38 / CHRONICLESnhis client was merely defending himselfnagainst what he perceived, rightlynor wrongly, as a sexual advance. Afternall, Erickson was a grown man whosenproclivities were well-known; Westcottnwas just an innocent, frightened youngnboy, and state law does permit the usenof force in defending against sexualncontact.nErickson denied that he had gazednat . . .
Leave a Reply