U-M police arrest 'person of interest' in Thursday attack on Thompson Street
A 51-year-old Ann Arbor man was arraigned Friday on two charges related to the Michigan Sex Offenders Registration Act after University of Michigan police arrested him in connection with Thursday's attack on a young woman near West Quadrangle.
Billie Taylor, 51, faces up to 4 years in prison and a $2,000 fine if he is convicted of failing to comply with the sex offenders registration act, a felony, and up to 93 days in jail and a $1,000 fine for the misdemeanor of failing to notify authorities of a change of address.
Billie Taylor
Michigan State Police photo
Forsberg said the investigation into Thursday's incident is ongoing, but authorities are not prepared to charge Taylor with any further crimes right now.
A 21-year-old woman reported she was grabbed on the arm by a black man appearing to be in his late-50s at about 1:50 a.m. Thursday morning.
Police have said Thursday's assault does not appear to be related to 6 other attacks on women in Ann Arbor, including 2 rapes, between July 15 and July 26.
Taylor was convicted of 4th-degree criminal sexual conduct in 2000 and served 5 years in prison. The Michigan Sex Offenders Registration Act requires offenders to register an address for 25 years after conviction.
Magistrate Thomas Truesdell released Taylor from custody on a $10,000 personal recognizance bond, meaning that Taylor has to appear at 1 p.m. Aug. 31 for a preliminary exam in 14-A District Court, 4133 Washtenaw Ave.
Kyle Feldscher covers police and courts for AnnArbor.com. He can be reached at kylefeldscher@annarbor.com or you can follow him on Twitter.
Comments
Joe Kidd
Sat, Aug 20, 2011 : 11:13 p.m.
Since when did it become politically incorrect to refer to a person as a suspect? I think the term "person of interest" is silly. The incident on Thompson St may be charged as a misdemeanor unless there are more particulars that have not been released. Grabbing someone by the arm is not a felony. If he demanded money or other property it would be an attempted robbery but if that were true, he should still be in jail and not released. Even more so if he is a prime suspect in the Monday confrontation where a woman had to withdraw money from an ATM.
Matt Cooper
Sun, Aug 21, 2011 : 2:24 a.m.
Check your laws. Depending on the situation, yes, grabbing someone by the arm could well be a felony.
Tru2Blu76
Sat, Aug 20, 2011 : 6:42 p.m.
People just can't let go of their resentments and grudges ("issues"). Police catch a criminal: according to some, this is either accidental or as a result of responding (reluctantly) to "public pressure" - which is a synonym for "public critics." Police don't catch a criminal: according to that same group of critics, this is always the result of laziness, incompetence and / or misdirected law enforcement (up to and including the "misdirected" arrest of drunk drivers and scofflaws). Investigations is a boring, often frustrating task. It's standard fare for those who are law enforcement officers. Apprehending even a wife beater can involve resistance and sometime deadly resistance. Going from boredom to violent physical struggles is not good for the heart. Stake outs, including speed traps, is another boring part of police work. A speeder blazes past the radar detector and there's an immediate takeoff in a powerful police pursuit vehicle: with ordinary drivers chatting on their cell phones -in they way- and dangerous intersection crossings to get through. The stop is made and what does the average traffic cop get? Snotty or belligerent miscreants claiming they did nothing wrong and prattling about "useless cops." Police are empowered by the public to handle ALL forms of misbehavior. We pay them "well" it's said, but baby sitting and restraining (& investigating and arresting) 1000s of wrong doers isn't enough for "some people." Get a clue: go out and do a cop's job for a month. Let the rest of us sit back and critique your performance. Think more, kibitz less. Cops "picking on" college students: there's a joke in there somewhere. Well behaved "students", many who spend their free time trying to drink more beer than anyone in history has , are: the - perfect - group to "pick on." Arresting Taylor & then charging him (at this time) only violating t
KeepingItReal
Sat, Aug 20, 2011 : 1:25 p.m.
It seems that several bloggers claimed they have had direct contact with the attacker and would recognized him. If that's the case, it seems this guy would have been readily identified by those bloggers. If there is no positive ID or anything linking him to this incident, the court was correct in letting him out on a personal recognizance.
West of Main
Sat, Aug 20, 2011 : 4:40 a.m.
"Sgt. Jason Forsberg of the U-M Department of Public Safety said Taylor was arrested Thursday as a "person of interest" in Thursday's attack, and subsequent interviews revealed the alleged violations of the sex offenders registration act." I'm not sure I understand the sequence of events here. How can you be arrested as a person of interest? It seems more likely the case that he was interviewed or questioned as a POI, then arrested when the parole violations became apparent. As to the issue of bail as punishment or didactic tactic, you guys are right. I stand corrected. But the article does give the impression that his arrest was directly related to Thursday's assault.
muttslt
Sat, Aug 20, 2011 : 3:43 p.m.
WOM, you are correct. He would have been detained for questioning and identification, based on a reasonable suspicion and/or information that he was involved. All contacts are checked for warrants, etc, in which case the parole violations were discovered. Another way it can happen is that he is identified by name as a poi, the name is run and the violations are found. Then he would be arrested based on those, mirandized and interviewed about the new crime. Either way, the arraignment is for the parole violations. He cannot be arraigned for the assault until charges have been filed and submitted to the prosecutor, authorized and signed by a judge or magistrate. Granted, if there are felony charges, or an in-progress misdemeanor, he would remain in custody while all that happens within 24 hours (usually less).
aduggs
Sat, Aug 20, 2011 : 4:02 a.m.
Look on the bright side, us taxpayers do not have to foot the bill for incarcerating this guy. The Ann Arbor elected officials and the AAPD should both be ashamed of themselves. They do not make money to pay for the new City Hall by catching rapists, they make money by picking on innocent people. If you are a woman in AA at least carry pepper spray because you cannot count on the police for anything other than a fine. As a UM alumnus, I have had multiple encounters with 'rogue' police offices who purposefully pick on/fine college students just to make a few $100. Mean while they let rapists roam the streets - whatever it takes to feed the beast that is government.
muttslt
Sat, Aug 20, 2011 : 3:24 p.m.
Just an FYI, UMPD, not AAPD. They are separate agencies.
Kai Petainen
Sat, Aug 20, 2011 : 2:27 a.m.
wow. That was fast...
Kai Petainen
Sat, Aug 20, 2011 : 12:51 p.m.
HA! i love sarcasm.... hahaha... ah, that was funny.
Macabre Sunset
Sat, Aug 20, 2011 : 4:39 a.m.
Yeah. They caught him idling his car in a fast-food drive-through lane. He was also reported to be eying ducklings in a malicious manner.
Sallyxyz
Sat, Aug 20, 2011 : 2:19 a.m.
This person has no know address in the Sex Offenders Registry, and they let him out??? I can't believe it. How can they find him if he doesn't show up on Aug 31? Never should have let him out.
RJA
Fri, Aug 19, 2011 : 8:53 p.m.
Just so happy that I am NOT a ( person of interest) to anyone other than family and friends.
West of Main
Fri, Aug 19, 2011 : 8:40 p.m.
Released on a personal recognizance bond? Is that it? Is this the message you want to send just weeks after a rash of sexual assaults?
Matt Cooper
Mon, Aug 22, 2011 : 12:47 a.m.
What crime did he commit? Not registering on the sex offenders list? Ok. So what? That crime has nothing whatever to do with the recent attacks on Ann Arbor's female population. Has he been charged in those attacks? Has he been convicted of having anything to do with those attacks? Is he even a suspect in those attacks? No, no and no (being a "person of interest" is NOT the same as being a suspect, despite what some here claim). And yet people like you would have him locked away without bail for an indeterminate time for a crime that the police aren't even remotely sure he had anything to do with. We have a "due process clause" in the US Constitution which says "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." Maybe you should read up on it a bit.
West of Main
Sun, Aug 21, 2011 : 4:19 a.m.
Except he did, to the best of our knowledge, commit a crime. A felony, in fact. And the crime came to law enforcement's attention after he was identified as a "person of interest" in an attack. I understand your desire for prudence, but don't you think you're going a little too far to defend this guy?
Matt Cooper
Sun, Aug 21, 2011 : 2:17 a.m.
So he can flee. So what? For just as much as you say he might have committed any of these crimes, he also might not have. Would you rather punish a man for something you cannot prove he's done? Secondly, his sex offender status has nothing to do with anything related to the attacks currently being investigated. I stole a car when I was 19. Does that automatically make me a suspect in every car theft in Washtenaw County? I think what you are looking for is a reason to pin something on him that as yet has not been proven, or even suspected, that he did. And until he is convicted in a court of law, rather than in a court of public opinion, the court acted as it should in doing its best to guaranteeing his appearance at his next court date. Anything beyond that, such as keeping him locked up pending the outcome of the assault investigation, is tantamount to punishment for something he may not have done. That's not how our system of jurisprudence works, thank God!!
Joe Kidd
Sat, Aug 20, 2011 : 10:55 p.m.
You are right too Matt but a $10,000 PR bond means he owes the court $10000 if he does not show up for his preliminary exam. He did not have to post the $10000. So he has the ability to flee, which is not good. He is a sex offender and obviously is not concerned with following the law.
Matt Cooper
Sat, Aug 20, 2011 : 1:29 a.m.
Absolutely correct, Peregrine! Bail is not a punishment, it is an assurance the person will appear in court at a later date. Nor is bail used to "send a message". While Taylor may be a "person of interest", he has been convicted of nothing related to the recent assaults, therefore he cannot be punished (until and unless he is convicted of any criminal charges in those cases).
Peregrine
Sat, Aug 20, 2011 : 12:21 a.m.
Bail should be based on seriousness of charges and likelihood of fleeing. Bail should not be set to a value to send a message in light of recent events. Further, he was not charged with assaulting anyone, although he's apparently a "person of interest" in that case.