A former Norwalk resident was sentenced to a dozen years in prison for five sex crimes.
During his sentencing hearing Thursday in Huron County Common Pleas Court, Norvell T. McIntire, 45, of Sandusky, could have received as many as 20 years in prison and at least $25,000 in fines for the five felony convictions involving minors.
Assistant prosecutor Jennifer Deland asked Judge James Conway to impose the maximum sentence.
“This man has been convicted of the most serious of crimes known to man, that of rape, rape against a child,” Deland said. “He has caused serious harm, serious psychological harm to all of these children. One of them is still seeking help. … These children have to live with this for the rest of their lives. And they have now been stripped of their childhood.”
She added that McIntire never seemed moved to remorse in any of his previous trials or cases.
“He has many previous felonies and assaults, some of the same nature,” Deland continued. “Each and every time he gets out, he continues to commit crimes. He has never shown any remorse for any of his victims nor the crimes he has committed.”
Following a jury trial in May, McIntire was convicted of five crimes, including rape — a first-degree felony that carried a prison sentence of three to 11 years. McIntire received 10 years for the offense.
McIntire received one year each for separate counts of gross sexual imposition and attempted gross sexual imposition, both fourth-degree felonies.
He also received two years in prison for the count of the third-degree felony of importuning and 60 days in jail for the second-degree misdemeanor of public indecency.
Conway said that not all of the terms would run consecutively. Conway said the count of rape, importuning and public indecency would be served together for a total of 10 years, and then McIntire would have to serve one year each for the counts of gross sexual imposition and attempted gross sexual imposition “to emphasize that they were different victims.”
Conway also required that McIntire register as a tier-three sex offender. McIntire, however, refused to sign the papers.
Conway advised McIntire that by signing the paper, it could be said that McIntire had been cooperative and would have a better chance at receiving approval for programs that could help him. McIntire still refused to sign.
“I refuse to sign,” he said. “I just decided not.”
Conway told the defendant he would mark the document as “Refused to Sign” but that he would still have to go to the sheriff’s office and register there as a third tier sex offender. If he refuses to cooperate there, it would result in another felony charge that could result in a conviction and more prison time. McIntire said he understood, but added: “I’m not going to sign. You can mark it. I refuse to sign.”
On Thursday, McIntire was acquitted of a pair of importuning charges following a bench trial. The case involved a pair of teen girls.
The victims in the May trial also were girls, ages 11 and 14, and they both testified.
The 14-year-old girl was upstairs with McIntire when nobody else was home in August. When the victim walked away from McIntire, he grabbed her arm, pushed her onto a couch and fondled the girl as he held her down, DeLand said.
“He told her, ‘You like it.’ He told her, ‘Don’t tell anybody,” DeLand told jurors.
In the other incident at the same house that same month, the 11-year-old girl was sitting on a couch with McIntire.
The victim testified the man untied and pulled open his gym shorts and tried to get her to look at his private parts. The girl said she flexed her arm and pulled away when McIntire grabbed her arm and tried to get her to touch his penis. She then left the couch, had two of her friends come to the bathroom with her and she told them what happened.
Before the incidents, McIntire approached both girls, who are best friends, and asked them if he could touch their butts.
“We said no and walked away. When we walked away, he smacked our butts ... with his palm,” the younger girl said.
On Thursday, Conway ruled McIntire will receive sex-offender counseling while in prison, as the prosecutor requested.
“I feel sex offender counseling would be appropriate because he does not face a maximum of enough years that would be sufficient to keep him away for life,” Deland said. “He would be let back in society and I think he would continue to prey on young victims.”
One of the victims’ mothers, who attended the hearing, agreed.
“In my opinion, as soon as he gets out, he’ll do it again,” she told the judge. “He hurt my child. … I don’t want anyone else hurt, and the longer he is away, the less likely that is to happen.”