of the room. The court is not deciding guilt here. That plea has already happened. The real question is whether this defendant deserves deferred adjudication, meaning probation and treatment outside prison, or whether the judge believes prison time is necessary to protect the public and punish the crime. And trust me, once the judge starts asking direct questions about the victims, the atmosphere shifts immediately. You can actually hear the tension build with every answer. What's fascinating in this hearing is how the court weighs character witnesses against the actual conduct described in the case file. Does being active in church outweigh the allegations? Does family support matter when children were allegedly harmed? And how much responsibility should a judge place on rehabilitation versus punishment?

[00:01:30]Those are the questions hanging over every second of this hearing. Pay attention to how carefully the judge listens early on because later those same details come back in a major way.

[00:01:41]Also notice how the defendant answers difficult questions. Some viewers may hear remorse, others may hear avoidance.

[00:01:48]And by the end of this case, the judge makes it very clear exactly where she stands. I'd like to know, what were you thinking when you were kissing the 7-year-old?

[00:01:57]Them if you could kiss their penis, what were you thinking when you were asking them that?

[00:02:02]When did you make the decision that you were going to kiss the penis, kissing them, I'm assuming in the mouth with your tongue? When did Court is calling 2020 CR3796 State of Texas versus Robert Chevalier, can I have parties announced for the record for the state? Courtney Mitchell for the state. Defense? Jennifer Zarka for Mr. Chevalier.

[00:02:22]>> And are you Mr. Chevalier?

[00:02:23]>> Yes, your honor.

[00:02:24]All right, you entered a plea to aggravated sexual assault of a child on October 20, 2022, you entered a plea of no contest.

[00:02:35]According to the plea bargain agreement, y'all need to whisper in the box.

[00:02:41]According to the plea bargain agreement, uh the state is asking that your punishment be assessed at a cap of 15 years. The state is silent on your application, and of course there's no contact contact with the complainants in chapter 62 registration. Have both parties had a chance to review the PSI report? Yes, your honor. Yes. Any objections to the PSI report, State? No, your honor. Defense? No, your honor.

[00:03:04]Right away, the defense begins building a very specific narrative. Robert is being presented as a man rooted in faith, structure, and community accountability. The pastor's testimony is clearly designed to show the court that there's a support system waiting for him outside prison. In sentencing hearings, that matters. Judges often look at whether a defendant has stable relationships, supervision, counseling opportunities, and people willing to hold them accountable. But here's the tension everyone in this courtroom is feeling. The pastor admits he understands the charge, yet still believes probation is appropriate. That creates a difficult balancing act. The defense wants the court to focus on rehabilitation and future behavior, while the prosecution and the PSI details force attention back onto the alleged victims and the seriousness of the conduct itself. And notice something else. The church testimony repeatedly emphasizes supervision around children.

[00:04:01]That's not accidental. The defense is trying to reassure the judge that safeguards would exist if probation were granted. But for some viewers, that might raise another question entirely.

[00:04:11]If supervision has to be this strict, does that actually strengthen the argument for prison instead? All right, the state is silent. Are there witnesses? Yes, there are. All right, you may call your first witness. Thank you, Judge.

[00:04:24]I will call Pastor Tim Stoker. All right, Mr. Stoker, would you come forward, please?

[00:04:38]If you could raise your right hand for me, please. Do you solemnly swear affirm the testimony you give will be the truth and nothing but the truth, so help you, God?

[00:04:45]So help me, God. All right, you can lower your hand. Make sure you keep your voice up so the court reporter can hear you. If you could state your name for the record, please. My name is Timothy Stoker. All right, and how do you spell your last name? S T O K E R. All right, defense. Thank you, Judge.

[00:04:59]Pastor Stoker, and where are you currently employed?

[00:05:02]I am pastor at Living Water Fellowship in Pleasanton, Texas. And is that how you know Mr. Stovall and him? I do know him as a member of our church.

[00:05:12]>> Okay. And um how often does he attend church? I we have services regularly twice a week. He attends those almost always. Uh sometimes with special meetings three or four times a week.

[00:05:24]Okay. So, is it fair to say he's a faithful parishioner? Very much so. All right. And um you know I work here today. It's a sentence, correct? Yes, ma'am. And did you just hear the court read the charge? I did. Okay. So, you understand what he has pled to in this case, correct? Yes. Okay. And so, I'm asking you today, um is it your opinion if the court were to grant his application for deferred community supervision, is it your opinion that he could be successful on that? I do believe so. And why?

[00:05:57]I uh in watching him over and I remember our congregation since around 2015.

[00:06:04]Uh and because of his good report, we have seen no signs of anything that would indicate that he has had any appropriate any appropriate inappropriate uh contact or behavior with children in our congregation, which we do take seriously.

[00:06:21]And uh as far as communicating with him personally, I do believe that he is pursuing his faith.

[00:06:26]Um his relationship with God.

[00:06:29]And I believe that the contact that contact and communication, he would be uh a good candidate for probation. Is your congregation a supportive environment?

[00:06:41]It is. Uh a close community. We're not a large congregation, so we're pretty close-knit as a spiritual family and community. And do you believe that continued participation in your congregation would benefit him should the court allow him to be on a deferred community supervision?

[00:06:59]>> I do believe so.

[00:07:01]And is there anything else that you would want the court to know today um to help her make her decision?

[00:07:08]I um would say that as a minister, of course I believe that we all need spiritual uh guidance and assistance in our life.

[00:07:18]Robert has shown a humility, a desire uh to pursue that, to uh engage with us uh through this time.

[00:07:27]I do see him seeking the Lord and I believe his righteousness as well.

[00:07:32]In your congregation, again should the court grant this, um would there always be supervision were any children around at the church at services? Yes. Yes. So, there would not be opportunity for him to be alone with children. We are very uh diligent and try to be very diligent in our uh campus Okay. community as well as our even our small group gatherings.

[00:07:59]And so, once again, um could you give your support your opinion? Do you believe that time in custody or time on intermediate probation would better serve Mr. Chevalier and the community?

[00:08:12]I believe as far as as ministering to him uh with his spiritual uh desires and need, his faith would be better served to be able to be on probation and be engaged with me as his pastor, the other leadership of the church, as well as the congregation. And as a pastor, would you commit to assisting him should he be given the opportunity for Absolutely.

[00:08:35]And and and if not, just say the judge decides to go a different way, would you still commit to supporting him? I will.

[00:08:42]Any further questions, Judge? Any questions? This cross-examination is short, but it lands hard. The prosecutor brings up a crucial detail. Some of the alleged contact with victims traces back to church settings and relationships built through religious communities.

[00:08:58]That changes the emotional weight of the testimony we just heard because now the courtroom has to wrestle with a bigger issue, trust.

[00:09:06]Many abuse cases involve environments where families naturally lower their guard, schools, sports teams, churches, youth organizations. The prosecutor doesn't need a long speech here. Just reminding the court that church connections were involved completely reframes the defense's community support argument, and you can feel the discomfort when the pastor acknowledges he knew about the charges since the arrest. The court now has to decide whether the church support demonstrates genuine rehabilitation potential or whether it unintentionally highlights how trust and access play a role in the first place. This is one of those moments where the courtroom stops being only about legal arguments and becomes about credibility, judgement, and public safety. I want to know what you think watching this. Should strong community support influence sentencing in a case involving crimes against children or do the allegations outweigh everything else automatically? Uh briefly, um pastor, are you aware that some of the allegations in this case are directly directed back to meeting the victim's at church?

[00:10:16]In my congregation?

[00:10:18]I I I I It just said at church.

[00:10:21]At church? I did attend church with him previous to him being a member of my congregation before I was pastor there.

[00:10:28]Uh so, yes, I am aware of that and acknowledge in that context. Okay.

[00:10:32]And and you How long have you been aware of the charges?

[00:10:36]Since uh since he called me from the jail from the from the warrants. Okay.

[00:10:41]No further questions.

[00:10:43]All right. Thank you. Thank you so much for coming in and thank you for the work that you do.

[00:10:47]All right. Defense, call your next witness. I would call James Valdez, Judge.

[00:11:02]Could you raise your hand for me, please? Yes, I Do you solemnly swear and affirm the testimony you give would be the truth and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Yes, ma'am. All right. You can lower your hand. State your name for the record. My name is James Valdez. All right. Defense. Thank you, Judge. Mr. Valdez, how do you know Mr. Shabazz? We met through church. We've been friends for approximately 12 to 13 years.

[00:11:24]And so, and again, you know why you're here today. Yes, ma'am.

[00:11:28]And so, I'm not going to ask you some of the same questions.

[00:11:33]Do you believe that Mr. Chevalier and the community would be better served with prison time or a deferred community supervision?

[00:11:43]Deferred community supervision is the best route for him. And And the reason being is that he's already been out.

[00:11:50]He's not done anything to the best of my knowledge, anything wrong. He's lived a good life.

[00:11:57]Um He's done well. We talk all the time.

[00:12:01]Um we hang out for Bible study.

[00:12:03]Um Everything he says is is good. We never talked about anything bad or wrong or or anything negative. We just were encouraging each other, prayer, getting in the word.

[00:12:15]So, is your relationship um did it come from your church community?

[00:12:21]Well, it started there.

[00:12:23]And then we still just kept it going for all these years. I've known him since I'm you know, Valley High and ever since he's moved out to the country, um we've been just friends for a long time. And I've known his kids from just forever. I mean, since they're like small and stuff. And so, it's been really loving. And I tell you what, I love his wife.

[00:12:46]His family are very nice. Do you believe that his family is a supportive environment for him should the court grant the deferred community supervision? Oh, very much so. The The family's wonderful.

[00:12:59]Everybody. And um you talked about him.

[00:13:02]Do you also believe Do you believe there would be any safety issues for the community should court grant the community supervision?

[00:13:11]There's no safety issues at all. I've never known Robert to be you know, to be an issue in that area at all.

[00:13:21]He's always been safe. He's been kind.

[00:13:23]He's always helpful. Do you believe he's a productive member of society? Very much so.

[00:13:29]And um he called you an accountability. Would you tell the court what that Well, in terms of accountability coach, we are accountable to each other. I mean, we we read the word, we go through questions, we ask about our families, you know, how we're doing in terms of reading the Bible, living our lives, how we're doing within the community, what have you. And so, we really approach done trying to live a good life.

[00:14:00]Um and we've been doing this for years.

[00:14:02]And so, should he be granted the deferred community supervision, would you be supportive of him in that venture? Oh, very much so.

[00:14:12]And do you believe he could complete it successfully? Oh, very much so.

[00:14:16]>> The second witness doubles down on the defense theme. Robert is a long-time friend, Bible study partner, volunteer, and productive member of society. And legally speaking, this is classic mitigation testimony. Defense attorneys often bring in people who can humanize a defendant beyond the criminal charge itself. But, there's another layer here that makes this testimony complicated.

[00:14:38]The witness repeatedly says, "I've never known him to be unsafe." And that's a statement courts hear all the time in cases like this. The problem is that many offenses involving children happen in private, hidden from friends and family for years. So, character testimony can only go so far when weighed against direct allegations and admissions in the case file. Also, notice how the defense keeps emphasizing accountability groups, Bible study, and community structure. They're trying to paint a picture of a man who would comply with probation conditions and succeed in treatment. In other words, they're arguing that society benefits more from supervised rehabilitation than incarceration. But, sentencing isn't just about future compliance. It's also about punishment, deterrence, and the impact on victims. And the judge hasn't even started her direct questioning yet.

[00:15:28]That's where this hearing takes a dramatic turn.

[00:15:31]Is there anything else you want the court to know today before she takes the stand?

[00:15:37]I've known Robert for 13 over 13 years. He's been wonderful, and I love his family. They've been really good.

[00:15:44]I mean, even knowing his parents before they passed, um just wonderful. They've been kind to They have a publishing community.

[00:15:51]Completely um really involved in the I only I only have known him as doing a lot of volunteer work and doing a lot of you know, caring for others.

[00:16:04]They do.

[00:16:06]I'll pass the witness, your honor. Thank you. Any questions?

[00:16:08]>> No.

[00:16:10]All right. Thank you so much for coming in and giving me more information about him. Thank you very much. Thank you. You can call your next witness. One further witness, Judge. I will call Jennifer Spalio.

[00:16:28]All right. So, if you can raise your right hand for me, please.

[00:16:33]Do you solemnly swear or affirm the testimony you give will be the truth and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

[00:16:38]All right. So, if you can lower your hand. I'm going to need you to speak up because the court reporter is trying to hear. Okay. All right. And to make it easier because I think your voice is low, uh if you can move right there. Thank you. Yes. Okay.

[00:16:51]>> You're not a little bit closer. Okay.

[00:16:53]Thank you. Right there. Okay, you state your name for the record, please. Um I'm Jennifer Chevalier.

[00:17:00]All right. Uh you may ask your questions. Thank you, Judge. And how do you know Robert? Well, I've been married to Robert for 21 years. And we've known each other 22.

[00:17:11]And how many children do you have? We have two. We have my stepson, and then we have um our son again. And how old are your children?

[00:17:20]Uh, 26 and 20. And Are they here today?

[00:17:23]Yeah. Both your sons are here in the gallery, is that right? And his wife and his fiance. Okay.

[00:17:29]And so, um, is it fair to say there are quite a few supporters here for Robert today? Yes. His brother is here, too.

[00:17:35]Okay.

[00:17:35]And so, um the family that's here, do you believe if the court were to grant the deferred supervision, do you think the family would be supportive of Robert? Yes.

[00:17:46]And do you think everyone in the family would assist him in getting through the requirements of such a probation? Yes.

[00:17:54]And as his wife, you may be a little biased, but do you believe Robert could successfully complete that?

[00:18:01]Yes, I do.

[00:18:02]And tell the court why.

[00:18:04]Oh, well, um, my husband I've been by his side all this time, and I know that he is a man of character.

[00:18:15]Um, I know he loves me. I know he loves God.

[00:18:20]I know that he would he would do it for me and for God, that he would, uh want to do the right thing, because he's always wanted to help people, and um, and that's how this situation happened.

[00:18:36]But anyway, that he he want to help people and, uh, love people.

[00:18:41]Uh and, uh, he wants to make a difference.

[00:18:46]Small one.

[00:18:47]And with terms of a community supervision like this, there is some intensive therapy and things required.

[00:18:54]Are you aware of that? Yes. Right. And so, knowing that, do you believe that Robert would be committed to doing those things? Yes.

[00:19:03]And do you believe a deferred community supervision is a better way to treat this than sending him to prison. Oh, yes.

[00:19:13]And and tell the court why.

[00:19:16]Well, he would have the support of his church and me.

[00:19:23]And I would help help him work through whatever issues he may be may be struggling with.

[00:19:31]Um He also >> Now we hear from the wife and emotionally this may be the most difficult testimony in the hearing.

[00:19:39]She's been married to him for over two decades. Their children are present in court and she's openly pleading for the judge to give him another chance. From a defense standpoint, this testimony is meant to show stability, family support, and personal investment in rehabilitation. But listen carefully to the language she uses. She talks about his health issues, his faith, his character, and how she believes prison would physically break him down. That's strategic mitigation. Defense attorneys frequently present medical concerns during sentencing because judges can consider a defendant's physical condition when deciding punishment.

[00:20:15]Still, the emotional conflict here is enormous. The wife is standing by her husband while the court is evaluating allegations involving children who were supposedly under his care and trust. And when she says, "That's how this situation happened. He wanted to help people." You can almost feel the courtroom processing that statement in real time. Cases like this often divide audiences because viewers struggle with two truths existing at once. Family members can genuinely love and support someone while the allegations themselves remain deeply disturbing. And soon, the judge is about to confront the defendant directly with those disturbing details.

[00:20:55]He has some health issues. I think if he were in prison, um he would decline. Um he has a heart and lung issues.

[00:21:05]Um That's my main concern is I don't think that would be a supportive environment.

[00:21:14]With his health issues, does he regularly seek medical care? Oh, yes.

[00:21:18]And so, does he How frequently would you say he seeks medical attention? Um Well, he has a cardiologist who he sees, I think, every 6 months.

[00:21:31]And he has a pulmonologist that he was seeing.

[00:21:36]He's on a CPAP machine.

[00:21:39]And then he uses inhalers and nebulizers.

[00:21:43]Um Yes.

[00:21:49]Okay. And so, today, um can you tell the court that you believe he would successfully complete the deferred community supervision should she grant it? Yes.

[00:22:01]And you're fully confident of that. Yes.

[00:22:04]Okay.

[00:22:05]Is there anything else you want the court to know today before she makes this decision?

[00:22:10]That uh I love my husband very much.

[00:22:14]And I'm just going to try to be there for him and support him in whatever capacities that he needs.

[00:22:22]Um Whatever it takes, whatever it's it's obviously it's in your hands. So, it's whatever you grant for him. I I think that um that he and I uh will work through this together with God's help.

[00:22:40]Any questions? Uh just briefly, um you said you've been married for 21 years. Uh when did you start dating?

[00:22:48]Before you were married. We started dating >> [clears throat] >> February I have a bad memory.

[00:23:02]Um We dated for a year before we got married. Okay.

[00:23:08]Okay. Yeah. Was it here in Bear County?

[00:23:11]Yes.

[00:23:13]I'll pass on this question. Well, no, in Temple.

[00:23:17]I was in Temple, Texas. Okay. I'm sorry.

[00:23:20]Yes. That's okay. That's okay. It was in Temple. Okay. Thank you. I'll pass on this.

[00:23:25]All right. Thank you so much for coming and giving me some more insight.

[00:23:29]Thank you. And the witnesses?

[00:23:32]Mr. Chevalier, is there anything that you you want to say to the court? And before you say it, the court would have to swear you in. All right. Can you raise your right hand? Do you solemnly swear affirm the testimony you give will be the truth and nothing but the truth, so help you God? I do. All right. You can lower your hand. State your name for the record. Robert Chevalier. Okay. What would you like to say to the court?

[00:23:58]I believe that I can complete every I will complete every aspect of probation if granted.

[00:24:04]Um I'm at your mercy.

[00:24:11]And I just pray that you have you give me mercy now that we have this opportunity to re- redirect my path.

[00:24:21]>> Here we go. This is the moment the hearing changes completely. Up until now, the defense controlled the narrative with support letters, church testimony, family loyalty, and rehabilitation arguments. But once the judge begins asking direct questions about the victims and the conduct itself, the focus shifts from who is this man to what exactly did he do and why? And notice the judge's tone. She's not yelling, she's methodical. She wants specifics. She's trying to understand the defendant's thought process because sentencing decisions often come down to insight and accountability. Judges want to know whether a defendant truly understands the harm caused or whether they're minimizing their actions. But the answers here are vague.

[00:25:04]I wasn't thinking. I was stressed. I was in a downward spiral.

[00:25:09]Those responses may sound insufficient to a judge evaluating crimes involving children, especially because the court immediately notices an inconsistency. He claims stress caused the behavior, yet he never directed that behavior toward his own children.

[00:25:25]That distinction becomes critically important. This is where viewers often split.

[00:25:30]Some may interpret his answers as panic and shame. Others may see them as evasive and lacking responsibility. But regardless of interpretation, you can already sense the judge becoming increasingly skeptical. Okay.

[00:25:43]All right, I have a couple of questions for you.

[00:25:44]>> Yes, How old were the complainants in this case?

[00:25:48]Um One was He was a year older than my son and I think he's like 14 and 15. The other? Um seven or eight. All right. So, with regards to the seven- or eight-year-old, I read the PSI report.

[00:26:05]I would like to know what were you thinking when you were kissing the seven-year-old?

[00:26:14]I'm not exactly sure what I was thinking. I just know I was in a downward spiral. I was stressed.

[00:26:21]Um So, were you doing it to relieve stress?

[00:26:27]Possibly. All right. And if you were doing that to relieve stress, did you do the same with your child and your stepchild? No, ma'am. Why not?

[00:26:43]They're my boys.

[00:26:44]Oh. Okay. But these were two complainants that your wife testified to that you were helping.

[00:26:51]Right. All right. And then uh one of them said that you asked them if you could kiss their penis. What were you thinking when you were asking them that?

[00:27:10]I don't think I was thinking, Your Honor.

[00:27:12]And according to what I'm what I've read, and I always read the PSI report, and I always read the plea agreement and the stipulations, that this was going on for a period of time.

[00:27:24]Right? That's right. So, each time these children were invited to your home or asked to come to your home, were you getting excited at the prospect of touching them?

[00:27:40]No.

[00:27:42]So, how did you formulate Okay, these two boys come over to your house. I'm assuming they want to play with your boys. They're spending the night or whatever they're doing.

[00:27:52]When did you make the decision that you were going to kiss the penis, kissing them, I'm assuming in the mouth with your tongue?

[00:27:59]When did that formulate in your mind that you're going to do this?

[00:28:03]And what were your other children doing at the time? Your stepson and your other son.

[00:28:15]I'm not really sure how to answer that, Your Honor. I don't All I know is I was not in my right mind, basically. I wasn't thinking.

[00:28:25]But how are you not thinking?

[00:28:27]I wasn't thinking about the consequences of what But no, I'm I'm like, how are you not thinking about these two children because they're not your biological children, but you're thinking about your biological children and your stepchild as these are my children, so I'm not going to touch them and put them through that trauma. I'm just trying to understand where you're coming from so I can make a informed decision on whether or not I should send you to prison.

[00:28:55]I don't know how to answer that. This section is devastating because the judge starts reading directly from the PSI details and suddenly the courtroom isn't dealing with vague summaries anymore.

[00:29:07]We're hearing allegations of repeated attempts, physical restraint, grabbing, touching, pulling at clothing. Details that paint a much more serious and deliberate picture than the defendant's earlier I wasn't thinking explanation.

[00:29:19]And this is exactly why PSI reports matter so much in sentencing. A pre-sentence investigation gives the judge a broader factual background, victim impact information, criminal history, and behavioral patterns. Even in plea agreements, judges rely heavily on these reports to determine whether probation is appropriate. The judge's key question is powerful. Why should I give you deferred adjudication?

[00:29:43]That's the entire hearing distilled into one sentence. And the answer the defendant gives, I believe I can do better, may not have addressed the court's deeper concern, which is public safety and accountability. Then comes another critical revelation, a prior probation case involving a Boy Scout victim. That changes everything.

[00:30:04]Prior similar conduct can heavily influence sentencing because it suggests a pattern rather than an isolated lapse in judgment. Once that came out, you could feel the possibility of probation slipping away fast. All right, because what I'm reading here, it says while in his friend's home, the defendant would attempt to kiss him, but he would always walk away or move his head. On one occasion, the defendant grabbed his arm after he exited the bathroom and attempted to kiss him. On some occasions, the defendant was able to kiss him on the lips by grabbing his chin and holding the back of his neck.

[00:30:34]The defendant would also attempt to place the defendant's hand inside of his pants, but he was able to stop this by tightening his belt.

[00:30:41]The defendant only touched the side of his thigh outside of his underwear.

[00:30:46]The defendant also pinched him when he was wearing pajamas. And of course it goes on and on about you rubbing his buttocks, grabbing his buttocks.

[00:30:55]Um He believes this because the He said the defendant also attempted to kiss his buttocks and penis. He believes this because the defendant would be on his knees in front of him and attempt to pull down his pants.

[00:31:12]So here's my question for you.

[00:31:14]I know you want deferred adjudication, but why should I give you deferred adjudication?

[00:31:26]I believe I can do better.

[00:31:29]Well, I mean everybody Everybody over there in the box believes they can do better.

[00:31:33]And I want to be able to give to community I've taken and I want to be able to give.

[00:31:41]And to be able to serve and to just be a better member of society.

[00:31:52]And what trauma do you think you caused the complainants in this case?

[00:31:56]How do you think they're doing today?

[00:31:58]I pray they're doing good, but I don't know.

[00:32:01]I'm sure they have some some issues.

[00:32:05]Okay. Any questions for this?

[00:32:10]You said you'd like to be better.

[00:32:13]And you tell the court you would proactively do anything that's asked of you on a community supervision should it be granted? Absolutely.

[00:32:24]Any counseling?

[00:32:26]Any counseling, any anything.

[00:32:31]And would you seek the help of all the people that are here to support you today? Absolutely.

[00:32:37]And is anything like this ever going to happen again? No.

[00:32:42]That's all I'm going to put. And are are you asking the court to grant your application for the bird's community supervision?

[00:32:47]>> Yes, I am asking for the two bird men.

[00:32:50]No further questions. State.

[00:32:52]Um Mr. Chevalier, how long was your probation in your previous case?

[00:32:57]5 years.

[00:32:58]And who was the victim in that case?

[00:33:01]Um it was a boy scout.

[00:33:04]No further questions.

[00:33:06]Just very briefly, were you also a boy scout at the time? Yes, sir.

[00:33:09]And there was some four or five years age difference, is that right?

[00:33:13]>> Yes, sir. Okay, but you were also a boy scout at the time. Yes.

[00:33:16]No further questions, judge. All right, anything else? No, no. And there it is, 15 years in prison.

[00:33:23]The judge follows the plea agreement cap, but decisively rejects deferred adjudication. No probation, no second chance in the community. The court makes it clear that prison is the appropriate outcome here. What stands out most is how the hearing evolved. At the beginning, the defense presented a man surrounded by faith, family, and community support. Multiple witnesses vouched for his character, his church involvement, and his ability to succeed on supervision. But in the end, the judge focused on the conduct itself, the victim's experiences, the repeated nature of the allegations, and the prior history involving another minor. And legally, that prior case likely carried enormous weight.

[00:34:05]Judges look for patterns when similar allegations appear more than once across different stages of someone's life.

[00:34:11]Arguments for rehabilitation outside prison become much harder to justify.

[00:34:15]Also important, the lifetime chapter 62 sex offender registration.

[00:34:20]That means the consequences here extend far beyond prison time.

[00:34:24]Restrictions on housing, employment, reporting requirements, and firearm possession all continue long after incarceration. This case raises difficult questions about accountability, rehabilitation, trust, and how courts balance community support against serious crimes involving children.

[00:34:42]All right, this is what the court is going to do.

[00:34:45]Uh the court's going to find you guilty, sentence you to 15 years in the prison, give you credit for any time served.

[00:34:51]There's a $1,500 fine. Time and money run concurrent. There's to be no contact with the complainants or the complainant's family. Showing you what's entitled trial court certification of defendant's rights to appeal. Did you review that with your attorney? Did you understand it and did you sign it? Yes, sir. Because this is a plea bargain agreement, because I followed your plea bargain agreement, and because you waived your right to appeal, you do not have the court's permission to appeal.

[00:35:12]Do you understand? Yes, sir. Because this is a felony conviction, you're not allowed to own or possess any weapons or ammunition. If you have questions of what a weapon or ammunition is, you'll need to speak to an attorney. And the chapter 62 registration is for life. All right. Good luck to you.

[00:35:27]Thank you, Mr. Saka. This courtroom hearing ultimately became a clash between mitigation and accountability.

[00:35:33]The defense worked hard to show Robert as a devoted husband, church member, volunteer, and someone capable of rehabilitation through community supervision. Witness after witness described him as supportive, faithful, and deeply connected to family and faith. But the judge's responsibility wasn't simply to evaluate character references. It was to weigh those references against the severity of the allegations, the details in the PSI report, the impact on the victim's and the defendant's prior history involving another minor. And when the judge pressed for explanations, the answers clearly did not provide the level of accountability or insight the court needed to justify probation. In the end, the court sentenced him to 15 years in prison, imposed lifetime sex offender registration, and denied the possibility of deferred adjudication. It's a reminder that sentencing hearings are often about far more than apologies or community support. They're about whether a judge believes the defendant can safely remain outside prison while still serving justice for victims. And now I want to hear from you.

[00:36:37]Do you think the judge made the right call in denying probation or should rehabilitation and community support have carried more weight here? If you found this case as shocking as we did, make sure to hit that like button, share your thoughts in the comments, and don't forget to subscribe for more jaw-dropping courtroom breakdowns.