Score:   1
Docket Number:   ND-OK  4:20-cr-00064
Case Name:   USA v. Heiner
  Press Releases:
United States Attorney Trent Shores announced today the results of the June Federal Grand Jury A.

“The federal justice system continues, as it must, even during a public health crisis and civil unrest. Through it all, the men and women of the United States Attorney’s Office continue working with our law enforcement partners to protect and serve the public,” said U.S. Attorney Trent Shores. “The grand jury indictments returned this week involved allegations of child sex trafficking, possession and distribution of child pornography, and federal firearms violations.”

The following individuals have been charged with violations of United States law in indictments returned by the Grand Jury. The return of an indictment is a method of informing a defendant of alleged violations of federal law, which must be proven in a court of law beyond a reasonable doubt to overcome a defendant’s presumption of innocence.

Luis Alberto Garcia. Possession of a Firearm by an Alien Illegally in the United States. Garcia, 39, of Broken Arrow, is charged with knowingly possessing a Kimber .380 ACP caliber pistol and associated ammunition while being an alien illegally residing in the United States. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Homeland Security Investigations, the Tulsa Police Department, and Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives are the investigative agencies.

Thomas James Heiner. Sex Trafficking of a Child. Heiner, 55, of Langley, is charged with sex trafficking of a child. Heiner was apprehended while attempting to purchase an 11-year-old child to engage in sex acts with him. A press release announcing initial charges by Criminal Complaint was issued on May 22, 2020, and can be found here. The FBI, Tulsa Police Department, and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Homeland Security Investigations are the investigative agencies.

Joel Daniel Padilla-Rojas. Unlawful Reentry of a Removed Alien. Padilla-Rojas, 35, of Tulsa, is charged with reentry of a removed alien, having returned to the United States unlawfully after being deported June 4, 2009, at or near Laredo, Texas. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Enforcement and Removal Operations (ICE-ERO), the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives and Tulsa Police Department are the investigative agencies.

Jeffrey Rahn Reetz. Felon in Possession of Firearms and Ammunition; Possession of Child Pornography (superseding). Reetz, 66, of Claremore, is charged with being a felon in possession of a Mosin-Nagant bolt-action 7.62 caliber rifle; a Kimber .45 caliber pistol; a Beretta 9 mm pistol; a Springfield Arms bolt-action .30 caliber rifle; a Derringer .32 caliber pistol; a New Haven Mossberg 12 gauge shotgun; a Savage Arms .223 caliber rifle; an Olympic Arms 12 gauge shotgun; a Hopkins & Allen .22 caliber revolver; and 1,421 rounds of ammunition. Reetz is also charged with knowingly possessing and accessing with intent to view child pornography from January 2017 to January 23, 2020. The images included a prepubescent minor and a minor who had not attained 12 years of age. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Homeland Security Investigations is the investigative agency.

Herbert Dewayne Reyes. Sex Trafficking of a Child; Sexual Exploitation of a Child; Receipt of Child Pornography. Reyes, 43, of Bristow, is charged with sex trafficking of a child from June 1, 2019, through Aug. 22, 2019. Reyes is also charged with sexual exploitation of a child. He is alleged to have enticed and coerced the minor to engage in sexually explicit conduct in order to make images of those sex acts. Finally, Reyes is charged with receiving electronic images of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct. The Bristow Police Department is the investigative agency.

Kevin Edward Swarthout. Distribution and Receipt of Child Pornography; Possession of Child Pornography. Swarthout, 47, of Tulsa, is charged with knowingly receiving and distributing child pornography from December 25, 2019, through May 12, 2020. Swarthout is also charged with possessing and accessing child pornography from Dec. 25, 2019, through May 12, 2020. The child pornography included images of one prepubescent minor and a minor that had not attained 12 years of age. Swarthout was previously convicted of possessing child pornography on Nov. 6, 20o0, in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma. A press release announcing initial charges by Criminal Complaint was issued on May 2o, 2020, and can be found here. The Carter County Sheriff’s Department, Tulsa Police Department, Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation, and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Homeland Security Investigations are the investigative agencies.

Daniel Brent Woodson. Distribution and Receipt of a Visual Depiction of a Minor Engaged in Sexually Explicit Conduct. Woodson, 42, of Collinsville, is charged with knowingly receiving and distributing child pornography from Dec. 15, 2017, to May 20, 2020. Woodson was previously convicted of possession with intent to promote child pornography and with possession of child pornography in Galveston County, Texas, on Jan. 30, 2015. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Homeland Security Investigations is the investigative agency.

An Oklahoma marijuana distributor made an initial appearance in federal court today for allegedly soliciting a woman to molest her 11-year-old child in exchange for help with living expenses, announced U.S. Attorney Trent Shores.

Thomas James Heiner, 55, of Langley, was charged by Criminal Complaint with sex trafficking of a child.

“The allegations in this Complaint are utterly reprehensible,” said U.S Attorney Trent Shores. “One of our most important missions at the United States Attorney’s Office is seeking justice for child victims who have been sexually exploited by adults. It is my intention to bring the full force of the law against this defendant. Moreover, we will argue for his detention while he awaits trial because we believe he poses a significant threat to children in our community and others. This child sex trafficking investigation and arrest are great examples of the important work being done by the FBI, Tulsa Police Department, and Homeland Security Investigations. When these law enforcement entities team up, Tulsans are most certainly safer and criminals are held accountable.”

During a routine traffic stop on May 16, 2020, a woman reported to the officer that on multiple occasions a man known as “Sasquatch” offered her cash payments, assistance on car payments, and a place to live if she would allow him to molest her daughter while the two adults had sex. According to court documents, “Sasquatch” told the woman that he had previously done the same with an ex-girlfriend and her daughter. The woman reported that the man lived in Langley, Oklahoma, and formerly in Utah. Later, authorities learned the suspect’s name was Thomas Heiner.

On May 17, Heiner allegedly called the woman again and asked her and her minor daughter to meet in a Tulsa hotel room to engage in sex acts. On May 19, at the direction of the FBI, the woman took part in several telephone calls with Heiner, which were observed and recorded by FBI and Tulsa Police Department personnel. According the court documents, Heiner discussed in detail how the two could groom the young girl and coerce her to take part in sex acts with them. Heiner is also alleged to have described how he previously molested a 7-year-old child on at least two occasions.

"The arrest of Thomas James Heiner demonstrates our ongoing commitment to apprehending those who prey on innocent children," said Melissa Godbold, Special Agent in Charge of the FBI Oklahoma City Division. "The alleged actions of Mr. Heiner are not only a violation of the law, but can cause irreparable harm to the mental and physical well-being of young victims. This kind of behavior cannot be tolerated."

“In law enforcement, we deal with reprehensible acts that decent, law abiding human beings could not possibly fathom,” said Tulsa Chief of Police Wendell Franklin. “This is another case which destroys the innocence of a child and touches the heart of every justice official involved in the investigation. Tulsa Police Department extends our heart to child victims who have endured abuse. May the work performed by our agency and our federal partners—the FBI, Homeland Security Investigations, and U.S. Attorney’s Office—be feared by any criminal looking to exploit our innocent children.”

A Complaint is a temporary charge alleging a violation of law. For the case to proceed to trial, the United States must present the charge to a federal Grand Jury within 30 days of the defendant’s initial appearance in federal court. Once a Grand Jury returns an Indictment, a defendant has a right to a jury trial at which the United States would have the burden of proving the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

The FBI, Tulsa Police Department, and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Homeland Security Investigations are the investigative agencies. Assistant U.S. Attorneys Christopher J. Nassar and Edward Snow are prosecuting the case.

Every day, law enforcement and U.S. Attorneys’ Offices across our nation dedicate themselves to finding justice for missing and exploited children. On May 25, our country recognizes National Missing Children’s Day. President Ronald Reagan proclaimed May 25, 1983, the first National Missing Children’s Day in memory of 6-year-old Etan Patz, who disappeared while walking to his bus stop in lower Manhattan on May 25, 1979. National Missing Children’s Day honors his memory as well as those children still missing. Etan’s killer was convicted in February 2017 for the 1979 murder, but the case remains active with the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children because his body was never found.

Description: The fiscal year of the data file obtained from the AOUSC
Format: YYYY

Description: The code of the federal judicial circuit where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: The code of the federal judicial district where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: The code of the district office where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: Docket number assigned by the district to the case
Format: A7

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which cannot be modified by the court
Format: A3

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which can be modified by the court
Format: A3

Description: A sequential number indicating whether a case is an original proceeding or a reopen
Format: N5

Description: Case type associated with the current defendant record
Format: A2

Description: Case type associated with a magistrate case if the current case was merged from a magistrate case
Format: A2

Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, defendant number, and reopen sequence number
Format: A18

Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, and reopen sequence number
Format: A15

Description: The docket number originally given to a case assigned to a magistrate judge and subsequently merged into a criminal case
Format: A7

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a magistrate case
Format: A3

Description: The status of the defendant as assigned by the AOUSC
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the fugitive status of a defendant
Format: A1

Description: The date upon which a defendant became a fugitive
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which a fugitive defendant was taken into custody
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date when a case was first docketed in the district court
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which proceedings in a case commenced on charges pending in the district court where the defendant appeared, or the date of the defendant’s felony-waiver of indictment
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: A code used to identify the nature of the proceeding
Format: N2

Description: The date when a defendant first appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: A code indicating the event by which a defendant appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant
Format: N2

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the highest severity
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE1
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE1
Format: A3

Description: The FIPS code used to indicate the county or parish where an offense was committed
Format: A5

Description: The date of the last action taken on the record
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which judicial proceedings before the court concluded
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which the final sentence is recorded on the docket
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which the case was closed
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The total fine imposed at sentencing for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and a fine was imposed
Format: N8

Description: A count of defendants filed including inter-district transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants filed excluding inter-district transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of original proceedings commenced
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants filed whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated including interdistrict transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated excluding interdistrict transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of original proceedings terminated
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period including long term fugitives
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period excluding long term fugitives
Format: N1

Description: The source from which the data were loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: A10

Description: A sequential number indicating the iteration of the defendant record
Format: N2

Description: The date the record was loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: Statistical year ID label on data file obtained from the AOUSC which represents termination year
Format: YYYY

Data imported from FJC Integrated Database
Magistrate Docket Number:   ND-OK  4:20-mj-00127
Case Name:   USA v. Heiner
Description: The fiscal year of the data file obtained from the AOUSC
Format: YYYY

Description: The code of the federal judicial circuit where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: The code of the federal judicial district where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: The code of the district office where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: Docket number assigned by the district to the case
Format: A7

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which cannot be modified by the court
Format: A3

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which can be modified by the court
Format: A3

Description: A sequential number indicating whether a case is an original proceeding or a reopen
Format: N5

Description: Case type associated with the current defendant record
Format: A2

Description: Case type associated with a magistrate case if the current case was merged from a magistrate case
Format: A2

Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, defendant number, and reopen sequence number
Format: A18

Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, and reopen sequence number
Format: A15

Description: The docket number originally given to a case assigned to a magistrate judge and subsequently merged into a criminal case
Format: A7

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a magistrate case
Format: A3

Description: The status of the defendant as assigned by the AOUSC
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the fugitive status of a defendant
Format: A1

Description: The date upon which a defendant became a fugitive
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which a fugitive defendant was taken into custody
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date when a case was first docketed in the district court
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which proceedings in a case commenced on charges pending in the district court where the defendant appeared, or the date of the defendant’s felony-waiver of indictment
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: A code used to identify the nature of the proceeding
Format: N2

Description: The date when a defendant first appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: A code indicating the event by which a defendant appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant
Format: N2

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the highest severity
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE1
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE1
Format: A3

Description: The FIPS code used to indicate the county or parish where an offense was committed
Format: A5

Description: The date of the last action taken on the record
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which judicial proceedings before the court concluded
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which the final sentence is recorded on the docket
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which the case was closed
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The total fine imposed at sentencing for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and a fine was imposed
Format: N8

Description: A count of defendants filed including inter-district transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants filed excluding inter-district transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of original proceedings commenced
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants filed whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated including interdistrict transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated excluding interdistrict transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of original proceedings terminated
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period including long term fugitives
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period excluding long term fugitives
Format: N1

Description: The source from which the data were loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: A10

Description: A sequential number indicating the iteration of the defendant record
Format: N2

Description: The date the record was loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: Statistical year ID label on data file obtained from the AOUSC which represents termination year
Format: YYYY

Data imported from FJC Integrated Database
F U C K I N G P E D O S R E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E