On the surface, the ten year prison sentence in the case of Christopher Holden Fenn, 47, Mission Viejo, seems a bit harsh. After all, the only charges against the man relate to his rather unfortunate practice of sneaking up on women who happened to be alone in isolated areas, and appearing naked in front of them. He did not rape or sexually assault them. Apparently, he just liked scaring the heck out of them, and from the victim statement at the sentencing, he was pretty effective at that.

But, consider the case of Richard Lee Thompson, 48, of Lakewood. Thompson was convicted yesterday of killing a man by hitting his victim in the head with a pool cue during a barroom brawl. Thompson is facing only four years in prison and that’s the maximum. He is scheduled for sentencing on Feb. 19, 2010.

On March 17, 2008, Thompson started an argument over a beer with 44-year-old Steven Toole at Breaker's Bar in Cypress. The victim pushed the defendant, who fell to the floor. When Thompson stood up, he grabbed a nearby pool cue and swung it at the victim, striking him one time in the head with the fat end of the cue. The victim immediately collapsed and was taken to the hospital. Toole was placed on life support and died the next day.

Fenn, an insurance underwriter, pleaded guilty back in September to 27 felony counts of indecent exposure with a prior conviction from 1981 and one felony count of aggravated assault. He was sentenced earlier this week to ten years in state prison, plus Fenn will have to register as a lifetime sex offender.

According to Deputy District Attorney Robert Mestman of the Sexual Assault Unit and the prosecutor on this case, “There were some allegations where he actually physically grabbed the women, yelled at them, approached them, but he wasn’t charged with any assaults, other than the one count”. The assault charge was because Fenn threw a brick at a person who was chasing him when he was caught.

The press statement from the Orange County District attorney’s Office said “The flashing occurred in the early morning throughout south Orange County, on the way to his Santa Ana office, or near his Mission Viejo home, where he lived with his wife and four children.”

Fenn’s attorney, Joseph H. Low IV, of Long Beach, agreed that Fenn is a family man. “It’s a very close family and they’re very tight and they’re a very sweet family. They’re staying together and they’re waiting for daddy to come home.”

So, Thompson kills a man and will get, at most, 4 years, and Fenn goes around exposing himself, and he gets 10 years.

Prosecutor Mestman said of the Fenn case “It’s bizarre”. Mestman indicated that there was no psychiatric evaluation done on Fenn. “It’s an optional thing. He {Fenn} didn’t want to do it. I had asked for one, he didn’t want to do one, and I couldn’t force him to do it.”

According to Fenn’s attorney Low, a psychiatric examination would not have been helpful in Fenn’s defense. “It would have to be the kind of mental disorder where the guy was completely unaware of what it was, or could not appreciate, what it was he was doing in any way, shape, or form. There’s no evidence whatsoever that this guy was mentally incapacitated.”

Mestman indicated that the exposure charges against Fenn became felonies because of his prior convictions on 3 indecent exposure charges back in 1981. In addition to the prior charges, Mestman said “We suspected him in over 100 incidences over several years throughout Orange County, so it was an aggravated case.”
The DA dropped several counts in exchange for the guilty plea. Mestman said “He {Fenn} was looking at over 40 years if he went to trial. It was a strong case, he probably didn’t want to risk going to prison for over 40 years. He essentially terrorized several communities in Orange County over several years. He would always approach women when they were by themselves, in a vulnerable position, early morning, in parks, when they were walking their dogs, jogging by themselves. A lot of women were terrorized.”

But, Low indicated many of the counts were based on greatly varying witness descriptions of the perpetrator and that some of the counts could not have been done by Fenn. Low said many of the charges, “I thought, were not provable in any way. In fact, they didn’t have what they needed. He would have walked {been exonerated} on most of them, but in a worse case scenario, he gets nailed on 2, 3, 4, or 5 of them, it’s over.” Low indicated that this case was primarily a witness identification case and the descriptions varied greatly. “They had him from 5’6’, 105 pounds, no body hair, or, 6’5’ and really chubby, it was allover the charts.”

So, they decided to plead guilty in exchange for a lesser sentence. Low said “When you risk going to trial on all those counts, even if you got convicted on just one, the judge can use all the other ones for sentencing.”