Skip to main content

Police Beat: Batavia man accused of imitating girl's father to get her released from school early

By Howard B. Owens

An 18-year-old Batavia man allegedly called a Byron-Bergen School and imitated a girl's father to get her released from school early.

There was reportedly a court order in place requiring the man not contact the girl.

Arrested by the Sheriff's Office was Michael Aaron Witkop of Ross Street.

He is charged with criminal contempt, 2nd, and criminal impersonation, 2nd.

Witkop was jailed on $250 bail.

Doug Yeomans

Yeah Bob, he sounds like a real troublemaker:

Posted by Howard Owens on July 8, 2010 - 9:27am
Michael Aaron Witkop, 18, of Ross Street, Batavia, is charged with unlawful possession of fireworks, possession of alcohol under 21 and inadequate vehicle exhaust mechanism. Witkop was stopped at 1:54 a.m. by Deputy Patrick Reeves on Law Street, Batavia for an alleged traffic violation. He was allegedly found in possession of fireworks and alcohol.

C'mon, don't you remember being 18? I had alcohol and fireworks when I was 18 and I even went skinny dipping with my girlfriend (and more) and look at me now! Oh my, lock me away and toss the key! True enough, it was legal to possess alcohol when I was 18. I'm pretty sure the muffler was falling off of any vehicle I owned when I was 18, too.

We don't know all the details about the entire case. something tells me there's a reason why bail was only $250.

It's the job of the police to make arrests. That's what we pay them for. It's then up to the D.A. or a grand jury to decide weather or not to send the accused to trial, court or some other form of adjudication.

I'd rather give the lad the benefit of a doubt than to immediately string him up by his trouble makers. Young people do silly things and take risks.

Mike Witkop just sounds like a bit of a wild boy to me which isn't always a bad thing. Should he be held accountable? Sure. Should we dismiss him as a cancer on society as of yet? Not from what I see. Maybe someone who actually knows him can give us a peer review.

Dec 2, 2010, 11:30am Permalink
Bea McManis

Doug,
There is a difference between sowing wild oats (which has it's own consequences) and violating an order of protection.
What part of violating an order of protection do you find worthy of ignoring because the kid is a somewhat of a 'wild boy'?

Dec 2, 2010, 11:37am Permalink
Peter O'Brien

The order of protection could have come from the girls parents.

So the kid wanted to see a girl he liked that her parents probably disapprove of. No big deal. There is no evidence that he was going to harm her. More than likely he was going to take her out.

Dec 2, 2010, 12:03pm Permalink
Beth Kinsley

Sorry but the order of protection could not have come from the girl's parents. That's just not how it works. Generally you can only get an order of protection if there are some kind of criminal charges or through a family offense petition in Family Court. An Order of Protection is not easy to get in NYS.

Dec 2, 2010, 1:17pm Permalink
Bea McManis

Beth is right. I was awarded an order of protection and didn't even know about it until I received notice in the mail by the court. I did not go to court nor did I ask for the order.
Not to say I didn't appreciate it, but it did come as a surprise.

Dec 2, 2010, 2:10pm Permalink
George Richardson

Beth, my mother in law thought I had a dirty mouth but I loved her until she loved me and now she is dead. I have always had a dirty mouth but I've been married for thirty three years, because that was my worst trait. Give peace a chance. Love and trust your girls like they love and trust you, and you know they do. Oh yes, you know they do.

Dec 2, 2010, 3:21pm Permalink
Doug Yeomans

Bea, I said he should be held accountable. I was addressing Bob Harker's statement that Mike is a threat to the girl.

If Mike called the school to try and convince them that he is the girls father, then the girl was in on the plan, too. If she was afraid of him then she sure wouldn't be willing to skip out of school on a plan that's destined to fail. C'mon...really...c'mon...

Dec 2, 2010, 3:22pm Permalink
Brenda Ranney

Checked his fb page.
His friends list reads like a BHS roll call. While my daughter's are included my niece is. Also a few church family's daughters. Then there's girls I know by way of sports teams.
More than likely Doug, there is an acquaintance, friend, or relatives child on his friend's list that you know also.
What would you say to someone you know asking,"Have you seen my child, she gone and I don't know where"?

Considering the road conditions of late ...

Dec 2, 2010, 4:33pm Permalink
Bob Harker

Doug:

"If Mike called the school to try and convince them that he is the girls father, then the girl was in on the plan, too."

How can you possibly assume that??!!

Also, the claims of the order of protection coming from the parents are ridiculous. Orders of protection come from the courts - a judge obviously had reason to believe that this girl was at risk from this boy - whether she their relationship is consensual or not.

Dec 2, 2010, 9:24pm Permalink
Jacob Bell

See here the thing. I know him, good friend of mine. Hes being railroaded by a onesided justice system and a ex girlfriend who at the time was REALLY pissed off. Hes not a preditor or a threat to people or anyone. This incident was just him being REALLY REALLY REALLY stupid and trust me, he regrets it. Im not going to say anymore about this incident because its pending and frankly, none of you peoples busniess.
Im not going to sit here and listen to you people who dont even know ANYTHING about him say this crap. Pretty sure you people arnt exactly the model of Jesus. Theres alot more to this story then what Howard is reporting so lets not cast judgements

Dec 2, 2010, 10:00pm Permalink
Beth Kinsley

The parents issued an Order of Protection? NOT! The parents may have called the police and started the wheels in motion but only a court can issue the order.

Dec 2, 2010, 10:06pm Permalink
Jacob Bell

She under 18, which means her parents have controll which means its their call. Lady I know everything about the case, the kids one of my good friends. They are the ones who called the police and had the judge issue the order of protection.

Dec 2, 2010, 10:13pm Permalink
Howard B. Owens

Beth, correct me if I'm wrong, but based on all the times I've sat in court ...

When a person is charged with a crime, there is usually an alleged victim. As a matter of routine, the DA's office asks for a temporary order of protection baring the alleged offender from contact the alleged victim. After the person is convicted -- if convicted -- a longer term order of protection (for several years, usually) is put in place.

As we know, the alleged perpetrator in this case was also accused of sexual misconduct with a girl under 18 years of age. It's not far-fetched to assume she is the protected party in this case.

It would just be matter of standard procedure to have an order of protection -- probably a stay away order -- if that's the case.

There's no such thing as "the parents asking for it" in a matter such as this.

Further, orders of protection, in my view, serve two purposes. One is an attempt to restrain the conduct of an alleged offender; the second is in the victim's own best interest. In many cases (without speculating too much) a victim might act contrary to his or her own best interest by having contact with a person he or she is best not being in contact with. This is why police enforce an order of protection even when the protected party doesn't complain. This is particularly important in spousal/partner domestic violence situations. Not saying anything about this case, just saying that's the way it is.

Dec 2, 2010, 10:18pm Permalink
Bea McManis

Jacob,
Defending your friend is your right.
I will exercise my right in defending my friend, Beth.
She has forgotten more about the law than you will ever know.
She has a name, it's Beth. She is not referred to as "lady" using the inflection you used in your post.
Beth is well respected in her field of legal expertise. She works for a law office in Rochester.
Now, you may think you know all of the story, but it is quite apparent that some of that story is flawed regarding the legal process.
Please treat Beth with the respect she deserves.

Dec 3, 2010, 12:15am Permalink
Doug Yeomans

Beth, nice find on the police report I missed. I'm sure that's what the order of protection stems from, also. Laws can be so contradictory when it comes to young people and sex crimes. Kids have access to any form of birth control they want but when a barely 18 year old boy has sex with his girlfriend and she's under 17, the law wants to turn him into a sex offender. There are a few laws, designed to protect minors from predators, that can be used to destroy an individuals life when there was no predation occurring. I'm simply saying that the law should be a lot more forgiving in certain circumstances.

Before I turn this into a "who is more right or wrong" argument that really has no winners, especially myself, let me reiterate my original point. Bob Harker scoffed at the $250 bail. I pretty much said there's probably a lot we do not know about that specific case to question why bail was only set at $250. I elaborated about remembering being an 18 year old and doing dumb things. I was just trying to point out to Bob that Mike just might not be the threat that that he painted him to be.

Here's what I believe to be a good source explaining why teenagers behave the way they do. Any parent should be able to attest to how frustrating it can be and the law should also take it into consideration:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=124119468

We expect young adults/old kids to be able to make fully rational decisions that adults (mature adults) take for granted but many times they simply can't.

Dec 3, 2010, 6:30am Permalink
Thomas Mooney

Beth you may have the legal knowledge but not the cooth to stay out of peoples life . Why would some one like you ,Bea and Doug look at the blotter and then investigate that person to see if this person has anty previous arrests .Are you that lonely that you have to psss judgement on people you have no clue about .Read the blotter and comment if you like but to search files and then comment like you know this person is obsurd

Dec 3, 2010, 8:02am Permalink
Howard B. Owens

There's nothing wrong with using the search feature on this site to see if somebody has been arrested before and why. That's part of the reason our archives are permanent.

Dec 3, 2010, 8:36am Permalink
bud prevost

posted by Thomas Mooney on Nov 10, 2010:

Jason Armstrong , another career criminal out from prison . Send this guy back upstate where he belongs , sick and tired of this system that keeps spitting back out criminals that deserve long prison terms . Probation , and parolle do not work for these type of criminals .

Mr.Mooney- sounds like you're a stone thrower living in a glass house. Beth Kinsley is a fine person, and she did nothing out of line. Don't object to her actions while your own seem to be similar.

Dec 3, 2010, 9:26am Permalink
Beth Kinsley

My only point was that a parent can't put an order of protection on someone as some people on here have said. They are usually ordered as the result of criminal charges and then I see that he has been arrested for sexual misconduct with an underage girl which explains a lot. I'm not saying whether those charges are correct or not. I don't know that facts of that case, especially the age of the victim.

Dec 3, 2010, 9:31am Permalink
Thomas Mooney

Bud , You are a perfect example of pulling out info you don't know about . The statement with Mr. Armstrong is a fact of knowledge that I have personaly delt with (nothing i looked up or reserched )Iknow this guy and what he has done in every detail . The mere fact that people post comments along with research tries to reiterate that they know what they are talking about . My gripe isn't so much with Beth because she does has have good legal knowledge but with the peolple that thrive on this web site to make people think something that is true when it is in fact not . I too know nothing of this case or the people and thats why I have not commented on the specifics .

Dec 3, 2010, 10:02am Permalink
Thomas Mooney

Bea , I am sorry for including you in this . I guess I included you because you felt the need to back Bath up as if she needed it . I feel that we as a whole on this site accuse or think we know someone because of what the rap sheet says or from past experiances that we may have . I too am guilty of this and I too will do a better job at not making assumptions . My point is this kid deserves a shot at defending him self in court and not have pre-trial judgements that alter what the public thinks of him . The info is out there , but do we realy need to post.If someone wants to pass judgement on him , let them do the research .

Dec 3, 2010, 10:13am Permalink
Peter O'Brien

Its threads like this that turn people like my wife away from posting here.

But not me.

I'm sorry but I refuse to believe that the parents were not involved in the original complaint about the sex. Therefore they are the originators of the order since they started the legal proceedings as far as I am concerned.

Moving on from that, its sad that this man could have his life ruined over some crazy crap. There are ways to deal with this type of thing without getting the law involved and instead people don't handle things themselves, they call the cops and use the court's time and the peoples money on a high school infatuation. What happened to the days of the father polishing his gun in his living room when the boyfriend comes along? Where are the boy's parents in ensuring their son isn't causing grief all over town? If this would have been me at 18, I would have been grounded regardless of my age and then kicked out of the house if I didn't follow my parents rules. But since this kid is still at the same address, I am going to guess that didn't happen.

This could evenly have been fixed with some tough love at home and would have saved the community from a lot of grief.

Dec 3, 2010, 11:10am Permalink
Bea McManis

Posted by Thomas Mooney on December 3, 2010 - 10:13am
Bea , I am sorry for including you in this . I guess I included you because you felt the need to back Bath up as if she needed it

Thomas,
As I said to Jacob, you have the right to defend your friend.
Just as I have the right to take offense at a slam hurled at a friend of mine.
Your apology is accepted.
Thanks.

Dec 3, 2010, 11:34am Permalink
Kyle Couchman

I just have an observation to convey with regards to Jacob and Thomas's comments. I have been in their position many times defending friends whom I thought were close and that I knew the inside story on.

However in my lifetime I have found that friends are not always totally honest, for whatever reason, embarassment, guilt or sometimes even downright deception to protect themselves. Very few times have I found that I had the whole truth.

I can appreciate Jacob and Thomas's feelings but you sometimes have to balance between belief and doubt as you really dont always get the whole picture, what you get is one side of the story and because of your relationship you tend to credit it much more than you should.

I'm just wondering if it's my choice of friends that I have had in this lifetime or has everyone had this experience.

Seems to me this is what police and courts and juries are for as everyone has a tendency to slant their story to their favor, it's human nature.

Maybe Jacob and Thomas need to keep that in mind before typing things that can come across slightly rude or condecending because they dont really know the whole story (Unless of course they were at the incident as witnesses)Just what they have been told.

It a humbling experience to have to eat crow when all the facts eventually come to light.

Dec 3, 2010, 12:29pm Permalink
Thomas Mooney

Kyle , I do not know any parties involved . What I am stating is that there is alot of accusations about this kid that none of us know to be true . Bea I understand where you are coming from and like a trial there are two lawyers with two different deffinations of the law and that is where I think Beth needs to realize that Judges make a judgement not us no matter what the story says .Who is realy right or wrong rarly do we ever know for sure and when we do it is an easy job for the judge.

Bud , There is only one hole that I am diging and it is not for me . I don't realy care what you think or say .Carma my friend , I am not afraid of it , but I would be if I were you .

Dec 3, 2010, 1:16pm Permalink
C. M. Barons

When I was asked by a PAC representing NYS justices for my opinion on raising salaries for judges in the state, my response was no. Part of my objection (aside from the fact that their earnings ARE on par with other professionals)- it is time we embrace alternatives to our current justice system. Community peer councils and mediators would be very effective in dealing with some of the matters that clog our courts and eat up tax dollars. For instance: the sign man Vs. Chris Charvella.

Dec 3, 2010, 2:06pm Permalink
C. M. Barons

Note- the judges just got their raise. Hawley voted in favor...

BILL NO A42010

SAME AS Same as S68010

SPONSOR Rules

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A42010 Text:
S T A T E O F N E W Y O R K
________________________________________________________________________

10

Third Extraordinary Session

I N A S S E M B L Y

November 29, 2010
___________

Introduced by COMMITTEE ON RULES -- (at request of the Governor) -- read
once and referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

AN ACT in relation to establishing a special commission on compensation,
and providing for their powers and duties; and to provide periodic
salary increases to state officers

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, REPRESENTED IN SENATE AND ASSEM-
BLY, DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

1 Section 1. (a) On the first of April of every fourth year, commencing
2 April 1, 2011, there shall be established for such year a commission on
3 judicial compensation to examine, evaluate and make recommendations with
4 respect to adequate levels of compensation and non-salary benefits for
5 judges and justices of the state-paid courts of the unified court
6 system. In accordance with the provisions of this section, the commis-
7 sion shall:
8 (i) examine the prevailing adequacy of pay levels and non-salary bene-
9 fits received by the judges and justices of the state-paid courts of the
10 unified court system and housing judges of the civil court of the city
11 of New York and determine whether any of such pay levels warrant adjust-
12 ment; and
13 (ii) determine whether, for any of the four years commencing on the
14 first of April of such years, following the year in which the commission
15 is established, the annual salaries for the judges and justices of the
16 state-paid courts of the unified court system and housing judges of the
17 civil court of the city of New York warrant adjustment.
18 In discharging its responsibilities under paragraphs (i) and (ii) of
19 this subdivision, the commission shall take into account all appropriate
20 factors including, but not limited to: the overall economic climate;
21 rates of inflation; changes in public-sector spending; the levels of
22 compensation and non-salary benefits received by judges, executive
23 branch officials and legislators of other states and of the federal
24 government; the levels of compensation and non-salary benefits received

EXPLANATION--Matter in ITALICS (underscored) is new; matter in brackets
[ ] is old law to be omitted.
LBD12081-06-0
A. 10 2

1 by professionals in government, academia and private and nonprofit
2 enterprise; and the state's ability to fund increases in compensation
3 and non-salary benefits.
4 (b) The commission shall consist of 7 members to be appointed as
5 follows: 3 shall be appointed by the governor; 1 shall be appointed by
6 the temporary president of the senate; 1 shall be appointed by the
7 speaker of the assembly; and 2 shall be appointed by the chief judge of
8 the state. Of the members appointed by an official pursuant to this
9 subdivision, where such official has more than one such appointment, at
10 least one-half (at least a majority, in the case of the governor) shall
11 not be employees of the state or any political subdivision thereof, and
12 at least one-half shall not be members of the bar of the state. The
13 governor shall designate the chair of the commission from among the
14 members so appointed. Vacancies in the commission shall be filled in the
15 same manner as original appointments. To the extent practicable, members
16 of the commission shall have experience in one or more of the following:
17 determination of executive compensation, human resource administration
18 and financial management.
19 (c) The commission may meet within and without the state, may hold
20 public hearings and shall have all the powers of a legislative committee
21 pursuant to the legislative law.
22 (d) The members of the commission shall receive no compensation for
23 their services but shall be allowed their actual and necessary expenses
24 incurred in the performance of their duties hereunder.
25 (e) No member of the commission shall be disqualified from holding any
26 other public office or employment, nor shall he or she forfeit any such
27 office or employment by reason of his or her appointment pursuant to
28 this section, notwithstanding the provisions of any general, special or
29 local law, regulation, ordinance or city charter.
30 (f) To the maximum extent feasible, the commission shall be entitled
31 to request and receive and shall utilize and be provided with such
32 facilities, resources and data of any court, department, division,
33 board, bureau, commission, agency or public authority of the state or
34 any political subdivision thereof as it may reasonably request to carry
35 out properly its powers and duties pursuant to this section.
36 (g) The commission may request, and shall receive, reasonable assist-
37 ance from state agency personnel as necessary for the performance of its
38 functions.
39 (h) The commission shall make a report to the governor, the legisla-
40 ture and the chief judge of the state of its findings, conclusions,
41 determinations and recommendations, if any, not later than one hundred
42 fifty days after its establishment. Each recommendation made to imple-
43 ment a determination pursuant to paragraph (ii) of subdivision (a) of
44 this section shall have the force of law, and shall supersede inconsist-
45 ent provisions of article 7-B of the judiciary law, unless modified or
46 abrogated by statute prior to April first of the year as to which such
47 determination applies.
48 (i) Upon the making of its report as provided in subdivision (h) of
49 this section, each commission established pursuant to this section shall
50 be deemed dissolved.
51 S 2. Date of entitlement to salary increase. Notwithstanding the
52 provisions of this act or of any other law, each increase in salary or
53 compensation of any officer or employee provided by this act shall be
54 added to the salary or compensation of such officer or employee at the
55 beginning of that payroll period the first day of which is nearest to
56 the effective date of such increase as provided in this act, or at the
A. 10 3

1 beginning of the earlier of two payroll periods the first days of which
2 are nearest but equally near to the effective date of such increase as
3 provided in this act; provided, however, the payment of such salary
4 increase pursuant to this section on a date prior thereto instead of on
5 such effective date, shall not operate to confer any additional salary
6 rights or benefits on such officer or employee.
7 S 3. The annual salaries as prescribed pursuant to this act for the
8 state-paid judges and justices of the unified court system whenever
9 adjusted pursuant to the provisions of this act, shall be rounded up to
10 the nearest multiple of one hundred dollars.
11 S 4. This act shall take effect immediately.

Dec 3, 2010, 2:38pm Permalink
Jacob Bell

Mooney is the only one who got the point of my statement. LEAVE HIM ALONE. You know nothing about the case or about him. You comment that his facebook is a BHS roll call, you think maybe that because we all went to BHS? Seems like a logical explanation to me. Then you go and make statement about his past event. The sexual misconduct is directly connected to this case, same girl. The fireworks and booze, great 4th of July party, you going to say you never did it when you were our age?

The sexual misconduct cases, along with ALL the other cases are still pending. I know every detail about all the cases and about him and the stuff you’re saying isn’t very adult of you people. You’re all passing judgment on something and someone you don’t know. So lets grow up and give the kid a chance?

Dec 3, 2010, 2:39pm Permalink
bud prevost

Thomas- it's "karma", not "carma", and I have no problem with who I am and what I do. I actually prefer "do unto others as they would do you".

Dec 3, 2010, 2:50pm Permalink

Authentically Local