Kenneth Hatch III was arraigned in Knox County Superior Court in Rockland on Aug. 23 on 22 charges of Sexual Abuse of a Minor, Unlawful Sexual Contact, and Furnishing Scheduled Drugs to a Minor.

The Lincoln County sheriff’s deputy is currently on indefinite leave without pay. He was arrested in July on two charges. A grand jury later indicted him on those charges and 20 more. He is currently free on an unsecured bail of $50,000, and has several bail conditions to meet to remain at liberty.

All but two of the charges are Class C felonies, which carry a maximum sentence of five years’ imprisonment, two years’ probation, and a $5,000 fine. The other two charges are Class B felonies, subject to 10 years in prison, with three years’ probation and a $20,000 fine.

The charges involve three alleged victims, according to the indictment.

One of the charges, number 17, was challenged by Hatch’s attorney, Richard Elliott of Boothbay Harbor, on the grounds that the statute of limitations would have run out on the 2004 charge of Unlawful Sexual Contact allegedly committed when the victim would have been about 4 years old. Judge William Stokes permitted the charge to be answerable along with the others. Hatch pleaded not guilty to it and the other 21 charges.

Hatch will face a deferred disposition conference in Rockland on Oct. 27. Because the case has not yet had a formal change of venue, Elliott was given 30 days to decide whether he and Hatch would agree to a move to Knox County.

Elliott requested a change in Hatch’s bail conditions, to allow him to have visitation with his sister’s children during family gatherings. Hatch’s son is coming home from the military and the family was planning a get-together to celebrate, Elliott explained. The state objected strongly, since one of Hatch’s bail conditions was no contact with children under the age of 16, and Hatch’s sister’s children are in that age range.

The prosecutor said he had never in eight years objected to visitation, but that the allegations in this case show that no level of supervision is sufficient to protect children.

Stokes reminded the state that Hatch had the presumption of innocence. Stokes said he would entertain the idea of limited visitation.

While Elliott wanted unlimited family gatherings, he agreed to a per visit agreement with Hatch’s sister and brother-in-law in close supervision, and no physical contact with the children.

“The supervision must be very diligent,” Stokes said. “The sister or her husband must be in the same room, eyes-on, at all times.”

“We understand, your honor,” Elliott said.

The state also asked that Hatch have no contact with any of the witnesses named in discovery. Elliott said that they had not yet received the list of witnesses, but had no problem in principle with a no-contact order.