Reply to a comment

The following is according to the police report:
"The victim said they sent each other texts and he said the suspected domestic battery incident was not true and needed a hug." This statement by Guidry obviously was made because "she" asked if the story was true. All published reports of that charge indicated this fellow struck his "wife". The artlcle contains another extracted statement from the police report: "Guidry, who is married, told the woman he was not married," Either the police report is advancing the woman's allegation or the implication that he told her he was not married is false. Could it be this is all out of context and the paper is simply guilty of making up a story to inflame it's readership. Consider this. Why have no other female patients (or their husbands for that matter), reported this type of behavior to the police previously? Offenders such as this do not suddenly start this behavior. They have been doing it for a long time. Because of the type of alleged crime and lack of any reported prior history, it is unlikely the motive offerred by the victim can be taken at face value. It is possible to believe from the attorney's statment and the few facts presented, that they had a consential though inappropriate relationship of some kind. That alone is not a crime. So now we have a criminal charge of solicitation to make it all worthwhile. The alleged facts as presented in the story appear to show that services of some type using barter may have been exchanged. I want to know who really initiated it. A professional married, high profile member of our community, who had much to loose, or a victim who had no other means of payment. Also, the tone of this story, the one regarding the alleged battery and the comments made by the same few "shocked" and convinced citizens who have no first hand knowledge, appear to show we have a real effort in Marco Island to run this fellow out of town. Now that is a story that may be worth reporting.