David Daniels: Police mugshots

The countertenor, arrested in Michigan with his husband Scott Walters on a Houston warrant, awaits extradition to Texas on sexual assault charges, which he denies.

 

share this

Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on linkedin
Share on google
  • Daniel needs to cut down on the foie gras stuffed pizza and the two bottles of Mouton-Cadet. He’s following Depardieu down that road of no return. Prison might be good for him.

  • Norman, do we really need to see mug shots here? Exactly how does this serve “…the most fascinating of art forms.?” Good grief.

  • I believe it is impossible to prove this without a confession from the accused. At any rate, they are both innocent until proven guilty and they are denying this!

  • I hate to say this, but looking at these mug-shots I get the feeling it might be a good idea to put these guys on suicide-watch, especially the older one (Daniels). I say I hate to say it, because (for those readers who don’t know about prison) being on suicide-watch is god-awful. The prisoner on suicide-watch is alone in a cell, but also watched by monitors through a transparent wall with holes for speaking, so, no privacy, and, the prisoner is denied anything which could conceivably be used in a suicide attempt. Think about that a minute. No cloth clothing, he could try to asphyxiate by stuffing that into his windpipe. So he has to wear only a rigid plastic garment kind of like a piece of body-armor, but padded so he can’t hit himself with it effectively, and it’s open in the back so he’s naked from behind– not risky since he’s alone in his cell, but uncomfortable and humiliating. No books (or documents), he could pull out the pages, wad them up, and stuff them into his windpipe. No bedding, no soft pillows, and, no toilet paper in the cell, he has to ask the monitors outside the cell to hand him small lengths of toilet paper as needed, enough for each individual wipe separately. No writing utensils, he could stab himself or try to swallow them. Nothing to do at all except sit and think. The monitors are usually other inmates; they’re instructed to talk with him if he wants, but mostly they won’t, they want him to shut up and let them read or listen to their ear-phone radios or whatever, and they’re not usually people these guys would likely want to talk to anyway, not very sympathetic, and very likely not at all interested in baroque opera! And talking to them is dangerous for the prisoner’s case– there’s no confidentiality and if the prisoner reveals something which might damage his case, they’re gonna tell. Now, you could imagine a humane designer putting an in-wall TV in the cell with a wall-pad for turning it on or off or changing channels, or maybe a radio, but I don’t know of any prison which actually does that, I’m not sure why not, except, based on what I hear about it, I suspect that the suicide-watch conditions are designed to function at least partially as a punishment, to deter prisoners from trying to manipulate the system by threatening or attempting suicide.

    But even though suicide-watch is awful, it might be necessary in this case. These two are smart and highly cultured, refined, unlike (probably) anyone else in their Texas prison will be, and my bet is they’re probably floating in a kind of denial-mode, maybe even thinking of the experience as an exciting new adventure, like being Florestan in Pizarro’s dungeon (the person I know who went to prison thought that way for some time at first). But this could suddenly break up when they realize what they’re really up against. Besides the formidable culture-differences, prisoners are often quite homophobic and most inmates don’t like sex-offenders of any kind (that’s one of the cliches about prison life which is actually true), although at least (THANK GOD) they are not accused of raping any children. (Heaven help them if they were– that’s another of the cliches about prison which is actually true: prisoners hate and despise child-molesters. They are an underclass in the underclass; most prisoners won’t talk to them at all and that–being shunned– is the best they can hope for– almost any other interaction would likely be something worse than being shunned, if you get my drift. But being shunned by the other prisoners is plenty bad enough. Prisoners have to interact with each other in many ways in order to get on. For instance, getting a hair-cut from the official prison barber often involves a long wait, days or weeks, so prisoners usually get other prisoners to cut their hair in exchange for some other favor or for food bought from commissary or something. Not an option for a child-sex-criminal whom no one will talk to or interact with!)

    On the other hand, these guys probably have a pretty strong support network OUTSIDE the prison, and their friends and colleagues, at least some of them, are likely being very supportive; that tends to reduce suicide-risk substantially. And maybe they’ll get out on bail. I’ll write about the mixed blessing which bail is, if they get it.

    • Oh, my, that is so, so witty!

      Did you have a good little giggle with yourself when you thought of it?

      Were you imagining what you would do if the soap were dropped?

      • Dear Paul,

        In response to your two questions:
        1) yes (very much)
        2) no (not at all)

        I did enjoy your response and in fact, it was much more funny than my “witty” comment. It really made me LOL so I thank you for that.

        Commentary on this blog is all about passive aggressive behaviour so props to you for doing a job well done! Cheers!

  • ThrownOutOfTheKremlinForSinging seems to know a lot about prison life. is there something that he/she would like to share with us mere mortals?

  • It comes to mind, that arresting and imprisoning people who are presumed innocent until proven guilty is inherently a violation of their rights.

    • Excuse me? When people are charged with a crime, they are often arrested and sometimes remanded without bail. Until convicted, they will be in jail — if not bailed — not prison. Even if in custody, they retain the presumption of innocence and it is up to the prosecution to prove their guilt.

    • It’s probably safe to assume that before making the arrest, law enforcement had reasonable cause to suspect that a crime had been committed. Also, look up “extradition” so you can understand what is happening. They were “arrested in Ann Arbor, Michigan, on Tuesday, and will reportedly be extradited to Texas where they will face prosecution for allegations of sexually assaulting a singer in Houston almost ten years ago, several media outlets reported on Wednesday.” Jurisdictions, and all that, you know. U.S. law DOES operate on a presumption of innocence, but you gotta get the alleged perpetrators into court in order to judge innocence or guilt, see how that works? I’m not a lawyer but this pretty basic stuff. Hope that helps.

      source of quote: https://operanews.com/Opera_News_Magazine/2019/1/News/David_Daniels_Arrested_on_Charges_of_Sexual_Assault.html

    • L.N. — The prosecution will have produced enough evidence that there is a reasonable chance of a conviction before the trial. Normally, the accused will be granted bail but sometimes it is refused. The grounds for refusal are: (i) significant chance of absconding; (ii) significant risk of further serious crime before the trial.

      Provided the two accused post some surety not to abscond, and surrender their passports, I would be surprised if they were not bailed.

  • I will bin my old Hogwood Rinaldo and get the Rene Jacobs one. Cannot have him in my record collection if he has form like the bloke in Kings Consort.
    DD has become a fat berg all that junk food they eat in USA.

  • >