Bismarck Tribune - Bismarck News - Bismarck man facing charge

Bismarck man facing charge

Dec 30, 2008 - 04:05:20 CST

A Bismarck man has been accused of having forcible sexual contact with his tae kwon do student.

John Dvorak was charged Monday with Class Afelony gross sexual imposition.

South Central District Judge Robert Wefald set bond for Dvorak at $3,000 cash or surety.

According to a complaint in the case, Dvorak is accused of using force to engage in sexual contact with a Bismarck woman on Dec. 20.

Dvorak said in court that the woman was his student.

Burleigh County Assistant State's Attorney Cynthia Feland said Dvorak taught tae kwon do.

- Jenny Michael

News > Local

Printer friendly version Bismarck man facing charge

Comments

to no one you know wrote on Jan 18, 2009 8:10 PM:

" You think so, do you?

Well some men like to take advantage of young girls who can't fight back and ruin how they feel for the rest of their lives. It's just too bad that the man doesn't think about the fact that these actions could ruin a reputation.

Think about that. "

no one you know wrote on Jan 17, 2009 8:22 PM:

" actually, this case needs no further discussion. It's ridiculous as is...what are we wasting time with this case for? So much for innocent till proven guilty...some women think it's the opposite and just want to ruin someone's good reputation. "

Me wrote on Jan 15, 2009 11:42 PM:

" It's funny that after the comment from the online editor, no one seems to have any interest posting about this article.

Well I think it's worth discussing further. Does anyone know the status of this case? I'm wondering if he had a bond or bail....or whether there is any upcoming hearing? "

Online Editor wrote on Jan 7, 2009 11:26 AM:

" To readers, writers: Please focus on the story, not each other. "

Mike R wrote on Jan 7, 2009 11:10 AM:

" GG: I spend as much time with my kids as I can. Sadly, my present situation is such that I don't have them all the time. As far as not needing to defend myself - maybe. When someone is poking good natured fun of me, I am OK with that. But when someone is upset with me, calling me a know-it-all, I do take that personally. I do not think that I am vastly more intelligent ahn anyone else who posts on this blog (although I do wonder some days). I just have experience in certain areas where I am able to comment on a more factual basis on some issues. Some people get upset and call me a know-it-all because I go against thier popular "urban legand" beliefs, and then they resort to personal attacks. I have yet to see any of my attackers even try to find facts to prove me wrong on anything I have said. If I truely am nothing more than a blow-hard who doesn't really know what I am talking about, you would think it would be very easy to find the facts to prove me wrong. Since no one has done that yet, it is same to assume that I do in fact know what I am talking about when it comes to law enforcement topics. The true know-it-alls at the ones who attack me because they think they are the ones who know everything about how law enforcement works even though they have no training or experience at all in that field. They are what I commonly refer to as bar-room attornies. "

GG wrote on Jan 6, 2009 10:04 PM:

" To Mike R.; So, your not old,& you have a full time job,& you don't spend any time with your kids??? Just kidding Mike !! I agree with you 100%!! But, you need to stop defending yourself!! Your just giving people like,me! More to pick on you about!! My advice, as if you ask for it , is ignore that kind of stuff,& just comment on the blog!! After all, we don't know the real you, either !!!! "

Mike R wrote on Jan 6, 2009 9:21 PM:

" Pointless: This blog became about me, when somone thought it was better to comment about me and my blogging habits rather than make an actual comment on the story itself. Since that time, I have been defending myself. This blog would not be about me if someone else wouldn't have steered it that way. Personally, I would much rather it stay on point and not be about me, but that was someone else's choice. I am not even sure why the online editor allowed him to hijack this blog in that fashion.

As far as the actual story, I have seen well respected, high ranking people who are guilty of sexual assault even though no one believe they were capable of it. I have also seen the "victim" cry sexual assault out of revenge or when seeking attention and do unrepairable damage to a person's reputation. With the information printed on this case, I would say it could either way. There is not enough information here to make a determination either way. The only thing for sure is that it is going to get ugly there most likely will not be any clear cut winner. "

MIke R wrote on Jan 6, 2009 9:14 PM:

" Movin out: Please go back and re-read my initial post. Nowhere did I ever say (or even remotely imply) that I knew what happened. I said nothing of the sort. I do not know what went on or what was going through the guy's mind and my post CLEARLY states that. All I said is that it seems whenever a story like this gets printed, everyone defends the person based on his character and many times the person is guilty. I do not know if that is the case in this story or not and I freely admit that. I also pointed out that it is not uncommon for someone to cry sexual assault out of revenge, and that could just as eaily be the case as anything else. Only time will tell the whole story. I never once said anything but that. So please tell me how that translates into me being a know-it-all or thinking I know what was going on inside his head.

GG: I'm not old and I do have a full time job, but I do have lots of law enforcement experience. I use the computer in my spare time when I am not at work and don't have my kids with me. "

Movin Out wrote on Jan 6, 2009 5:51 PM:

" To mike r. Maybe people just don't like" Know It Alls. " I or you do not know what goes on in this guys head, Do WE?? "

Pointless wrote on Jan 6, 2009 3:56 PM:

" Excuse me, but Mike R, although you seem to know a lot on situations like this, I'm not sure when this blog became about you. I don't mean to offend you in any way, because you really do seem like an intelligent individual. However, this story is not about you or how much you know. It is about one man. John Dvorak. I will not go into detail, but I'm very close to this situation and I hope that, out of respect to the people involved or hurt by this incident, that we can keep the focus on the story at hand. That being said, Mike R, I would love to hear more about what you have to say about this situation, because you seem to have good insight.

I think we need to stop pointing fingers at anyone. We do not know whether this man is innocent or guilty. We also do not know that this girl made anything up or misconstrued something. Sexual preditors do not act like they are sexual preditors. Perhaps this situation happened exactly as it printed. Has no one taken that into account? "

david wrote on Jan 6, 2009 3:18 PM:

" First of all people, the article states" A bismarck man has been accused of having forcible sexual contact with his tae kwon do student" If we are to believe that he was breaking up a confrontation while in plain view of several people he and his wife invited over, than this would not be possible. The way the story reads it would appear there must be other circumstances involved besides a party with several people there. Alot of possitive comments were made for john's character, and if he's proven innocent I for one would not hesitate to get behind him and move forward. I would also get behind him to recover his expenses from the supposed victim. How bout anyone else? "

GG wrote on Jan 6, 2009 11:55 AM:

" To MIKE R.; There have been 8 of these blog's in the past 3 wks.,The tribune
doesn't change much!!
To enough already; Yes ,he has posted a lot of comments!! So, what?? Maybe,
he's an old guy who doesn't have much else to do?? Maybe,he's an old guy,who's
got a lot of experience?? I must admit I have also given him a bad time in the past!! That is what makes this all fun!!! CHILL OUT !!! Go outside if you have to!!!! "

For arguments Sake wrote on Jan 6, 2009 10:19 AM:

" Remember when Ted Bundy was finally caught, and all his neighbors, co-workers and friends could say was "He was the kindest gentlest person I have ever met. He was the 'boy next door'. I can't hardly believe he was capable of such things, it didn't seem like it could have been in his nature!". "

Mike R wrote on Jan 6, 2009 10:01 AM:

" Enough Already: I have NEVER claimed that I was an "expert" on any topic, but I have spent my almost my entire adult life working in the field of law enforcement. I have hundreds of hours of training on a variety of law enforcement topics. I have thousands of hours of real world experience dealing with a multitude of issues - many as an investigative role. There are very few law enforcement topics that could be discussed, that I have not dealt with in some manner in my career. Not saying that this makes me an expert, but I would have to say that gives me a perspective that most of the people blogging here do not have. Most of the stories I comment on are law enforcement related in some way - something that I do actually know about. I have said it many times before, instead of a personal attack, prove me wrong with undisputed facts. I have made the challange many times before and not once has any of the personal attackers even tried to do that. "

Enough Already wrote on Jan 6, 2009 9:08 AM:

" Okay Mike R: So you asked for someone to explain. I personally have attacked you before on this blog. What I want to know is how on every blog you state that you have dealt with that sort of incident and that makes you an expert on it. Every topic you blog on you act like you are an expert on and it is quite sickening after awhile. If you were an expert on everything you blog on then you should have quite a collection of college degrees on each and every different subject you are an expert on. It is rather annoying. You asked....I answered. "

OBE wrote on Jan 6, 2009 9:04 AM:

" There are several posts attesting that Mr. Dovak is a person of impeccable character. The name of his accuser is not published, but suppose there were just as many people who would attest that she was also a person of impeccable character? Then what? It seems to me some who have posted comments are already questioning the character of the woman. On what basis? I think that is wrong. What if it was your daughter or your wife? I don't know either of the individuals involved. However, I recently attended an excellent presentation on sexual assualt put on by the Abused Adult Resource Center. I learned that it is very common for us to think we would know someone who would commit a sexual assault if we saw them. You know, the creepy looking person in a dark alley. The reality is most of the time it is difficult to identify them. Many people who commit sexual assault are in fact percieved as very nice people. They might be community or church leaders. They are often very charming which they use to manipulate their victims. I am not saying Mr. Dovark is such a person. He is innocent until proven guilty. But I don't think it is appropriate to accuse the woman of being a lier or a person who hates men either. She should have her day in court too before any conclusions are made. "

justice for all wrote on Jan 6, 2009 8:30 AM:

" Sounds like the States atty office is at it again. If this guy is innocent they will not care, his friends will stick by him but proving his innocence will cost him in lawyer fees. I think the States attys get kick backs for not doing their homework and persuing the innocent. Just keeping the wheels of the justice system moving so they can afford a newer car. They should be buying a bowflex or some botox, maybe a cup of integrity. "

Kev wrote on Jan 5, 2009 9:08 PM:

" To Mike R. Okay I read "down by the rivers" comment. I think he is just asking others who comment on blogs why it seems that you are always commenting on so many articles? Another theory is he just wants to know if your an expert on the ones that you do comment on? I wouldn't and didn't find his words to be offensive by any means. If your have a problem with this then I suggest you have two options : 1. Ask the tribune to refrain from submitting response that may be offensive to another or 2. Refrain from blogging until things cool down. Mike~ If you have ever been on a debate team you find this often happens when people get so invovled discussing a topic that they say whatever comes out of their mouth without even thinking about what their saying to other person. Sorry if you found his comment to offensive,just try to move on from here and have a good week. "

W2 wrote on Jan 5, 2009 8:40 PM:

" Let's turn this incident 100% the other way. Suppose this woman used force to engage in sexual contact upon Mr. Dvorak. Would we even be talking about this much less it being reported to the police? This is just a supposition on my part.

From all the good things that have been said about Mr. Dvorak I am inclined to say that I think I smell a "SKUNK IN THE WEEDS". There are many women out there that have a horrible vengence against any and all males. "

Bono wrote on Jan 5, 2009 6:16 PM:

" Mike R - I think you have some good comments. Very opinionated sometimes but isn't that what makes the blogs interesting?

It is sad that a person can accuse someone of a heinous act and get away with it. A civil trial would cost way too much and the accused person is probably already tarred and feathered by his/her peers in this city.

And I think a lot of people use more than one user name to comment. You obviously don't so they like to attack. Don't let 'em get to ya! "

Mike R wrote on Jan 5, 2009 4:33 PM:

" J-Dog: I disagree with you that as a poster I must accept personal attacks. One of the unwritten "rules" of the tribune is that personal attacks which are not a comment of the actual story are not allowed. Therfore, I should not have to accept them. Besides, just as "down by the river" comments are his observation and opinion, my comments calling attention to the attack are my personal observation and opinion and are just as valid as his. Yet, you support his right to make his comments, but lecture me about mine. Isn't that hypocritical? "

J-Dog wrote on Jan 5, 2009 4:02 PM:

" Mike R. - Down by the Rivers comments are nothing more than an observation and an opinion of one person. Their opinionated comments are no more factual or meaningful than any of your opinions. The comments by Down By The River are not a personal attack on you. If people want to comment online, they must be willing to accept responses to their comments whether they are friendly, contradictory or attacking. "

MIke R wrote on Jan 5, 2009 12:14 PM:

" Kev: Have you read the comment by down by the river? If that isn't a personal attack, then I don't know what on earth it would be. "

Kev wrote on Jan 5, 2009 8:39 AM:

" Seriously people this blog is getting way out of line. The guy in this article is innocent until proven guilty and nothing more. As for Mike R. quit your whinning, you have the right to your opinion according to the first amendment ~freedom of speech. Your taking this way to personal. You need to realize that no one is attacking you because of your comment(s) on this blog or any other blog. I agree that other people on here express their opinion much more frequently then some others do and then their are some who just show pure hatered towards others in their blog enteries no matter what the story is about. This is nothing more then an opinion blog that is to be used from your point of view on a story and should be nothing more,keep your comments to a mere level and you won't be attacked by others. "

Mike R wrote on Jan 5, 2009 3:14 AM:

" OK, I just have to know. Why is that someone is always attacking me and the number of stories I comment on? Several times I have been accused of being a "know it all" because I comment on "every story in the paper". There are other posters who comment on more stories than I do - Deb, Snap, Dewdrop, Mamamia, Dante - just to mention a few. No one ever attacks them on the number of stories they comment on - why me? I have to wonder if it is a different person each time or if it is always the same person (with some petty personal grudge) using a different username each time. I have to think that it has to be the same person every time. How else do you explain the fact that someone really seems to following the number of stories I comment on, but they never seem to realize the number of posters who comment on more stories than I do? I say if there is someone out there with a personal grudge, have the guts to confront me on it already, or just let it go and move on. "

Mike R wrote on Jan 4, 2009 10:46 PM:

" down by the river: and just for your information, I have commented on 4 or 5 stories in the past 2 or 3 weeks. That is a FAR CRY from commenting on every story in the paper. I am quite sure that the tribune ran more than 5 stories in the past 3 weeks. If you want to attack me personally, at least try to include some facts. Figments of your imagination do not count. "

Mike R wrote on Jan 4, 2009 10:43 PM:

" Down by the river: I comment because I am a very opinionated person. And in cases like this one, I have a lot of experience in dealing with these types of situations. Sure is easy to hide behind your keyboard and cast stones though isn't it? "

down by the river wrote on Jan 4, 2009 8:29 PM:

" to everybody - I am just wondering why Mike R. has a comment for every news story in the paper. Is he an expert to all these incidents that happen? Maybe he is a psychic. Or just smarter than the rest of us?? ha "

nodak wrote on Jan 4, 2009 7:47 PM:

" I shared a dorm suite with John for a year in college and an appartment with him one summer. Ive never known John to be anything but a kind considerate and rational person. These charges dont sound like him. "

Why not wrote on Jan 4, 2009 6:15 PM:

" To To TKD Student: Why can't he/she express thier opinions? What difference if they are connected to the martial arts? Everyone else can have an opinion, why can't the student? Who would know better than friends, acquantances, and students? "

Mike R wrote on Jan 4, 2009 3:32 PM:

" bono: Sadly, I have seen situations play out before where the accuser made the whole thing up, and I have never once seen them prosecuted for their false allegations. It always ends up that the accuser had some phychological issues at the time of making the false report so they needed help and not criminal charges, yadda, yadda, yadda. It is sad, but if you are falsely accused of a crime of this nature, there really is no vindication for you. You always have the option of a civil lawsuit, but if the accuser doesn't have a lot of money, you still get nothing. "

lala wrote on Jan 4, 2009 3:07 PM:

" The problem with accusations like this is that even if they are found to be false, the reputation of the individual accused is damaged beyond repair. Remember that teacher who was accused of touching children inappropriately. The courts later determined that the kids made the story up because they were upset about being disciplined. He was found innocent at trial but his reputation was tarnished, to say the least. We have to remember that people are innocent until proven guilty and to withhold judgment until then. "

GG wrote on Jan 4, 2009 2:16 PM:

" To Eddy,& Bono; Your comments make the most sense to me!! I personally know
of a woman,who had gotten several men into trouble!! Mostly to try to keep herself out of trouble!! She was never held accountable for these lies!! Which,
some of the lies ruined some of the mens lives!! But, in this case god must have been the judge, because she's in prison now on drug convictions!! "

eddy wrote on Jan 4, 2009 12:08 PM:

" sounds like he has a good name and reputation. people let the process run, it could have been your daughter! if he is as squeaky clean as you all say, than i say he has nothing to worry about, the truth will come out. "

Bono wrote on Jan 4, 2009 11:27 AM:

" If this man is found innocent - the accuser needs to be charged with a false report to police and made to go through a trial and pay all legal bills for Dvorak. These people who lightly accuse others of crimes and ruin their lives need to be held accountable. "

CIndyloo wrote on Jan 4, 2009 11:06 AM:

" I don't know the guy involved in the story or the woman. But, if he's innocent, I really feel for him and the family. Lots of theories, he did do it or the woman made it up being she made an advance and was spurned, so she gets even.

A few years ago, a woman reported to the police that she was raped at a truck stop near Bismarck. The cops wasted valuable time, trying to find the man responsible. She made it up. People like her make it bad for when it really does happen.

And as far as the "he could never do this, he has a wife". Unfortunately, there are men who cheat on their wives and wives who cheat on their husbands. "

zzz wrote on Jan 4, 2009 9:20 AM:

" Don't know the man involved but I hope the state's attorney's office has their facts right; otherwise they're ruined someone else's rep even if he's found innocent. This wouldn't be the first time that's happened. "

Movin Out wrote on Jan 4, 2009 9:20 AM:

" Oh No!!! This just can't be happening to a good ol North Dakota boy! Just goes to show, what happens behind closed doors is something even close friends will never know. There are more people just like him in this state than you know. "

Dewdrop wrote on Jan 4, 2009 7:56 AM:

" Snap and others: If you do not know that man.... then don't comment negative, he is innocent until proven guilty! The people that know him have stated he would never do such a thing. I have not seen one post one here that says.... Yeah, I know him and I think he would do something like this. I have no idea if he is guilty or innocent, that will be determind but, REMEMBER PEOPLE...
YOU COULD BE THE NEXT ONE WRONGLY ACCUSED!

And I do agree with Bruce that maybe something could have been misconstrued. "

Wath-n-see wrote on Jan 4, 2009 4:22 AM:

" Hmmmm, Cynthia Feland's involved here and betcha every dollar Gail Hagerty's next in line here as well ! Grab your toothbrush anna roll of TP Dude, you're going on vacation soon.... "

Psych wrote on Jan 3, 2009 8:14 PM:

" From a psychological standpoint, I think it would be important to point out that in such events, we spectators must take an objective view to the situation. You and I were not there when it happened. Therefore, we cannot immediately judge the situation or the people involved without sufficiet evidence. And that is the duty of the judge and the legal system to do. "

Snap wrote on Jan 3, 2009 2:33 PM:

" When are folks goona learn! You never really know anybody! "

To TKD student wrote on Jan 2, 2009 10:45 AM:

" TKD student,

As an ambassador of the martial arts, you should have the good sense to not make comments on this situation. I strongly encourage you to keep your opinions on this matter to yourself. "

Mike R wrote on Jan 2, 2009 1:06 AM:

" A couple thoughts on the matter. First off, lately there have been numerous stories printed in the paper where everyone just "knew" the guy was innocent and couldn't have possibley done anything wrong - only later to find out that the person was guilty of everything they were charged with. Not saying that is the case here, but there sure seems to be a lot of that going around lately.

On the other hand, sexual assault claims as a means of revenge are quite a bit more common than most people realize. I have seen it numerous times myself. Even had one person demand to be given a polygraph test so she could prove she was telling the truth. When she was informed that the person she accused was serving prison time in another state, only then did she admit that the story was fabricated. Anything is possible in this day and age. The scary part of it all is it seems like it takes less and less evidence to convict someone of a sexual assault these days. Makes a guy think twice about getting into that verbal altercation with the opposite sex. Never know these days. "

AD wrote on Jan 1, 2009 10:53 PM:

" This article doesn't offer a lot of information and almost makes this man sound guilty before we have all the facts.

Dvorak is a friend of a friend and I have heard nothing but good things about his character. I hope this accustation does not wreck his reputation in his community or his future. "

CGH wrote on Jan 1, 2009 8:24 PM:

" To Mike R: The events that have been related to John and his wife's friends are that this alleged "incident" occured when the couple had invited several people over to their home and the accuser got into a physical altercation with another guest, which prompted John to step in and try to break it up.

I find it perplexing that more of these details were not printed in this initial news article. Additionally, I am flummoxed as to why these charges are being pursued.

I have known John for at least 6 1/2 years and this is absolutely not something that is in his nature. He is a soft-spoken, kind, caring, selfless man. I will be extremely disappointed in the justice system if John's name is not cleared at the end of this mess. "

Mike R wrote on Jan 1, 2009 6:48 PM:

" Leah: Where (and I mean Anywhere) did the story say anything about this being done while breaking up a fight? Where did it say anything about a fight in his own house? If you have some "inside" information on this story that is not printed, you have to share it before you voice your opinion or it just doesn't make sense. Right now, you have left everyone dumbfounded wondering what the heck you are talking about. "

Leah wrote on Jan 1, 2009 1:52 PM:

" What the heck?! What kind of person would do that to one of the nicest people I have ever known? You have to touch someone to break up a fight obviously, sometimes you can't help where. Would it have been better if he'd stood back and watched....in his own house?! That's insane, anyone would have done it, only a pathetic person would throw out such a charge...obviously trying to push the blame onto someone else. Pathetic. What a justice system we have, trying good people. I can't wrap my mind around it. Like Mr Editor said, it's how you say something, but he made it sound like John was the guilty party when he's actually the victim. The girl needs help. If you know John, you'd know he wasn't that kind of person....that's all that needs to be said. "

TKD Student wrote on Jan 1, 2009 10:18 AM:

" As a student of TKD, who has trained with this man a few times...I find it hard to believe he would ever do something of this nature. I have only trained with him a handful of times, but the times I have he's been completely professional. I do have the ability to see all possibilities, though. Being a black belt, he could forcibly do many things to a student, but as I said before I do not believe this is Mr. Johns nature. If this woman IS doing this in a malicious manner, she is an extremely damaged person and needs to seek help. If she simply misunderstood his intentions, I pray Mr. Johns good name/reputation will be cleared. Afterall, if you don't have your good name...you don't have much else. "

Online Editor wrote on Jan 1, 2009 9:33 AM:

" To LDH: I don't pick sides. Comments are reviewed for taste and tone before they are posted. It usually not what someone says, but how they say it. "

Amy and Kyle wrote on Dec 31, 2008 6:24 PM:

" There is no way in hell or on this earth that this could have ever happened. Not in the way that it is printed. Either someone took instruction of a tae kwon do move the wrong way or there is some attention-starved lunatic grasping at straws, but there is no way he would have or could have done this. Kyle and I have known John for years and he has always, ALWAYS been an ambassador of kindness, gentleness, humor, love, and HUGE discretion. The validity of the accusation, or the accuser, really IS in question. "

Bruce Lee wrote on Dec 31, 2008 4:15 PM:

" Is it possible that while demonstrating a hold or move or technique that something he did was misconstrued? "

wimpy wrote on Dec 31, 2008 1:38 PM:

" Boy, theres sure alot of sex crimes and sex offenders living in the bis-man area!! "

Brian wrote on Dec 31, 2008 12:19 PM:

" This is unblievable. I've known him for a long time and this is definitely not something John would do. I'm so shocked I can't even come up with a coherent enough statement. If you looked up the definition of good samaritan in the encyclopedia it would have a picture of John there "

David wrote on Dec 31, 2008 12:18 AM:

" This accusation, against a man I have know for years, leaves me in question of the validity of the offense. It is not within John's character to do such an act. "

Celia wrote on Dec 30, 2008 11:37 PM:

" John would NEVER do this! He is INNOCENT and anyone who knows him knows he isn't capable of such a thing. "

Cameron wrote on Dec 30, 2008 10:19 PM:

" HE COULD NEVER DO THIS!!!! HE HAS A WIFE. "

Post Your Own Comment

All online comments are limited to 350 words total.
Comments are reviewed for taste, tone and language before posting.
Some comments may be used in the Tribune's print edition.
We value and respect your privacy, but The Bismarck Tribune might
disclose certain information to governmental entities if served with subpoena.