Sex Offender Is Put on Probation : Huntington Harbour Man Spent 2 Years in State Hospital

A wealthy Huntington Harbour man who has spent almost 2 1/2 years in a state mental hospital for sex offenses was released Thursday on five years’ probation by an Orange County Superior Court judge.

John Steen, now 58, pleaded no contest in 1982 to eight counts of sexual misconduct with two girls, ages 8 and 13, and was declared a mentally disordered sex offender. A judge refused his request to be placed in a private institution and sent him instead to Patton State Hospital in San Bernardino County.

Doctors there, as well as officials of the Orange County Probation and Mental Health departments, recommended Steen’s release for outpatient treatment, Judge James L. Smith said Thursday.

“I . . . recognize that it’s going to be an unpopular decision,” Smith said before announcing his sentence. Smith said he is “dismayed” by the public’s lack of faith in the recommendations of penal and mental health authorities.

But the father of the younger victim said he is “terribly disappointed” with Steen’s release. The father, who has filed a $600,000 lawsuit against Steen, read in court a statement urging the maximum penalty of 22 years’ imprisonment for Steen, whom he termed “the ringleader--the most culpable, responsible adult” in the group of six people that molested the girls.

Activity Videotaped

The group had videotaped the sexual activity, and the tapes were found after police learned of the sexual activity at Steen’s home. The molestation came to light when the 13-year-old’s aunt intercepted a letter written by her niece telling Steen and his wife that she wanted to quit her relationship with them.

Steen was not shown participating in sex acts on the videotapes, said Deputy Dist. Atty. Ken Chinn, but he said the 13-year-old victim told investigators he had engaged in oral copulation and other sexual activity with her.

Steen already has been “treated much more severely and much more harshly” than the five others involved in the case who actually molested the girls, Smith said.

All but one received three years’ probation and jail terms of between 45 days and one year, Chinn said. Steen’s wife, Christi, spent less than two years at Patton State Hospital before she was released for outpatient therapy.

“I’m impressed with the kindness and leniency the court has shown this man,” said the father, whose name was withheld by The Times to protect his daughter’s identity. That treatment, the father said, made him feel he “should go home and chastise my daughter for molesting this man . . . .”

“It is absolutely clear that playing card games at Patton State Hospital is not punishment,” said the father, his voice cracking as he reached for a cup of water. Releasing Steen would “send a signal to all child molesters: . . . They will never have to set foot in prison.”

‘Not a Country Club’

Life in a state hospital is similar to that in prison, Smith responded. Patton “is a lock-down custody facility. It’s not a country club; it’s not a health spa.”

The father walked out of the courtroom while the judge was speaking, soon after it had become clear that Smith would impose a light sentence. Steen, who made no statement at the hearing, sat silently, occasionally nodding in agreement with the judge’s remarks.

As he left the courtroom, Steen would neither comment on the sentence nor discuss his plans beyond visiting the county probation office. He would not say if he plans to remain in Orange County.

When asked if he felt remorse for his actions, Steen answered softly, “Of course.”

Under the terms of his probation, Steen and his property will be subject to search and seizure by police or probation officers without a warrant, his travel will be restricted and he will not be allowed contact with minors except in the presence of an adult sanctioned by the Probation Department.

Defense attorney James Riddet said he considers those conditions, recommended by the prosecutor, reasonable and appropriate. Chinn had requested the maximum 22-year sentence, asking the judge to consider “the severity of the crimes and the effect” on the victims.