YOUNGSTOWN — Arthur Carter, 49, a former Youngstown police officer who has served three years of his four-year prison sentence for committing sex offenses against three Ursuline High School girls, again is seeking early release from prison.

Carter pleaded guilty in July 2020 to three counts of felonious assault after he was indicted in 2018 on 23 sex charges involving the three students for incidents from 2001 to 2009. He began his prison sentence in September 2020.

Carter was employed by the Youngstown Police Department for almost 10 years and was placed on administrative leave after the initial allegations were made. His employment with the police department was terminated after he entered his guilty pleas.

Judge Anthony D’Apolito, who is presiding over the case, called Carter in 2020 a “father’s worst nightmare” and said Carter’s actions showed “sometimes you have to worry the most about the people you trust the most.”

TRACK COACH

Carter was assistant track coach at Ursuline when he committed the offenses.

D’Apolito said if a parent learned that a “coach, who is also a police officer” took an interest in their daughter, they might assume that was safe.

“Quite simply, he was a wolf in sheep’s clothing. He had the cover of being a police officer, of taking an oath to protect the public. He had the opportunity through being a coach to prey upon kids,” the judge said.

Letters written to the judge indicated that Carter had done a lot of good things, “but he has a very bad side as well,” D’Apolito said.

“He has hurt numerous people through his actions,” the judge said, including law enforcement “that don’t need another hit right now,” and “the victims, who he harmed for a lifetime.”

“He was their coach at different times. And over a period of years, he sexually abused each of these girls multiple times,” said Natasha Frenchko, who prosecuted the case for the Ohio Attorney General’s Office after then-county Prosecutor Paul Gains asked for a special prosecutor.

D’Apolito denied Carter’s earlier request for judicial release in July 2022. Judicial release involves an early release granted by the sentencing judge.

FAMILY NEEDS HIM

Carter’s attorney, Lynn Maro, stated in her July 20 motion for judicial release that Carter’s family needs him at home because of his wife’s illness and because of his son starting his senior year of high school this month.

“When Mr. Carter agreed to take the (plea) offer in this case, it was with the understanding that the three-year recommended sentence was acceptable” to the judge, she stated.

“Mr. Carter has been a model prisoner,” Maro stated. The institution report reflects his taking classes and having no disciplinary issues, she noted.

Maro also filed an additional exhibit in the case July 27. It was a letter from the Rev. Ken Rupert, who oversees the religious services department of the Toledo Correctional Institution, where Carter is housed. Rupert’s letter stated that he has provided pastoral care and spiritual guidance to Carter over the past two years.

The letter states that Carter has has attended worship services weekly since 2021 and completed several programs, including “an intensive prayer boot camp” and “Stepping up to Manhood Class.”

REDEMPTION

“I have seen Arthur anguished and critically examine his poor choices and decisions that led to his incarceration, in addition to accepting responsibility for his choices. Getting incarcerated individuals to identify, examine and take responsibility for their poor choices is not easy to do,” Rupert stated.

“In my 23 years of providing rehabilitative programming, incarcerated individuals who can cross this threshold are consistent with those who are ready to move forward in life as a r https://helpx.adobe.com/support/photoshop.html?mv=product&mv2=ps# esponsible citizen.”

He added that he thinks if Carter is released early, “he will be a responsible citizen as well as a redeemed father and husband, a good neighbor to others, as well as a law-abiding citizen.”

No hearing date has been scheduled on the matter, and there has been no response to the motion filed by the prosecution in opposition to the early release.