Hundreds of new charges filed in Ohio
COLUMBUS, Ohio — Month after month, year after year, the decade-long ordeal of three Cleveland women takes shape in the charges against the man accused of imprisoning them: August 2002, kidnapping. October 2005, rape. November 2006, aggravated murder.
Christmas Day 2006, rape.
A new 977-count indictment filed Friday provides a numbing look at what prosecutors say was 10 years of captivity for the three women in suspect Ariel Castro's home in a rough Cleveland neighborhood. Among the most serious charges: that he caused the death of one of his victims' fetuses by punching and starving her.
Among the most haunting: that he assaulted the women throughout their captivity, causing psychological harm to them and to the daughter he fathered with one of them through assault. And in another newly revealed accusation, the indictment also alleges that on the same day that the child was born, Christmas of 2006, Castro raped one of the other women, who had helped deliver the baby.
“Today's indictment moves us closer to resolution of this gruesome case,” Cuyahoga County Prosecutor Tim McGinty said in a statement.
Castro, 53, is accused of kidnapping the three women and holding them captive — sometimes restrained in chains — along with the 6-year-old girl he fathered. The women disappeared separately between 2002 and 2004.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Bomb plot trial ends in Saudi’s conviction
- FCC plays net traffic cop
- Devoted California couple dies within 5 hours of each other
- Loose llamas corralled on Arizona street
- Regulators approve tougher rules for Internet providers
- French bulldog joins top 10 list in U.S.
- Heavy snow cuts power, snarls travel across South
- Vote puts federal prosecutor Lynch closer to Attorney General’s Office
- Russian threat via cyber on the rise, says U.S. intelligence assessment
- White House won’t snub pro-Israel lobby
- Impasse over funding for Department of Homeland Security likely will go to wire