If your considering copy and pasting your latest drive by spam here because you cant find any other place.
DONT!
Oprano has a ZERO tolerance policy for spam. Yours WILL be deleted. If you are looking for more exposure for your product please contact advertising@oprano.com for more information.
Legacy Archived Main BoardBusiness chat and general industry chat. All participation is welcome. Dont post your fucking spam here.
Perhaps an interesting case for anyone who has story sites that deal with questionable (in the eyes of the law) themes.
Attorneys appeal case of man imprisoned for writing child molestation fantasies
COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) Attorneys for a man imprisoned for writing sexual fantasies about molesting children in his journal asked a state appeals court Tuesday to order a lower court to dismiss the case.
Lawyers for the American Civil Liberties Union said the case violates Brian Dalton's First Amendment right to free speech. They also said Dalton's previous attorney was ineffective and that the trial judge abused her power.
The case has alarmed First Amendment experts, who believe Dalton, 24, is the first person in the United States successfully prosecuted for child pornography that involved writings, not images.
''You can't go to prison for writing thoughts in your private journal,'' lawyer Benson Wolman told a three-judge panel.
Dalton was charged after his mother discovered the journal in his home and gave it to authorities. He pleaded guilty in 2001 to pandering obscenity involving a minor, which falls under Ohio's pornography law. He then asked to withdraw the plea, so he could fight the constitutionality of the law.
The judge refused to allow the change, and ACLU attorneys filed an appeal. Dalton was sentenced to seven years for the journal and the judge reinstated a 1-year sentence from a 1998 child pornography conviction because he violated probation.
Steven Taylor, an assistant county prosecutor, said Dalton's lawyer discussed the constitutional questions with him, but Dalton told his attorney he wanted the case to end quickly to spare his family embarrassment.
Part of me says "It's just absurd that someone would be arrested for their THOUGHTS!" and another part of me says "Child molesters are the scum of the earth and if putting someone in jail protects a child, so be it."
Every interview I've seen/heard regarding child molesters has them ALL saying they have no control over it.
Just be glad I'm not a judge - I'd make my rulings based on emotions.
Originally posted by Serge_Oprano@Apr 8 2003, 04:50 PM Peaches,
I have a few entries in my journal about doing you and MikeAI...
you think I am in troubles with the law????
Is it illegal for you to do me and MikeAI?
It USED to be illegal for you to do Michael in GA, but they finally got rid of that law - you can visit now!
Originally posted by Hooper@Apr 8 2003, 05:03 PM It's illegal to use cocaine but it's not illegal for recovering drug addicts to write journals about how much they want to do the drugs.
It's illegal to murder people, but it is not illegal to dream about or even write out fantasies about killing your boss.
The thought police are ALWAYS wrong.
There have been people arrested for sending letters threatening to kill people - that's "writing" about it, isn't it? And as far as I'm concerned, doing drugs is a victimless crime, so writing about it is fine
I TOLD you I'd be a REALLY crappy judge :P Heck I'd sentence all child molesters to immediate death and give the relatives of the child a chance to do it themselves. h34r:
Originally posted by Serge_Oprano@Apr 8 2003, 05:09 PM Peaches, how far are you from I-95?
we are going to NYC soon and be passin' Georgia, we might stop for day...MikeAI's presense is optional
;-)))
Pretty far away - 95 goes up the east coast, and I'm in the north/middle.
Let's also remember this guy was a convicted child molester on probation. He certainly wasn't someone who merely writes and had never acted his "urges". :angry:
If the State of Ohio had revoked this guy’s probation on the original charge for his journal entries I don’t know if I would have raised an eyebrow, and doubt even the radical ACLU types would have either. The state has an absolute right to regulate virtually any kind of conduct by a probationer.
But the idea that NEW “pandering” charges were levied over what every account I’ve read has characterized as private journal entries IS scary. The ACLU is probably dead on in alleging that the “case violates Brian Dalton's First Amendment right to free speech…and that the trial judge abused her power,” although the arguments about ineffective/incompetent counsel are questionable in view of the prosecutors’ claims.
Still – pandering in the legal sense generally involves getting something for others. It’s all well and good to say “Well, it’s just a child molester,” but this guy is being charged for his thoughts. Unless Ohio has a “panderbation” law on the books someplace that the biased liberal media is not mentioning, I don’t like this one at all, and I have to agree with Mr. Hooper – “The thought police are ALWAYS wrong.”
Last edited by PornoDoggy at Apr 8 2003, 05:10 PM
__________________ SEX STORY TEXT Exotic Material for Adult Websites Available for part time (project or ongoing) work ...
You witnessed the opening of the door with 'hate crimes' legislation. Sure, it's unConstitutional; but how long do you think it will be before anyone mounts a genuine challenge to it without being 'eliminated' by a certain 'reverend'?
You never miss the opportunity to through the first bit of reactionary rhetoric that jumps into your mind into a conversation with all the grace of a beer-'n-boiled-eggs fart in a crowded elevator, do you?
If the reverend you are referring to is the AG of the US, I don't think it's very likely he's going to be defending hate crime legislation any time soon, unless he is a sleeper and has managed to hide his views on the subject for many, many years.
And as far as that goes, I'm all for doing away with hate crime legislation entirely. We've got plenty of laws on the books to deal with that kind of crap.
Let's just charge 'em with terrorism.
__________________ SEX STORY TEXT Exotic Material for Adult Websites Available for part time (project or ongoing) work ...
we dont have to agree or dissagree with it.
the court will make a decision.
if it is a decision that is not consistent with the law, then the ACLU and others will be all over it.
if he is convicted and the decision cannot be overturned and people still feel it is wrong... then the problem is the law that allowed it to happen or with a court/judge that acted outside of its authority. you cant blame people for enforcing the law and for successful prosecution.
Pd,
I don't expect Ashcroft to back 'hate crimes' laws...they're unnecessary and unconstitutional.
No, the 'reverend' I'm talking about is one who is far more interested in such things, one who is so racist that he is blinded by his own hate...I don't wanna mention any names; but his initials are Jesse Jackson.
And as for the child molester...turn him over to the parents... :grrr:
Originally posted by OldJeff@Apr 9 2003, 07:52 AM Of course we would not be having this conversation if they had executed this sick fuck when they caught him molesting children in the first place.
Yes I said Sick - and death cures this type of sickness
I think I just found my bailiff for when I'm a judge!
Originally posted by OldJeff@Apr 9 2003, 06:52 AM
Yes JR you can - Successful Prosecution - Rubin Carter, Unsuccessful Prosecution OJ Simpson.
You blame the courts, you blame the lawmakers, you blame the media.
The whole thing makes me want to and
Of course we would not be having this conversation if they had executed this sick fuck when they caught him molesting children in the first place.
Yes I said Sick - and death cures this type of sickness
you are making a legal judgement about guilt or innocence of cases that already made it through the court and state your opinion on the matter as fact? Did Chairman Mao put you up to this?
there is a system of laws in place.
there is a system of people in place to enforce those laws
there is a system in place to prosecute those who break laws.
an inflamatory word like "thought police" is used and everyone draws a conclusion that it is some government conspiracy because she has taken the time to characterize the situation for you.
you then took the ball and ran with it and continued by saying it was never ok for "thought crimes"
- what the hell is a "thought crime"?
a person was accused of breaking the law.
he was not accused of "thinking" anything.
its interesting to watch how quickly a purely legal conversation can become a mindless conversation about paranioa and politics and not a conversation about the law and whether the prosecutor has a case or not.
[you are making a legal judgement about guilt or innocence of cases that already made it through the court and state your opinion on the matter as fact? Did Chairman Mao put you up to this?
]
Not exactly...
Rubin Carter was wrongfully convicted - This one hits home for me since my Grandfather was the arresting officer.
OJ Killed those people - there was 10 times more physical evidence on him than 90% of the murderers convicted in this country. Trouble is Mark Furman was a racist asshole, (a "thought crime") , which as everyone knows is a much greater crime than murder.
I simply used those as points to where our court system does not work
[there is a system of laws in place.
there is a system of people in place to enforce those laws
there is a system in place to prosecute those who break laws.]
There is a system of laws in place that are selectively enforced, By people who are often paid to look the other way, and the courts are as fair as the defendent can afford.
Of course I might be biased against our legal system since it suspended my drivers license and issued a warrent for my arrest for non payment of child support. Interesting since I dont have any children
It was the same judge that signed my divorce a year and a half earlier - I am pretty sure the paperwork in front of him indicated I didn't have kids.
saying that OJ is innocent is an assumption. it cannot be proven and was proven "beyond a reasonable doubt" that he was not guilty.
Quote:
Mark Furman was a racist asshole, (a "thought crime") , which as everyone knows is a much greater crime than murder.
again... what is a "thought crime"?
was Mark Furman accused of being a racist for "thinking" something... or for both his words and deeds?
no one can possibly prove what he "thinks" without the benefit of hearing him speak and seeing him act.
did the Latoya Jackson psychic hotline help you reach this conclusion? or was it connected to things he was purported to have said?
Quote:
There is a system of laws in place that are selectively enforced, By people who are often paid to look the other way, and the courts are as fair as the defendent can afford.
yes, i have heard that in the Latin Quarter of Xui Bong Do Province in Northern China, this is a real problem. Everyone gets "paid" to look the other way.
where else are people "paid" to look the other way?
Quote:
Of course I might be biased against our legal system since it suspended my drivers license and issued a warrent for my arrest for non payment of child support. Interesting since I dont have any children
please tell me that you are not going to deny that a simple clerical error was not recognized and corrected.
I got arrested for a DUI once that i never had. oh well. it happens. it was not very pleasant waiting in jail for 6 hours to straighten it out but i dont live in a dreamword where i beleif that a system based on human judgement cannot be flawed. it was straightened out. i went home.
Quote:
It was the same judge that signed my divorce a year and a half earlier - I am pretty sure the paperwork in front of him indicated I didn't have kids.
are you a celebrity? i dont remember if i had kids last year.
The simple Clerical Error as you put it cost me 3 grand in legal fees and more than a month of being unable to drive.
It was eventually cleared up when after my attorney trying for 3 weeks to get the judge to vacate the order I called the Judge myself - it turned out the Judge's secratary was a personal friend that I have known since childhood, her son and I were Boy Scouts together.
Funny after talking with her the Judge vacated the order and reinstated my license the next day.
I guess there is some truth to "Who you know, as opposed to what really happened"
You keep referring to China for some reason, I would assume that would be to get my left wing blood all boiling or something.
You are barking up the wrong tree, Regan was to my left on many issues.
04-08-2003
h34r:
and 
Hybrid Mode
