But did they get to have orgies in hot air balloons with giraffes and Chuck Norris? Because the McMartin kids did... and the cops believed it...

What would YOU do for a Klondike bar?

Innocent or not, if I were him, I'd have killed myself before I ever got to prison. I can't even imagine what the inmates would do to child-molesting ex-cop, but I bet death is preferable.

Paris1127: But did they get to have orgies in hot air balloons with giraffes and Chuck Norris? Because the McMartin kids did... and the cops believed it...

Wow, I had completely forgotten about that trial. You forgot the whole Satanic Cult angle, though. That's the part I mostly remember. Oh, and the fact that the initial complaint came from a woman who had already been diagnosed with schizophrenia & ended up drinking herself to death before the trial began.

brigid_fitch: Paris1127: But did they get to have orgies in hot air balloons with giraffes and Chuck Norris? Because the McMartin kids did... and the cops believed it...

Wow, I had completely forgotten about that trial. You forgot the whole Satanic Cult angle, though. That's the part I mostly remember. Oh, and the fact that the initial complaint came from a woman who had already been diagnosed with schizophrenia & ended up drinking herself to death before the trial began.

I didn't forget (ok, I forgot about the schizo mom) but those facts are the most ludicrous of them all. Although I also forgot about the tunnels under the playground leading to sacrifice... or whatever...

wow, he was a cop AND known as a molester in jail... he got raped fo sho...

/blanket party.

Why does everyone say kids are innocent? Children are monsters and should all be locked up until they are 18 for the sake of public safety.

They should let him rape his kids when he gets out, just to make a point.

Absolutely no statements by ANY person should ever be admitted into evidence if the individual cannot be fully cross-examined by the defense.

Ever.

That's farked up. He spent 20 years in a Federal PMITA prison for child abuse...and he's an ex-cop. Like others have said, he's lucky to be alive. If I were him, the first thing I would have done upon release is walk up to now-retired Detective Krause, and cockpunch him for every day I was in there.

The prosecutors/detectives/and his ex-wife twisted those kid's memories until they didn't even know if he really did abuse them. "You just blocked it out of your memory, of course he abused you!" Sickening.

All those involved with his prosecution should face defamation charges. At least something to let the accused feel vindicated.

when's his lawsuit against the state and the overzealous investigators start?

entered a no-contest plea because his public defender refused to defend him? there'd be a lawsuit for that waste of air as well..

Am I wrong, or does the article imply that a cop repeatedly harassed them with questions, trying to force them to come up with testimony that their father abused them?

It says the boy said he abused htem to get another cop to stop repeatedly asking them questions...

Vancouver, BC != Vancouver, WA...

/stupid media...

Paris1127: brigid_fitch: Paris1127: But did they get to have orgies in hot air balloons with giraffes and Chuck Norris? Because the McMartin kids did... and the cops believed it...

Wow, I had completely forgotten about that trial. You forgot the whole Satanic Cult angle, though. That's the part I mostly remember. Oh, and the fact that the initial complaint came from a woman who had already been diagnosed with schizophrenia & ended up drinking herself to death before the trial began.

I didn't forget (ok, I forgot about the schizo mom) but those facts are the most ludicrous of them all. Although I also forgot about the tunnels under the playground leading to sacrifice... or whatever...

The schizo mom was easy to forget, as only one of her personalities drank herself to death. The others were still ok to stand trial, although obviously under a lot of pressure, having lost their friend and all.

But man, I'll never forget those monkeys...

Heh heh....monkeys...

IonBeam2: Why does everyone say kids are innocent? Children are monsters and should all be locked up until they are 18 for the sake of public safety.

lol As a parent of a two year old... I must concur.

IonBeam2: Why does everyone say kids are innocent? Children are monsters and should all be locked up until they are 18 for the sake of public safety.

THANK YOU
dahmers love zombie: Absolutely no statements by ANY person should ever be admitted into evidence if the individual cannot be fully cross-examined by the defense.

Ever.

EXACTLY.
hej: They should let him rape his kids when he gets out, just to make a point.
You know he served the time, he should at least get to do the crime.

Though if my kids did this to me, and I got out, I'd farking rape them with a serrated steak knife.

What a horrible awful thing to lie about.

Paris1127: brigid_fitch: Paris1127: But did they get to have orgies in hot air balloons with giraffes and Chuck Norris? Because the McMartin kids did... and the cops believed it...

Wow, I had completely forgotten about that trial. You forgot the whole Satanic Cult angle, though. That's the part I mostly remember. Oh, and the fact that the initial complaint came from a woman who had already been diagnosed with schizophrenia & ended up drinking herself to death before the trial began.

I didn't forget (ok, I forgot about the schizo mom) but those facts are the most ludicrous of them all. Although I also forgot about the tunnels under the playground leading to sacrifice... or whatever...

Check your local listings for the next time the NBC special "Witch hunt" is on, it's about one of those sexual abuse panic cases of the 1980's, it was a really compelling program.

hej: They should let him rape his kids when he gets out, just to make a point.

There in their 30s now, where's the fun in that?

Wow, this is the worst episode of "Frasier" ever.

I'm confused. It says 'Vancouver B.C.' at the top of the story then mentions Vancouver WA? Teh Fark?

Poor cop.

Poor spelling Subby. How can an whole police office go to jail? How can a police office have kids?

Time to release him from prison and send him to Disneyland.

On second thought... that may not be a good idea.

They now need to find the mother, and any detectives that went along, and throw them all in jail and throw away the key. Not only did they frame an innocent man, they exploited two children who now have to live with what they did.

scottydoesntknow: If I were him, the first thing I would have done upon release is walk up to now-retired Detective Krause, and cockpunch him for every day I was in there.

I assume you're referring to detective Sharon Krause?

Crudbucket: hej: They should let him rape his kids when he gets out, just to make a point.

There in their 30s now, where's the fun in that?

Why should there be a time limit?

I actually remember my mom trying to do the exact same thing to me.

After my parents divorced she had in in with the cops to try and get me to say my dad raped me. I didn't lie and say he did, but I also wasn't hounded for a month by the same detective.

I was kinda shocked when I read that part in the article about how their mother said they had blocked it from memory. It's pretty much verbatim of what my mom kept telling me when I was growing up.

Cervidanti: Am I wrong, or does the article imply that a cop repeatedly harassed them with questions, trying to force them to come up with testimony that their father abused them?

It says the boy said he abused htem to get another cop to stop repeatedly asking them questions...

It also said the mother (who insisted the kids had blocked out the memory) had an affair with said cop's supervisor. It was most likely the supervisor who insisted on the persistent questioning.

Detective Sharon Krause

Woman? I would assume so. Sounds to me like a man hater took it too far. KHITBASH

Cervidanti: Am I wrong, or does the article imply that a cop repeatedly harassed them with questions, trying to force them to come up with testimony that their father abused them?

It says the boy said he abused htem to get another cop to stop repeatedly asking them questions...

In some places now they have special teams to interview children, because it is so easy to get them to agree to something that isn't true if you ask it in the wrong way. Someone good at pressuring a gang member to confess to a crime isn't necessarily well equipped in getting the truth from a five year old.

The Aristocrats?

Crudbucket: hej: They should let him rape his kids when he gets out, just to make a point.

There They're in their 30s now, where's the fun in that?

Dammit.

When people are found completely innocent of the crimes they were punished for, especially when there's been serious abuse of the legal system, in this case (apparently) an incompetent public defense and investigators messing with kids heads to get a certain testimony, I'm constantly frustrated that those who perpetrated the injustice seem to get away with it.

The judge, public defender, investigators, and any others who took part in creating this inappropriate result should see the inside of a jail cell for a significant amount of time.

scottydoesntknow: That's farked up. He spent 20 years in a Federal PMITA prison for child abuse...and he's an ex-cop. Like others have said, he's lucky to be alive. If I were him, the first thing I would have done upon release is walk up to now-retired Detective Krause, and cockpunch him for every day I was in there.

7300 Cockpunches. That would be the most consecutive cockpunches since Keith Hackney Fought Joe Son's crotch at UFC 4.

He was a cop and he though he had a better chance on APPEAL than from pleading NOT GUILTY? WTF?

He doesn't deserve prison for pederasty but he sure did pay for being a moron.

Both children, who live in Sacramento, Calif., said that while growing up in California they were told by their mother, who divorced Spencer before Spencer was charged, that they were blocking out the memory of the abuse.

What an absolutely classy family. He needs to biatchslap the ex for helping keep up the charade.

It's strange that there wouldn't be some obvious medical evidence at the time, considering the violent nature of the crimes he was charged with. If there was medical evidence, then something isn't adding up.

their dad is a police office? woah

This is why, when people decry restorative justice practices as being "soft on crime," and worry that there will be "no uniform code of justice, no fairness," I'm like LOOK AROUND PEOPLE. Just read a few stories like this one and ask yourself if things are fair under the current process. (shaking my head)

The two kids in question for false molestering charges

fyrewede: This is why, when people decry restorative justice practices as being "soft on crime," and worry that there will be "no uniform code of justice, no fairness," I'm like LOOK AROUND PEOPLE. Just read a few stories like this one and ask yourself if things are fair under the current process. (shaking my head)

And yet people don't understand why its a bad idea to allow capital punishment for child rape.

This is another example of why guilty verdicts should be beyond a reasonable doubt. The anti-death-penalty-pansies just want to ban capital punishment but have no regard for anyone else unfairly convicted.

It's like I said to a co-worker the other day - What if Michael Jackson never touched any kids? The response? "Oh, he was guilty, blah, blah, blah, they had evidence, blah, blah, blah - he just bought them off". You can't just buy prosecutors off though (okay, well, maybe you can, but there's no evidence of Jackson paying off the prosecutors - that I know of anyway).

Child molestation is a serious offense and almost everyone is horrified by it and rightly wants anyone who commits such an act to be severely punished, but we've seen too many times that accusations result in witch hunts which result in innocent people going to prison.

There's always the "think of the children" aspect, but I for one am willing to stand up and say Fark the Children (not literally, of course), but think of the innocent adult for a change!

How would you feel if you were even accused of such a crime? Even if you were eventually acquitted, the stigma of the accusation would follow you for the rest of your life.

Maybe they just wanted to get a new daddy...

doyner: And yet people don't understand why it's a bad idea to allow capital punishment for child rapeanything.

FTFM.

skinink: I don't know how many Farkers have look at a typical police report. I had one written on me after an incident and requested it (after my lawyer saw no need to get a copy for my case). Cops do like to embellish and I can't remember the movie but the quote went something like if a cop thinks your guilty, he's gonna make you guilty.

The cop's report was so bad he couldn't even get my name correct on the report even after copying down my license info. for a second I thought about ignoring the summons because it clearly wasn't my name on the report.

I read a police report at work last week. It went something like this:
"Suspect was pulled over for suspicious broken tail-light. I asked for license and registration. Suspect was acting suspiciously. Suspect was acting very nervous, hands were trembling nervously and suspiciously. Suspect answered my questions, but very suspiciously and nervously. Suspect looked from side to side at one point. Suspect smelled strongly of marijuana. Car smelled strongly of marijuana. Driver's license and registration papers smelled strongly of marijuana. I handcuffed suspect and conducted a warrantless search of the vehicle for contraband and officer safety. I found an unregistered pistol in the trunk, locked in a box, unloaded. No marijuana was found. I immediately arrested suspect."

Mustakraken: When people are found completely innocent of the crimes they were punished for, especially when there's been serious abuse of the legal system, in this case (apparently) an incompetent public defense and investigators messing with kids heads to get a certain testimony, I'm constantly frustrated that those who perpetrated the injustice seem to get away with it.

The judge, public defender, investigators, and any others who took part in creating this inappropriate result should see the inside of a jail cell for a significant amount of time.

Yep and unfortunately, until they start handing out suitable punishment to coonts like these, with no appropriate deterrence for such heinous tactics, this sort of shiat will continue to happen time and time again.

austerity101: doyner: And yet people don't understand why it's a bad idea to allow capital punishment for child rapeanything.

FTFM.

I agree completely.

mud_shark: The anti-death-penalty-pansies just want to ban capital punishment but have no regard for anyone else unfairly convicted.


This ruins what otherwise was an ok argument. Where do you get this shiat?

doyner: austerity101: doyner: And yet people don't understand why it's a bad idea to allow capital punishment for child rapeanything.

FTFM.

I agree completely.

Glad someone does. What difference does it make what someone is convicted of? If you kill him and he was actually innocent, you've still killed an innocent man.

We really need to get over our obsession with child molestation, too.

mud_shark: What if Michael Jackson never touched any kids? The response? "Oh, he was guilty, blah, blah, blah, they had evidence, blah, blah, blah - he just bought them off".

If someone thinks getting a few million dollars is more important than putting someone who hurt your kid in jail then he/she deserves...(whatever crazy punishment you can think of)

I'd have voted for the asinine tag. The cops essentially committed perjury to back up a false accusation, by coercing false testimony from a couple of children.

Sad that it took so long for the truth to come out. Lawsuits, anyone?

Noam Chimpsky: It's strange that there wouldn't be some obvious medical evidence at the time, considering the violent nature of the crimes he was charged with. If there was medical evidence, then something isn't adding up.

Someone didn't read the article:

For several years, Spencer's appeals failed. He was denied parole five times because he refused to admit guilt and enter a sex offender treatment program.

He hired Seattle attorney Peter Camiel in the mid-1990s. Camiel and a private investigator uncovered several disturbing facts about the investigation - including that prosecutors withheld medical exams that showed no evidence of abuse, despite Krause's claims that the children had been violently, repeatedly raped - and those discoveries led Gov. Gary Locke to commute Spencer's sentence in 2004.

austerity101: We really need to get over our obsession with child molestation, too.

No kidding. How else could we create strippers and porn stars?

I'd say he's had quite a rocky road.

rotsky: I'd say he's had quite a rocky road.

My first sighting! Your actually real!

So, it was a conspiracy to put an innocent cop in jail?

Disapproves.

/he knew his friend

This is why there should not be capital punishment for child molestation (at least without extreme physical evidence). The words of children should really never be used to convict people. They believe in the Tooth Fairy for god's sake.

I think this guy is within his right to put a bullet into each head that colluded to put him away.

It just proves what I always say:

---You can't ever make them go away;

---You can't make them obey;

---But the one thing you can always do: You can always make them pay.

If you go to your door with a gun and make them take you the hard way, you will still be dead---but so will a lot of the enemy. Alexander Solzhenitsyn touched on it, and so did Leon Uris: What if every person arrested in the pogroms or the Holocast had gone to the door with a gun and started shooting?

Yes I concede, you would have been killed. Factor that quick death against a one way trip to Auschwitz, and you have to admit you haven't lost much.

Figure at 20 people, they would be damn worried;

At 200, they would be scared sh*tless;

They never would have gotten to 2000, they would have called it off long before that.

That is the price of 6 million murdered by Hitler, and at least twice that many by Stalin: 2000 people didn't have balls between their legs.

doyner: rotsky: I'd say he's had quite a rocky road.

My first sighting! Your actually real!

I see what you did there.

austerity101: We really need to get over our obsession with child molestation, too.

That's what the pope keeps saying.

Noam Chimpsky: It's strange that there wouldn't be some obvious medical evidence at the time, considering the violent nature of the crimes he was charged with. If there was medical evidence, then something isn't adding up.

During the child molestation trials of the 80's, the investigators were operating on several conflicting, yet absolutely believed, theories of child molestation:
1. Children NEVER lie about being molested;
2. Children WILL LIE to protect the molester (either from fear or misplaced love);
3. If the MOTHER says the child is acting "odd" it is de facto evidence of molestation;
4. If the CHILD says nothing happened, it's because they are "blocking" the memory, and may need repeated questioning and/or leading questions to get to the truth.

All these sound completely idiotic, but they were articles of faith during the witch-hunt molestation trials that ruined hundreds of lives in the 80's and early 90's. It was not uncommon for the child to be interrogated over a period of days or weeks until the story matched what either the prosecutor wanted them to say or what the psychotherapist wanted to believe had happened.

Fat and Nasty 86: What would YOU do for a Klondike bar?

I LOL'd.

USA! USA! We're Number One!

... at jailing our citizens. The United States has the highest incarceration rate and the biggest prison population of any country in the world.

/my state doesn't have its own Fark tag but still holds the record for the highest percentage of people in the justice system out of all 50 states: 1 in 13 adults.

This thread is missing some of our regular contributors. Where are the Farkers who like to say that prison rape is no big deal, and actually kind of funny, because everyone behind bars deserves it anyway?

/"can't do the time, don't do the crime"
//it rhymes, so it must be true

scottydoesntknow Quote 2009-07-11 08:29:12 PM
That's farked up. He spent 20 years in a Federal PMITA prison for child abuse...and he's an ex-cop. Like others have said, he's lucky to be alive. If I were him, the first thing I would have done upon release is walk up to now-retired Detective Krause, and cockpunch him for every day I was in there.

The prosecutors/detectives/and his ex-wife twisted those kid's memories until they didn't even know if he really did abuse them. "You just blocked it out of your memory, of course he abused you!" Sickening.

All those involved with his prosecution should face defamation charges. At least something to let the accused feel vindicated.


Agreed.

Does he still have to register as a sex offender?
Can he retire from the police force with 20+ years back pay? He deserves it if you ask me on top of damages,etc..

They should also lock up the psychologists who invented the whole "blocked memories" BS that led to countless witch hunts, ruining the reputations/lives of thousands of innocent parents just to make a buck.

Zombalupagus: /my state doesn't have its own Fark tag but still holds the record for the highest percentage of people in the justice system out of all 50 states: 1 in 13 adults.

But to be fair, most are black so it doesn't count. Our system really is just....

...if you have money....

...or aren't a minority.

dmd8605: doyner: rotsky: I'd say he's had quite a rocky road.

My first sighting! Your actually real!

I see what you did there.

I dont see wat you didnt do their.

alltandubh: This thread is missing some of our regular contributors. Where are the Farkers who like to say that prison rape is no big deal, and actually kind of funny, because everyone behind bars deserves it anyway?

/"can't do the time, don't do the crime"
//it rhymes, so it must be true

They always hide when there are stories like this, because they know we'll crucify them.

And also because I usually arrive to point out that rape in prison just isn't as universal as they secretly seem to hope. Pervs.

They said they realized as adults the abuse never happened, and they came forward because it was the right thing to do.

Adults? Uh hello? They're age 33 and 30 now. They became adults over a decade ago. Why did they wait to come forward until now? Did their supply of ice cream finally run out?

mud_shark: This is another example of why guilty verdicts should be beyond a reasonable doubt. The anti-death-penalty-pansies just want to ban capital punishment but have no regard for anyone else unfairly convicted.

I follow your argument as being for more accountability... but your first paragraph is very confusing. I am taking from it that you not only think it is an injustice when people are unfairly convicted... but that you also support the death penalty? I'm confused. What about if this fellow had been murdered by the state before his children were of an age of conscience?

I'm not arguing with you... I just felt your first paragraph completely conflicts with the rest. Just seeking some disambiguation.

Police interrogations are an unholy mindfark I wouldn't wish on my worst enemy.

arcas: They said they realized as adults the abuse never happened, and they came forward because it was the right thing to do.

Adults? Uh hello? They're age 33 and 30 now. They became adults over a decade ago. Why did they wait to come forward until now? Did their supply of ice cream finally run out?

Perhaps their supply of shame and human decency just arrived. Ped-Ex ran a little late.

FTFA: In 1985, Spencer entered the no-contest pleas, a type of guilty plea, after learning his court-appointed attorney had not prepared a defense. He felt pleading no contest was his only option, and that he would appeal his convictions.

IANAL, but I'm pretty sure "no contest" is NOT "a type of guilty plea." It's an acknowledgment that you face overwhelming odds.

Poor guy. A life ruined, and for what?

PhotoshopAmateur: their dad is a police office? woah

Their mom must have been a huge slut.

MadAzza: FTFA: In 1985, Spencer entered the no-contest pleas, a type of guilty plea, after learning his court-appointed attorney had not prepared a defense. He felt pleading no contest was his only option, and that he would appeal his convictions.

IANAL, but I'm pretty sure "no contest" is NOT "a type of guilty plea." It's an acknowledgment that you face overwhelming odds.

Poor guy. A life ruined, and for what?

A Klondike bar. We already covered this, sheesh.

Thats what he gets for getting married and having kids.

The two adult children of former Vancouver police officer Clyde Ray Spencer, who spent nearly 20 years in prison after being convicted of molesting them, testified in court Friday the abuse never happened.
/why jail the children?

Fat and Nasty 86: What would YOU do for a Klondike bar?

/thread

MadAzza: FTFA: In 1985, Spencer entered the no-contest pleas, a type of guilty plea, after learning his court-appointed attorney had not prepared a defense. He felt pleading no contest was his only option, and that he would appeal his convictions.

IANAL, but I'm pretty sure "no contest" is NOT "a type of guilty plea." It's an acknowledgment that you face overwhelming odds.

Poor guy. A life ruined, and for what?

No contest. Last I checked, it meant you were neither pleading guilty nor not guilty, but that you weren't contesting the charges and were accepting the sentence as given. In this case, it means the reporter couldn't be bothered to look up "nolo contendre" in his dictionotomy.

I don't get it.

There's something else going on if cops are framing cops instead of covering up for them.

cyberspacedout: I'd have voted for the asinine tag. The cops essentially committed perjury to back up a false accusation, by coercing false testimony from a couple of children.

Sad that it took so long for the truth to come out. Lawsuits, anyone?

Lawsuits o'plenty. This case might be a heads up for all the others that are accused of molesting or other inappropriate behaviour. True rapists, pedos etc should be dealt with appropriately, but it is too easy now with all the mass hysteria to ruin someone's life with some sort of bullshiat grudge or accusation.
The children's mother and the interviewing/coercing cop should fry.

/Clyde Ray? WTF?
//White trash Chester name for sure.

hej: They should let him rape his kids when he gets out, just to make a point.

The kids were bullied into it. I wouldn't blame them.

Cervidanti: Am I wrong, or does the article imply that a cop repeatedly harassed them with questions, trying to force them to come up with testimony that their father abused them?

It says the boy said he abused htem to get another cop to stop repeatedly asking them questions...

Yup. Said cop should get life without parole.

xria: Cervidanti: Am I wrong, or does the article imply that a cop repeatedly harassed them with questions, trying to force them to come up with testimony that their father abused them?

It says the boy said he abused htem to get another cop to stop repeatedly asking them questions...

In some places now they have special teams to interview children, because it is so easy to get them to agree to something that isn't true if you ask it in the wrong way. Someone good at pressuring a gang member to confess to a crime isn't necessarily well equipped in getting the truth from a five year old.

Yeah. As far as I'm concerned all interactions between the police or a therapist with a kid in a suspected abuse situation should be recorded. No tape and they can't testify on the side the person is on. (Normally that would be the prosecution but if the defendant hires someone to examine them the same rule should apply.) Kids are too easy to manipulate!

doyner: He was a cop and he though he had a better chance on APPEAL than from pleading NOT GUILTY? WTF?

He doesn't deserve prison for pederasty but he sure did pay for being a moron.

The problem was at the trial it turned out the public defender hadn't prepared a defense. What else was he supposed to do?

arcas: They said they realized as adults the abuse never happened, and they came forward because it was the right thing to do.

Adults? Uh hello? They're age 33 and 30 now. They became adults over a decade ago. Why did they wait to come forward until now? Did their supply of ice cream finally run out?

Because they realized they weren't repressing memories--that the event never happened in the first place.

This has nothing to do with turning adult, but rather with realizing repressed memories like this normally don't happen.

Someone needs to send that guy to Vagas with a gimp mask, a ball gag, a chainsaw and ten million dollars...

Loren: The problem was at the trial it turned out the public defender hadn't prepared a defense. What else was he supposed to do?

Again, WTF? Wouldn't his union provide a decent lawyer? If not, a cop could sure as heck afford to pay for one.

ctobio: Noam Chimpsky: It's strange that there wouldn't be some obvious medical evidence at the time, considering the violent nature of the crimes he was charged with. If there was medical evidence, then something isn't adding up.

Someone didn't read the article:

For several years, Spencer's appeals failed. He was denied parole five times because he refused to admit guilt and enter a sex offender treatment program.

He hired Seattle attorney Peter Camiel in the mid-1990s. Camiel and a private investigator uncovered several disturbing facts about the investigation - including that prosecutors withheld medical exams that showed no evidence of abuse, despite Krause's claims that the children had been violently, repeatedly raped - and those discoveries led Gov. Gary Locke to commute Spencer's sentence in 2004.

I read it, just didn't process all of it. Hard to see how a cop could be railroaded like that, but I probably didn't process something else in there that explains how that happened. I thought it said something about an affair between the cop's wife and the cop's boss or something too, but I don't feel like reading it again. If I lose any more faith in the system, I will become unpleasant.

hej: They should let him rape his kids when he gets out, just to make a point.

I LOL'd

If I had my life ruined by the biatch wife/prosecutor/etc... after 20 years I'm sure you are bound to the system and will never live a normal life.

Depending on if i felt like living on the outside or not - I would make sure I punish all those who falsely put me in prison. Maybe not killing but definetly some loss of limbs. Serving as a reminder their entire life that true justice is not something you Fark with just so you can get a verdict you want.

Oh yeah - and I would rape the grown up 30 year old kids too, he did the time, might as well do the crime. Yeah they are old, pedobear wouldnt approve but he might as well get some revenge sex out of it.

It took them twenty years to figure out that they made it all up? Shenanigans. Family members recant on testimony all of the time.

TFA: In 1985, Spencer was also convicted of abusing a 4-year-old stepson, who was not at Friday's hearing.

Yeah.

Ahhh. 1980s American Family Values.

accelerus: Depending on if i felt like living on the outside or not - I would make sure I punish all those who falsely put me in prison. Maybe not killing but definetly some loss of limbs. Serving as a reminder their entire life that true justice is not something you Fark with just so you can get a verdict you want.



Approves

Those of you railing against capital punishment, I present you a few points:

1. If this had been a capital punishment case, the flimsy evidence from the prosecution would have been scrutinized a hell of a lot more than it was at the time.

2. Appeals all the way up the chain would have been automatic.

3. The defendant would have had much better representation than he did initially.

mynameist: I think this guy is within his right to put a bullet into each head that colluded to put him away.

Well, no, he's not. But he really really should.

browser_snake: Those of you railing against capital punishment, I present you a few points:

1. If this had been a capital punishment case, the flimsy evidence from the prosecution would have been scrutinized a hell of a lot more than it was at the time.

2. Appeals all the way up the chain would have been automatic.

3. The defendant would have had much better representation than he did initially.

And yet, there are still innocent people on death row.

accelerus: Depending on if i felt like living on the outside or not - I would make sure I punish all those who falsely put me in prison. Maybe not killing but definetly some loss of limbs. Serving as a reminder their entire life that true justice is not something you Fark with just so you can get a verdict you want.

Hypothetical ITG?

Noam Chimpsky: If I lose any more faith in the system, I will become unpleasant.

This is you on "pleasant" mode?

Cases like this one show exactly why the amount of power put into the hands of cops is absurd. They even turn on their own with it.

Noam Chimpsky: I read it, just didn't process all of it. Hard to see how a cop could be railroaded like that, but I probably didn't process something else in there that explains how that happened. I thought it said something about an affair between the cop's wife and the cop's boss or something too, but I don't feel like reading it again. If I lose any more faith in the system, I will become unpleasant.

There is no reason to have faith in it. Those who have faith in it get consumed by it. Odds are this cop was naive and had some faith in the system. He just didn't realize how evil his co-workers and managers were. He knows now.

Some farkers must of done some time, I see a little prison argot in here.

/if you had to look that up, you suck

Sadly, this is only news because he may get out. I'd wager there's hundreds, if not thousands of people wrongfully imprisoned for this. It's the salem witch trials of the modern age. Not that there aren't real offenders, of course there are.

doyner: mud_shark: The anti-death-penalty-pansies just want to ban capital punishment but have no regard for anyone else unfairly convicted.


This ruins what otherwise was an ok argument. Where do you get this shiat?

Okay, I've already admitted to being a bit "unfocused" today (actually getting more and more out of focus as the beer leaves my fridge), but there are people who argue that we should not have capital punishment because sometimes innocent people are convicted.

Are you with me so far? Have I used any words that confound your vocabulary?

Okay, good. Let's continue then. These same people who argue that innocents are sometimes found guilty and sentenced to death do not seem to give a flying fark if some innocent is found guilty and sentenced to life in prison.

Shouldn't we focus on reforming our courts so innocent people are never convicted rather than making sure they are not given the ultimate punishment?

Tell the guy serving 20 years for walking on water (or whatever - oh, sorry, was that obscure?) even though he didn't do it that it's okay because at least we're not executing him,

I look back to the last time I served on a jury - I couldn't believe the charges that were brought against the defendant. It was not something where the death penalty was even a consideration, but the charges brought against him were not supported by the evidence. And yet, the defendant spent months in jail of a crime he didn't commit (IMO and the opinion of every fellow juror that I spoke with).

Is that type of "justice" okay with you? Is it okay for someone to serve time in prison when they are innocent so long as they don't get the death penalty?

The principles upon which this country was founded do not state "innocent until proven guilty, unless it's a misdemeanor". I don't care if you are arrested for jay-walking, if you are going to be found guilty in a court of law, you must be proven guilty. If you are convicted of jay-walking while merely standing on the sidewalk, then we have a problem.

fnordfocus: I don't get it.

There's something else going on if cops are framing cops instead of covering up for them.

Man, it is almost as if they were trying to cover up an affair or something. Perhaps in relation to a higher up in the force such as a supervisor with somebody close to the sentenced man, like his wife.

It is a shame we'll never know.

Derek313: Some farkers must of done some time, I see a little prison argot in here.

/if you had to look that up, you suck

I know what "farkers" means, thank you very much.

onebadgungan: And yet, there are still innocent people on death row.

Who exactly?

Name them and present credible evidence and I will fight to get them out of prison. Otherwise, STFU.

fnordfocus: Again, WTF? Wouldn't his union provide a decent lawyer? If not, a cop could sure as heck afford to pay for one.

No, unions don't provide lawyers for non-duty related matters.

That being said, I'm very suspicious about this. What cop would plead no contest to such serious charges knowing he was facing many years in jail for something he didn't do? His excuse of "My public defender didn't prepare a defense" is extremely weak and for his kids to wait this long to decide they were never molested is suspicious too.

mud_shark: Shouldn't we focus on reforming our courts so innocent people are never convicted



No. The purpose of the courts is that anybody's ass can be threatened to go to jail at anytime whatsoever especially if someone higher up the food chain disagrees with you. Reform would be beside the point.

Also, most crimes don't even get reported if you compare victimization surveys vs. crimes reported.

CruiserTwelve: What cop would plead no contest to such serious charges knowing he was facing many years in jail for something he didn't do?

Maybe they worked him over like they do to citizens.

I've seen that interrogation scene in Menace II Society

Everyone involved in this clusterfark should undergo scaphism while hooked up to life support. Poor guy.

browser_snake: Those of you railing against capital punishment, I present you a few points:

1. If this had been a capital punishment case, the flimsy evidence from the prosecution would have been scrutinized a hell of a lot more than it was at the time.

2. Appeals all the way up the chain would have been automatic.

3. The defendant would have had much better representation than he did initially.

F that. All cases should be scrutinized to the fullest extent. He was sentenced to TWO LIFE TERMS. Even if the potential punishment drives the quality of the case, no better than capital punishment.

dahmers love zombie: Absolutely no statements by ANY person should ever be admitted into evidence if the individual cannot be fully cross-examined by the defense.

Ever.

In fact, this should have been appealed as unconstitutional for that very reason.

Sounds like someone isn't getting a Father's Day card.

Man, don't get me started on vindictive ex-wives. They can make up all kinds of shiat, then they just walk after you spend your life-savings defending yourself.

mud_shark: onebadgungan: And yet, there are still innocent people on death row.

Who exactly?

Name them and present credible evidence and I will fight to get them out of prison. Otherwise, STFU.

Well, since we already brought up the Satanic Panic of the '90s, how about this guy? Link(pops)And then read the page on the case.

If there hadn't been an irrational belief in Satanic cults that caused daycare centers to be accused of ritual child abuse, these three would have never been convicted.

Acharne: mud_shark: This is another example of why guilty verdicts should be beyond a reasonable doubt. The anti-death-penalty-pansies just want to ban capital punishment but have no regard for anyone else unfairly convicted.

I follow your argument as being for more accountability... but your first paragraph is very confusing. I am taking from it that you not only think it is an injustice when people are unfairly convicted... but that you also support the death penalty? I'm confused. What about if this fellow had been murdered by the state before his children were of an age of conscience?

I'm not arguing with you... I just felt your first paragraph completely conflicts with the rest. Just seeking some disambiguation.

I'm pro-death. I just want to be sure that anyone convicted of a crime is definitely guilty before enduring whatever sentence they are faced with.

If you're guilty of jay-walking, let's have the evidence. That should be relatively easy to prove in a court of law. If you're guilty of murder, let's see the evidence. Prove the case and then let's execute the motherfarker!

What we shouldn't do is skimp on justice. If the prosecutor cannot prove his case, then let the defendant go free. I don't care how guilty the person looks - if they cannot prove his guilt, then let him walk.

I say this having served on a jury in a felony trial where my peers (i.e. the other members of the jury) felt the defendant was guilty as hell. We just didn't think he was guilty of the charge that we were asked to consider.

The case ended in a mistrial before we had a chance to decide, but I was certainly not going to find him guilty and I suspect most others weren't either. My not-guilty vote would have been enough to clear him of the charge which he was accused.

I did think he was guilty - just not of the charge which we were asked to consider. Should he have served time? Yeah, probably, but again not on the charge that we were asked to consider. I can only guess that the defendant was facing other charges in other coutrooms where I sincerely hope the prosecutor did a better job, but I was not going to vote "guilty" simply because I thought the defendant was a low-life scumbag.

Are other people who are picked for jury duty less ethical than I? Probably. I just wish that others had the same moral values that I do. I know that's a pipe dream though. Now I need another beer

Yet another reason for not having kids.

We really should start requiring some evidence, as in any at all, before convicting people of abuse/molestation. The mere accusation just should not be enough. Most especially not an accusation from someone with obvious emotional/revenge motive (bitter ex-wife).

The kids are innocent. It doesn't take a master manipulator to get a 5 year old to believe a lie (tooth fairy, santa, easter bunny, jesus, god). If you've ever dealt with a kid with a monster under his bed you know what I'm talking about. The other cop, the wife, and the public defender however, are lousey sacks of shiat. I'd take a few months to enjoy my family then I'd hunt them each down and make them suffer. Dude's got a bad heart- his life's about over. At least get some righteous vengeance and go out like a hero. Life is all we really own, and taking a life- either through murder, false incarceration, or just abusing someone so bad that life becomes horrible- is the ultimate crime. Them farkers need to suffer and be made an example of.

proof of Canada's flawed system.

Remember: if you love children, lynchings are awesome.

//I feel ill.

rotsky: I'd say he's had quite a rockyrockey road.

/sorry, pet peeve.

scottydoesntknow: All those involved with his prosecution should face defamation charges.

Defamation? That's it? They've got perjury, coercion of a child, and obstruction of justice easily. They'll be touring their own PMITA prisons before long...

mud_shark: onebadgungan: And yet, there are still innocent people on death row.

Who exactly?

Name them and present credible evidence and I will fight to get them out of prison. Otherwise, STFU.

133 People Exonerated from Death Row (new window)

These people would probably know more about it. (new window)

I do wonder, though, if any evidence would be credible to you, regardless of its validity. I guess we'll see.

Need_MindBleach: mud_shark: onebadgungan: And yet, there are still innocent people on death row.

Who exactly?

Name them and present credible evidence and I will fight to get them out of prison. Otherwise, STFU.

Well, since we already brought up the Satanic Panic of the '90s, how about this guy? Link(pops)And then read the page on the case.

If there hadn't been an irrational belief in Satanic cults that caused daycare centers to be accused of ritual child abuse, these three would have never been convicted.

Sorry, but Wikipedia is blocked. Try again.

mud_shark: Need_MindBleach: mud_shark: onebadgungan: And yet, there are still innocent people on death row.

Who exactly?

Name them and present credible evidence and I will fight to get them out of prison. Otherwise, STFU.

Well, since we already brought up the Satanic Panic of the '90s, how about this guy? Link(pops)And then read the page on the case.

If there hadn't been an irrational belief in Satanic cults that caused daycare centers to be accused of ritual child abuse, these three would have never been convicted.

Sorry, but Wikipedia is blocked. Try again.

Fine, look up Damien Echols in onebadgungan's link. Unless that's mysteriously blocked too.

Honestly, you anti death penalty dudes do make a good point if someone is innocent...

On the other hand, if I was innocent and got to choose between twenty years in prison and being killed

stick the needle in me ASAP.

/life without freedom is not worth pursuing

davynelson: Honestly, you anti death penalty dudes do make a good point if someone is innocent...

On the other hand, if I was innocent and got to choose between twenty years in prison and being killed

stick the needle in me ASAP.

/life without freedom is not worth pursuing

Oh, I'm not anti-death penalty as a concept. I'm just anti-death penalty for innocent people. I also don't consider it a deterrent - it's state-sanctioned revenge. If that's what you need to get over whatever the criminal did to you or your family, go to it. Unfortunately, it rarely gives peace of mind or closure. Victim Resources (new window)

mud_shark: Okay, good. Let's continue then. These same people who argue that innocents are sometimes found guilty and sentenced to death do not seem to give a flying fark if some innocent is found guilty and sentenced to life in prison.

This is where you shift into "tarded"

I have never heard anyone say "Abolish the death penalty because sometimes people who are wrongly convicted die. But the people who are wrongly convicted of lesser crimes... meh... no biggie."

mud_shark: I'm pro-death. I just want to be sure that anyone convicted of a crime is definitely guilty before enduring whatever sentence they are faced with.

Do you propose a 100% accurate way of doing this?

mud_shark: Sorry, but Wikipedia is blocked. Try again.

Ah, the classic 'I don't believe you so why don't you go do all the research' bit.

Need_MindBleach don't fall for this trick and do mud_shark's homework for him. He's the skeptic, let him go research this stuff. It'll be a growing experience.

jst3p: mud_shark: I'm pro-death. I just want to be sure that anyone convicted of a crime is definitely guilty before enduring whatever sentence they are faced with.

Do you propose a 100% accurate way of doing this?

Well, you can dunk them in the lake. If they drown, they were innocent. If they survive, burn them at the stake, they are obviously guilty.

onebadgungan: jst3p: mud_shark: I'm pro-death. I just want to be sure that anyone convicted of a crime is definitely guilty before enduring whatever sentence they are faced with.

Do you propose a 100% accurate way of doing this?

Well, you can dunk them in the lake. If they drown, they were innocent. If they survive, burn them at the stake, they are obviously guilty.


Or just weigh them.


Duck and all.

If his ex-wife suddenly turned up impaled on a ten foot high spiked iron fence with no buildings around and handcuffed with five bullets through her head, a wire around her neck and a mouth full of strychnine, and I were the investigating detective... I would write "suicide" on my forms and let it go.

/srsly

jst3p: onebadgungan: jst3p: mud_shark: I'm pro-death. I just want to be sure that anyone convicted of a crime is definitely guilty before enduring whatever sentence they are faced with.

Do you propose a 100% accurate way of doing this?

Well, you can dunk them in the lake. If they drown, they were innocent. If they survive, burn them at the stake, they are obviously guilty.


Or just weigh them.


Duck and all.

Who are you who are so wise in the ways of science?

It goes without saying that I feel awful for the father, but I also feel really bad for those kids. First they're bullied into making up some garbage stories just to make the constant interrogations stop, then their father is sent to prison, then they spend the rest of their childhoods being told by THEIR OWN FARKING MOTHER that they'd had these horrible things happen to them when she had to know damn well that they didn't. Did it never occur to the mother that in the process of farking over her poor ex-husband she was also using her children in a horrible way? What if they had ended up believing her? If you read up on what happened when Gerald Amirault was released, even then some of his now-grown, alleged "victims" were convinced, thanks to their being repeatedly told these things, that all of this had really happened to them and were freaking out and spending about half their waking hours in therapy. Sounds like a great life.

For these two to have stepped back and rationally examined the ideas that had been fed to them without contradiction throughout childhood and come to the conclusion they did took a lot of character. Especially since I can't believe they're real happy with Mom and her law enforcements buddies right now.

mud_shark: Okay, good. Let's continue then. These same people who argue that innocents are sometimes found guilty and sentenced to death do not seem to give a flying fark if some innocent is found guilty and sentenced to life in prison.

You can say this until you're blue in the face, but that doesn't make it true. I've never known anyone who felt this way, IRL or online.

The_Gallant_Gallstone: CruiserTwelve: What cop would plead no contest to such serious charges knowing he was facing many years in jail for something he didn't do?

Maybe they worked him over like they do to citizens.

I've seen that interrogation scene in Menace II Society

He didn't confess. At least the article says he didn't confess.

browser_snake: Those of you railing against capital punishment, I present you a few points:

1. If this had been a capital punishment case, the flimsy evidence from the prosecution would have been scrutinized a hell of a lot more than it was at the time.

2. Appeals all the way up the chain would have been automatic.

3. The defendant would have had much better representation than he did initially.

And yet the innocence project continues to get people convicted of capitol crimes freed because- they didn't do them!

Including:
People in Chicago coerced into false confessions.
People in Mississippi convicted by a medical examiner who fabricated evidence.
People in Florida convicted by a miracle dog who could find scents left months before!

This justice system isn't responsible enough to have the death penalty.

\or other nice things

onebadgungan: These people would probably know more about it. (new window)

Do you find it suspicious that the Innocence Project refuses to release statistics on how many death row inmates guilt has been supported by DNA as a result of their investigations?

onebadgungan: jst3p: mud_shark: I'm pro-death. I just want to be sure that anyone convicted of a crime is definitely guilty before enduring whatever sentence they are faced with.

Do you propose a 100% accurate way of doing this?

Well, you can dunk them in the lake. If they drown, they were innocent. If they survive, burn them at the stake, they are obviously guilty.

It's a fair cop...

rotsky [TotalFark]

I'd say he's had quite a rocky road.rode

Sorry, pet peeve

Rockstone: proof of Canada's flawed system.

They're talking about Vancouver, Washington. Not BC.

In other words...Fail.

Went through some similar bullshiat back when i was 11-12. Difference was an innocent almost went to jail but luckily had enough money (200k in 1988) to hire a decent attorney / pay off judges to get off.

The DHR/CPS/etc workers who investigated these things were to me at the time way worse than the actual problem. Tricking you on words, how your lying about it not happening by crossing your arms, blocked memories etc... And how they would keep going on and on and on and on until you said what they wanted you to say just to get them to shut up about it and leave.

I'm 33 now and really don't know if i was molested or not. I think it is just recurring nightmares i have had since back then as the investigators would be really graphic on what molestation was. If i was i know it wasn't the person they were trying to convict but the then current stepfather who i know did some farked up shiat not necessarily in the molestation category but cutting it really close.

I still feel like crap that the innocent party was almost sent to jail and cost him a lot of money. I met up with him about 10 years ago and he said he doesn't hold a grudge and doesn't blame me but I still feel like shiat over the issue.

CruiserTwelve: onebadgungan: These people would probably know more about it. (new window)

Do you find it suspicious that the Innocence Project refuses to release statistics on how many death row inmates guilt has been supported by DNA as a result of their investigations?

That in itself is illogical, because why would a person who not only knows he is guilty but also knows that DNA evidence will confirm it even ask the Innocence Project to look at his case? You have to write these people and persuade them to take your case on, they don't go and find inmates to toss lawyers and investigators at.

There is no "suspicious", because it doesn't happen.

that's farked up. poor man. poor kids (I mean, 9 and 5?). Everybody that maliciously prosectued this man should be brought to beg at his feet for forgiveness. that and 1 million.

PfizerX: scottydoesntknow: That's farked up. He spent 20 years in a Federal PMITA prison for child abuse...and he's an ex-cop. Like others have said, he's lucky to be alive. If I were him, the first thing I would have done upon release is walk up to now-retired Detective Krause, and cockpunch him for every day I was in there.

7300 Cockpunches. That would be the most consecutive cockpunches since Keith Hackney Fought Joe Son's crotch at UFC 4.

Again, I'll point out that the detective who helped put this guy in jail was a female. So the point of your cockpunches may be lost on her.

rewind2846: That in itself is illogical, because why would a person who not only knows he is guilty but also knows that DNA evidence will confirm it even ask the Innocence Project to look at his case?

Why not? What does a person on death row have to lose?

There is no "suspicious", because it doesn't happen.

Yes, it does. I can't find a quote but Barry Scheck himself has admitted that in many cases their DNA tests have proven their clients guilty. The Innocence Project has refused to release numbers though.

So here's another question: Do you think more guilty people are found innocent by juries than innocent people are found guilty? I would guess that far more guilty people are acquited than the other way around.

dahmers love zombie: Absolutely no statements by ANY person should ever be admitted into evidence if the individual cannot be fully cross-examined by the defense.

Ever.

Unless you are an "enemy combatant".

hej: PfizerX: scottydoesntknow: That's farked up. He spent 20 years in a Federal PMITA prison for child abuse...and he's an ex-cop. Like others have said, he's lucky to be alive. If I were him, the first thing I would have done upon release is walk up to now-retired Detective Krause, and cockpunch him for every day I was in there.

7300 Cockpunches. That would be the most consecutive cockpunches since Keith Hackney Fought Joe Son's crotch at UFC 4.

Again, I'll point out that the detective who helped put this guy in jail was a female. So the point of your cockpunches may be lost on her.

Sex change surgery is a biach.

CruiserTwelve: onebadgungan: These people would probably know more about it. (new window)

Do you find it suspicious that the Innocence Project refuses to release statistics on how many death row inmates guilt has been supported by DNA as a result of their investigations?

No. Why is that important? If their results are one innocent person not killed and 100 guilty people confirmed guilty, they still did a good job.

veive: hej: PfizerX: scottydoesntknow: That's farked up. He spent 20 years in a Federal PMITA prison for child abuse...and he's an ex-cop. Like others have said, he's lucky to be alive. If I were him, the first thing I would have done upon release is walk up to now-retired Detective Krause, and cockpunch him for every day I was in there.

7300 Cockpunches. That would be the most consecutive cockpunches since Keith Hackney Fought Joe Son's crotch at UFC 4.

Again, I'll point out that the detective who helped put this guy in jail was a female. So the point of your cockpunches may be lost on her.

Sex change surgery is a biach.

I think that surgery is called an addadiktome.

/audio joke
//say it out loud and you might laugh

jst3p: mud_shark: Okay, good. Let's continue then. These same people who argue that innocents are sometimes found guilty and sentenced to death do not seem to give a flying fark if some innocent is found guilty and sentenced to life in prison.

This is where you shift into "tarded"

I have never heard anyone say "Abolish the death penalty because sometimes people who are wrongly convicted die. But the people who are wrongly convicted of lesser crimes... meh... no biggie."

Really? Do you not pay attention to the news or what? People don't actually say that, but they definitely mean that - oh, and to that other poster who told me to follow someone else's link that wasn't to a Wikipedia site - it was a Wikipedia site.

Sorry, but I demand facts, not opinions. You don't need to convince me that some people have been wrongly convicted - I want to stop that more than you do. I just think that justice should be served no matter if the crime is seemingly minor or something that I feel is worthy of the death penatly.

mud_shark: You can't just buy prosecutors off though (okay, well, maybe you can

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/03/26/national/main4895883.shtml
Oh, you can.

mediaho: Police interrogations are an unholy mindfark I wouldn't wish on my worst enemy.

Believe me, it's just as easy to mindfark 'em back, if you know how the game is played and you're lucky.

farkin_Gary: mediaho: Police interrogations are an unholy mindfark I wouldn't wish on my worst enemy.

Believe me, it's just as easy to mindfark 'em back, if you know how the game is played and you're lucky.

How many 5 year old kids know how the game is played though??

onebadgungan: Oh, I'm not anti-death penalty as a concept. I'm just anti-death penalty for innocent people. I also don't consider it a deterrent - it's state-sanctioned revenge. If that's what you need to get over whatever the criminal did to you or your family, go to it. Unfortunately, it rarely gives peace of mind or closure. Victim Resources (new window)

While I agree it can be misused for such purposes, I believe the death penalty isn't revenge OR a deterrent. It's taking out the trash. I mean, if you really have evidence-- I mean evidence like we had against Saddam Hussein, not some cop saying you did it and circumstantial crap-- then it's better for everyone involved if you kill the guy. You save money, time, energy, and you take care of someone who cannot be put back onto the streets anyway. No revenge involved, just eliminating individuals whose life can only harm us.

Who exactly?

Name them and present credible evidence and I will fight to get them out of prison. Otherwise, STFU.mud_shark: jst3p: mud_shark: Okay, good. Let's continue then. These same people who argue that innocents are sometimes found guilty and sentenced to death do not seem to give a flying fark if some innocent is found guilty and sentenced to life in prison.

This is where you shift into "tarded"

I have never heard anyone say "Abolish the death penalty because sometimes people who are wrongly convicted die. But the people who are wrongly convicted of lesser crimes... meh... no biggie."

Really? Do you not pay attention to the news or what? People don't actually say that, but they definitely mean that - oh, and to that other poster who told me to follow someone else's link that wasn't to a Wikipedia site - it was a Wikipedia site.

Sorry, but I demand facts, not opinions. You don't need to convince me that some people have been wrongly convicted - I want to stop that more than you do. I just think that justice should be served no matter if the crime is seemingly minor or something that I feel is worthy of the death penatly.

You asked for a credible death penalty case in which the defendant was likely innocent. I gave you the first one I could think of. Now you're changing your statement to something else, and also saying that you don't believe it because it's wikipedia. Fine. Look up the sources wikipedia uses for the article. Look up the case in the news. Look up the case in the innocence project, I'm sure it's there. But wait, you don't believe the innocence project either. I guess I just give up then.

mud_shark: jst3p: mud_shark: Okay, good. Let's continue then. These same people who argue that innocents are sometimes found guilty and sentenced to death do not seem to give a flying fark if some innocent is found guilty and sentenced to life in prison.

This is where you shift into "tarded"

I have never heard anyone say "Abolish the death penalty because sometimes people who are wrongly convicted die. But the people who are wrongly convicted of lesser crimes... meh... no biggie."

Really? Do you not pay attention to the news or what? People don't actually say that, but they definitely mean that - oh, and to that other poster who told me to follow someone else's link that wasn't to a Wikipedia site - it was a Wikipedia site.

Sorry, but I demand facts, not opinions. You don't need to convince me that some people have been wrongly convicted - I want to stop that more than you do. I just think that justice should be served no matter if the crime is seemingly minor or something that I feel is worthy of the death penatly.

Well, I didn't post any links to Wikipedia, so there was apparently some error. And you are aware that Wikipedia is actually vetted quite a bit and much more reliable than it is given credit for, right?

Anyway, so, yes, you are the type of person who will not accept any evidence unless you deem it worthy, regardless of it's truth. Now I know, and I don't need to engage with you anymore.

Fat and Nasty 86: What would YOU do for a Klondike bar?


Thread over in 2. Well done sir.

dmd8605: doyner: rotsky: I'd say he's had quite a rocky road.

My first sighting! Your actually real!

I see what you did there.

hahaha! I was in on the orginal rotsky thread. good times....

What's worse than a sexual predator? A vindicative biatch who frames an innocent man as a sexual predator. The mom can rot in hell.

Maliciously false accusations of sex crimes should be considered a sex crime.

If the city of Vancouver and or the State of Washington were truly interested in any sense of justice in this case, then detective Sharon Krause should be indicted by the prosecutors office immediately. She would have had to have been a complete idiot notto have known this man was innocent of the charges. Unfortuantely, we - once again - have a situation in which a person with an agenda for self promotion is given a tremendous amount of power. She lied to the prosecutors office, lied to the children, (coersing them to inturn lie) and lied in a court of law. At the very least, Spencer should retain an attorney to sue her, and the city into oblivion. That this can happen in a suppossedly "free" country is appalling!

Basiorana: onebadgungan: Oh, I'm not anti-death penalty as a concept. I'm just anti-death penalty for innocent people. I also don't consider it a deterrent - it's state-sanctioned revenge. If that's what you need to get over whatever the criminal did to you or your family, go to it. Unfortunately, it rarely gives peace of mind or closure. Victim Resources (new window)

While I agree it can be misused for such purposes, I believe the death penalty isn't revenge OR a deterrent. It's taking out the trash. I mean, if you really have evidence-- I mean evidence like we had against Saddam Hussein, not some cop saying you did it and circumstantial crap-- then it's better for everyone involved if you kill the guy. You save money, time, energy, and you take care of someone who cannot be put back onto the streets anyway. No revenge involved, just eliminating individuals whose life can only harm us.

I believe it's actually more expensive (new window) to the state to execute someone. And it takes more time and effort for the state. If that money and effort were put into rehabilitation programs, recidivism would go down and crime would drop sharply. But the privately owned prisons would make less and the private security firms who staff them would make less. While I don't think the only reason for executions is so businesses can profit, I think keeping executions so there is no money for those programs is at least a partial concern.

The_Gallant_Gallstone: Derek313: Some farkers must of done some time, I see a little prison argot in here.

/if you had to look that up, you suck

I know what "farkers" means, thank you very much.

I had to look up "must of." I still don't understand it.

CruiserTwelve: fnordfocus: Again, WTF? Wouldn't his union provide a decent lawyer? If not, a cop could sure as heck afford to pay for one.

No, unions don't provide lawyers for non-duty related matters.

That being said, I'm very suspicious about this. What cop would plead no contest to such serious charges knowing he was facing many years in jail for something he didn't do? His excuse of "My public defender didn't prepare a defense" is extremely weak and for his kids to wait this long to decide they were never molested is suspicious too.

Dude, did you forget how it was back in the 80's? Not only was a child molester guilty until proven innocent, sometimes they were guilty EVEN WHEN proven innocent. Also, faith was so strong in the "repressed memory" syndrome, there were cases where the DEFENDANTS were convinced they had done the crime, and were repressing the memory! (Paul Ingram, a police safety officer in Olympia, Washington, in 1988)

Also, as I said earlier, it was an article of faith with the cops, psychiatrists, and media, that if a child said he or she had been molested then IT WAS TRUE, even without any other evidence, and sometimes even with evidence to the contrary. I can see why this man would have thought he was better off taking the nolo, and hoping justice would prevail on his appeal. Which it didn't. And still hasn't, because according to the article, the DA's office may refile charges. Because IF A CHILD SAYS HE WAS MOLESTED IT MUST BE TRUE.

onebadgungan I agree the death penalty is no deterrent.

What it is, it's a GET OUT OF JAIL FREE card.
Let's face it, everybody dies.

veive: farkin_Gary: mediaho: Police interrogations are an unholy mindfark I wouldn't wish on my worst enemy.

Believe me, it's just as easy to mindfark 'em back, if you know how the game is played and you're lucky.

How many 5 year old kids know how the game is played though??

I meant that in the context of an adult interrogation.

Interviews of children, as a matter of criminal investigation, are a matter I would never wish to take responsibility for.

This makes me want to barf

/barfing
//maybe it's the drinking
///still disgusted by that and the hurricanes of course

mud_shark: jst3p: mud_shark: Okay, good. Let's continue then. These same people who argue that innocents are sometimes found guilty and sentenced to death do not seem to give a flying fark if some innocent is found guilty and sentenced to life in prison.

This is where you shift into "tarded"

I have never heard anyone say "Abolish the death penalty because sometimes people who are wrongly convicted die. But the people who are wrongly convicted of lesser crimes... meh... no biggie."

Really? Do you not pay attention to the news or what? People don't actually say that, but they definitely mean that -

So first you accuse me of not watching the news then you go on to concede that no one says that but you infer that this is what they mean based on... well nothing that I can see.

Stay in school kid.

In my opinion...

Since the age of 18 the children in this case have been committing a crime. They allowed a lie to keep going that cost an innocent man his freedom. They knew it was a lie.

After you are an adult then you should have to bear the burden of your crime fully. In situations like this the people who lied should have to serve the amount of time in prison that they caused an innocent man to serve.

det: get a new

Nice.

Derek313: Some farkers must of done some time, I see a little prison argot in here.

/if you had to look that up, you suck

what argot? what argot??

:)

/yes, I had to look it up

det: Maybe they just wanted to get a new daddy...

Meant to quote the whole thing.

/Nice
//Fail for me

angst178n: In my opinion...

Since the age of 18 the children in this case have been committing a crime. They allowed a lie to keep going that cost an innocent man his freedom. They knew it was a lie.

After you are an adult then you should have to bear the burden of your crime fully. In situations like this the people who lied should have to serve the amount of time in prison that they caused an innocent man to serve.

These kids had been convinced at a young age by a police officer and their own mother that they had been abused and just couldn't remember it. It may have just taken this long for the brainwashing to wash off. And that "repressed memory" theory has only been universally acknowledged as the BS that it is for the last 5 years or so.

Mr. Coffee Nerves: Wow, this is the worst episode of "Frasier" ever.

funny

RenownedCurator: Did it never occur to the mother that in the process of farking over her poor ex-husband she was also using her children in a horrible way?

No. Anybody else's feelings wouldn't have occurred to her. She probably had none of her own, beyond unchecked fury whenever she was frustrated. She wanted to be rid of her husband and she was going to have him got rid of. Why, we'll probably never know. Probably his only real crime was being unable or unwilling to be a complete doormat who would do or say or buy her everything she thought she wanted him to.

Sociopaths are like that.

They're also very good at manipulation. Children are perhaps only now realizing what a lunatic their mother really is.

CruiserTwelve:Why not? What does a person on death row have to lose?

Because in most states (like california) when someone has their DNA checked as evidence in a crime, it is usually the very last appeal they will get, including death row cases. They can even be moved to death row from life or life without parole on DNA evidence. There can be a lot to lose. Plus, it's not just DNA that gets them free, it's all the investigative work done by the Project aside from the DNA.

There is no "suspicious", because it doesn't happen.

Yes, it does. I can't find a quote but Barry Scheck himself has admitted that in many cases their DNA tests have proven their clients guilty. The Innocence Project has refused to release numbers though.

So here's another question: Do you think more guilty people are found innocent by juries than innocent people are found guilty? I would guess that far more guilty people are acquited than the other way around.

I have been searching through google for anything like what you assume Sheck has said, and have found nothing of the sort. I call a [citation needed] on this one.

Do you have some sort of beef with the Innocence Project, with people who are exonerated through DNA evidence, of with a legal system that is so farked that the difference between guilty or not guilty has more to do with power and status than whether or not you actually did anything?

The saying "better a thousand guilty men go free than one innocent man be jailed" is apropos, as long as we have prosecutors, judges and cops who seek power and control at any cost, and a system which leans heavily in favor of the rich and powerful.

I don't care what his lawyer told him, what the odds were, what anything was...

No father, does anything other then scream "innocent" when the judge asks how he pleads on the charges he molested his children, if the father really is innocent.

Can'tLetYouDoThatStarFox: I read a police report at work last week. It went something like this:
"Suspect was pulled over for suspicious broken tail-light. I asked for license and registration. Suspect was acting suspiciously. Suspect was acting very nervous, hands were trembling nervously and suspiciously. Suspect answered my questions, but very suspiciously and nervously. Suspect looked from side to side at one point. Suspect smelled strongly of marijuana. Car smelled strongly of marijuana. Driver's license and registration papers smelled strongly of marijuana. I handcuffed suspect and conducted a warrantless search of the vehicle for contraband and officer safety. I found an unregistered pistol in the trunk, locked in a box, unloaded. No marijuana was found. I immediately arrested suspect."

As someone who was arrested during a speeding ticket stop for having a two year-old bottle rocket under the edge of the carpet of my trunk, I laugh. If they had stopped me during the 4th that I had actually purchased the fireworks, I could understand that I was a safety hazard. Two years on, that farking thing had been missed because I don't really Molly Maid my trunk.

At least my traffic judge had the good sense to dismiss the charges. Still cost me a lot of money. They impounded my car, I had to get processed and released, and then I had to cab to the lot to get my car. And I had to pay towing charges.

Don't get me wrong, I WAS speeding. But because of a lost rocket in my trunk, instead of a ticket I was booked and released. That was a day off work for court, and 500 dollars for the attorney. There was another 300 dollars for towing.

Oddly enough since the charges were dismissed there were no court costs. The state didn't make any money on the extra stop, and the judge dropped my speeding ticket as well. Unless the county had a deal with the towing company, no one involved in my arrest made any money at all, and they certainly didn't make anyone safer.

It's not like I was keeping a wet, barely recognizable paper bottle rocket for two years in some grand plan to "do something".

/And officer Reynolds - you're an asshole.
//And the judge told you as much.

JohnBigBootay: Sadly, this is only news because he may get out. I'd wager there's hundreds, if not thousands of people wrongfully imprisoned for this. It's the salem witch trials of the modern age. Not that there aren't real offenders, of course there are.

Probably more like tens of thousands of innocents. Child abuse has the highest rate of conviction of any crime (these are stats from 10 years ago or so, from the top of my head), yet it also has the highest false conviction rate of any crime.

Also, I'm too tired to reread the article, but I'm assuming he is already out? Said he was in prison nearly 20 years and was convicted in 1985, so I'm thinking he's been out for 4-5 years already.

jevman: No father, does anything other then scream "innocent" when the judge asks how he pleads on the charges he molested his children, if the father really is innocent.

You know what: THIS. I can't think of a single scenario that a father would think it would help his kids if he did, and that's the only reason I can come up with that a parent would actually plead to something like that.

jevman: I don't care what his lawyer told him, what the odds were, what anything was...

No father, does anything other then scream "innocent" when the judge asks how he pleads on the charges he molested his children, if the father really is innocent.

Good thing you are "No father". Putting your own self into a hypothetical situation and then extrapolating your own hypothetical behavior out to all fathers is terrible logic. Try again.

This dude got railroaded:

-his lawyer had no defense prepared whatsoever
-there was no physical evidence of sexual abuse
-the prosecution withheld the medical exams from the defense
-According to the American Psychological Association, it is not currently possible to distinguish a true repressed memory from a false one without corroborating evidence.

Any competent counsel could've had the conviction thrown out for any number of reasons:

-incompetent counsel
-prosecutorial misconduct
-police misconduct

This dude got farked and only 20 years later, after the statute of limitations expired on the mother's actions, did they admit to screwing over their dad.

Something similar happened here. Guy was 19 years old and his 7 yr old sister was being molested by moms boyfriend. Mom and boyfriend told her to say it was her brother or they would be homeless. No forensic evidence, just her testimony sent him to jail for 7 years. He served it and told people he was in for GTA. Now he's 44 years old and as of a few months ago he was totally exonerated of the crime. Just in case you were wonderng Yes molester boyfriend continued doing it until they threw him out a few months later and he disappeared.

hej: PfizerX: scottydoesntknow: That's farked up. He spent 20 years in a Federal PMITA prison for child abuse...and he's an ex-cop. Like others have said, he's lucky to be alive. If I were him, the first thing I would have done upon release is walk up to now-retired Detective Krause, and cockpunch him for every day I was in there.

7300 Cockpunches. That would be the most consecutive cockpunches since Keith Hackney Fought Joe Son's crotch at UFC 4.

Again, I'll point out that the detective who helped put this guy in jail was a female. So the point of your cockpunches may be lost on her.

You haven't seen many "female" police officers, have you?

I'm pretty sure they start to grow penises (Penii?) when they get their first mullet.

I'm going to post before I read the thread because time is always against me. By the time I read all the comments, it's to late to post one of my own.

My brother was accused by his daughter in 1989. No evidence, irrefutable testimony that the kids were 30 miles away visiting a relative when it supposedly happened, social workers reprimanded for coaching the girl, etc... 5 Life Sentences, served consecutively. Appeals dropped it to 2 terms, concurrent. He has been in jail for twenty years. As an adult, his daughter went through the courts to get him a new hearing after recanting. It took her a few years, but she finally got him back into court and told her story. The judge had to decide if she was lying then or lying now. He decided on now and sent my brother back to his cell. Yay justice

Were these kids retards? At some point wouldn't they say "gee dad went to jail because I lied, this is bullshiat, I can't see Daddy, I love Daddy?"

I have a friend who I strongly suspect this happened to. Her mom claimed she came home one day to find dad was high on coke whih he'd been trying to quit and making 2 year old baby girl give him a BJ, so she just grabbed babygirl and up and left and never looked back and thankfully dad never looked for them. Buddy has no memory of this, but figures she was two so it makes sense she can't remember, and thinks her mom is a hero. But this was in 1973 supposedly, so the coke use makes me raise an eyebrow (especially as this story was told to buddy in 1984) and wouldn't it make more sense to have called the cops on this assmunch than sneak off in the night? I'm not saying it's a total lie; I'm saying I suspect it was more involved.

Long story short, to this day she has no idea where her dad was/is and has no desire to find him. He has also apparently never looked for her. Her mom was known to be living under one fake identity and I have long suspected her mom up and took off with her one night for whatever reason and created identities for them both.

mrcaffeine: I'm going to post before I read the thread because time is always against me. By the time I read all the comments, it's to late to post one of my own.

My brother was accused by his daughter in 1989. No evidence, irrefutable testimony that the kids were 30 miles away visiting a relative when it supposedly happened, social workers reprimanded for coaching the girl, etc... 5 Life Sentences, served consecutively. Appeals dropped it to 2 terms, concurrent. He has been in jail for twenty years. As an adult, his daughter went through the courts to get him a new hearing after recanting. It took her a few years, but she finally got him back into court and told her story. The judge had to decide if she was lying then or lying now. He decided on now and sent my brother back to his cell. Yay justice

My god. This is the stuff of nightmares. I have no words.

Need_MindBleach: And that "repressed memory" theory has only been universally acknowledged as the BS that it is for the last 5 years or so.


disagrees

/I don't
//but James does

SquintyKat
Could be scarier. In a newspaper article last year, they included an interview with the police officer who went to interview the girl in a group home because she was saying that I had also raped her. This was the first any of us had ever heard of it and they mentioned me by name in the article (not "a relative", by my farking name) Luckily, the policeman decided that since her story was impossible from a linear time perspective, he decided that it was without merit. So, at 40 years old, I find out that a child sex investigation of me is in the files. I get sick thinking of what might have become of me. I'm glad I don't live there anymore. Seeing that in the local paper means that people I used to know probably read it and decided I might be a sick individual. If I still lived there, thay might treat me like a child molester that got away.

Oh, my brother signed a contract last week to get out in 2012. If he were in jail for killing someone, he would have been out in 1996, 16 years earlier than he will for this charge.

I believe with one of the comments on thats site, the wife should be sent to jail for 20 years as well as the cops.

onebadgungan: CruiserTwelve: onebadgungan: These people would probably know more about it. (new window)

Do you find it suspicious that the Innocence Project refuses to release statistics on how many death row inmates guilt has been supported by DNA as a result of their investigations?

No. Why is that important? If their results are one innocent person not killed and 100 guilty people confirmed guilty, they still did a good job.

I don't disagree with that, but why would they refuse to release statistics? Could it be that a vast majority of their cases prove the guilt of their clients and they only want us to hear about the times they prove them innocent?

mrcaffeine: SquintyKat
Could be scarier. In a newspaper article last year, they included an interview with the police officer who went to interview the girl in a group home because she was saying that I had also raped her. This was the first any of us had ever heard of it and they mentioned me by name in the article (not "a relative", by my farking name) Luckily, the policeman decided that since her story was impossible from a linear time perspective, he decided that it was without merit. So, at 40 years old, I find out that a child sex investigation of me is in the files. I get sick thinking of what might have become of me. I'm glad I don't live there anymore. Seeing that in the local paper means that people I used to know probably read it and decided I might be a sick individual. If I still lived there, thay might treat me like a child molester that got away.

Oh, my brother signed a contract last week to get out in 2012. If he were in jail for killing someone, he would have been out in 1996, 16 years earlier than he will for this charge.

We all know the "justice system" is fu*ked up. Sexual abuse is the hot topic now, while real abusers go free.

CruiserTwelve: onebadgungan: CruiserTwelve: onebadgungan: These people would probably know more about it. (new window)

Do you find it suspicious that the Innocence Project refuses to release statistics on how many death row inmates guilt has been supported by DNA as a result of their investigations?

No. Why is that important? If their results are one innocent person not killed and 100 guilty people confirmed guilty, they still did a good job.

I don't disagree with that, but why would they refuse to release statistics? Could it be that a vast majority of their cases prove the guilt of their clients and they only want us to hear about the times they prove them innocent?

Does it make a difference? Even heard of the saying "Better ten guilty men walk free than one innocent one be imprisoned?"

Gyrfalcon: I can see why this man would have thought he was better off taking the nolo, and hoping justice would prevail on his appeal. Which it didn't. And still hasn't, because according to the article, the DA's office may refile charges. Because IF A CHILD SAYS HE WAS MOLESTED IT MUST BE TRUE.

I understand your argument, but I'm still not convinced that there wasn't something to the charges. He chose to take the nolo, and he lost every appeal. I understand that innocent people can be convicted because the crime is so disgusting that the jury wants to convict just because of that, but this guy was a cop so he supposedly knew the law, and he chose to plead nolo contendre to some serious charges. His excuse that his PD was incompetent stinks. He could have asked for a new PD. He could have had a trial to the court instead of a jury. He just didn't seem to put up any fight at all and it doesn't sound like something a cop accused of molesting his own kids would do if the charges were a complete fabrication.

We're only hearing one side of the story here. I know that's usually enough for many Farkers, but I have a suspicious mind and I have a feeling there's much more to this than we're hearing about.

rewind2846: I have been searching through google for anything like what you assume Sheck has said, and have found nothing of the sort. I call a [citation needed] on this one.

Yeah, I couldn't find it either but I'm sure he has said that. I'll keep looking.

Do you have some sort of beef with the Innocence Project, with people who are exonerated through DNA evidence, of with a legal system that is so farked that the difference between guilty or not guilty has more to do with power and status than whether or not you actually did anything?

I applaud the inncocence project. I think it's a great thing. Bear in mind though, the vast majority of people that are convicted are guilty. The few that get convicted in error are an anomoly. That certainly doesn't make it right of course, but the prisons aren't full of innocent people. With 2.3 million people in prison, the number the innocence project has exonerated is in the hundreds. That's a tiny percentage. The system isn't perfect, but it works pretty damn well.

Also remember that before DNA cops and prosecutors had to rely on witnesses that sometimes were mistaken or for whatever reason lied about what they saw. There was no evil intent, it was just using the best evidence they had available at the time.

The saying "better a thousand guilty men go free than one innocent man be jailed" is apropos, as long as we have prosecutors, judges and cops who seek power and control at any cost, and a system which leans heavily in favor of the rich and powerful.

I don't disagree with that.

Not that it will ever happen, but I'd be fascinated to see some kind of interview with the wife and/or prosecutors involved.

Would they admit they lied? Would they be remorseful for what they did? Would they see some kind of justification (i.e. "Okay he didnt do it but he deserved what he got because (insert insane reasoning here)".

I also wonder if there will be any ramifications for them and if not, why not?

austerity101: We really need to get over our obsession with child molestation, too.

I know, man. It's like they're ruining it for everybody.

CruiserTwelve: Gyrfalcon: I can see why this man would have thought he was better off taking the nolo, and hoping justice would prevail on his appeal. Which it didn't. And still hasn't, because according to the article, the DA's office may refile charges. Because IF A CHILD SAYS HE WAS MOLESTED IT MUST BE TRUE.

I understand your argument, but I'm still not convinced that there wasn't something to the charges. He chose to take the nolo, and he lost every appeal. I understand that innocent people can be convicted because the crime is so disgusting that the jury wants to convict just because of that, but this guy was a cop so he supposedly knew the law, and he chose to plead nolo contendre to some serious charges. His excuse that his PD was incompetent stinks. He could have asked for a new PD. He could have had a trial to the court instead of a jury. He just didn't seem to put up any fight at all and it doesn't sound like something a cop accused of molesting his own kids would do if the charges were a complete fabrication.

We're only hearing one side of the story here. I know that's usually enough for many Farkers, but I have a suspicious mind and I have a feeling there's much more to this than we're hearing about.

What side of the story is missing? The kids said it didn't happen. The dad said it didn't happen. He was let out of jail 4 years ago. The mom was sleeping with his boss. His PD didn't even fashion a defense. Now he's trying to get his name cleared from the sex offender charges, since he was let out of jail because there was no abuse. The medical records even prove there was no abuse. What is missing from this story that will help you?

Haha, it's funny because no matter what the outcome, cops are crooked.

CruiserTwelve: Gyrfalcon: I can see why this man would have thought he was better off taking the nolo, and hoping justice would prevail on his appeal. Which it didn't. And still hasn't, because according to the article, the DA's office may refile charges. Because IF A CHILD SAYS HE WAS MOLESTED IT MUST BE TRUE.

I understand your argument, but I'm still not convinced that there wasn't something to the charges. He chose to take the nolo, and he lost every appeal. I understand that innocent people can be convicted because the crime is so disgusting that the jury wants to convict just because of that, but this guy was a cop so he supposedly knew the law, and he chose to plead nolo contendre to some serious charges. His excuse that his PD was incompetent stinks. He could have asked for a new PD. He could have had a trial to the court instead of a jury. He just didn't seem to put up any fight at all and it doesn't sound like something a cop accused of molesting his own kids would do if the charges were a complete fabrication.

We're only hearing one side of the story here. I know that's usually enough for many Farkers, but I have a suspicious mind and I have a feeling there's much more to this than we're hearing about.

You just don't like to think that a cop could get railroaded by the justice system you swore to protect and defend, do you? I'm not being snarky, hon, I totally understand. But you want to believe this guy was guilty, because you'd rather not think that EVEN A GOOD COP could get nailed by a runaway justice system.

Being a cop doesn't mean he has any unusual insight into the way the law works, and I'm telling you, the way the courts were inclined towards child molesters, plus the mental agony he had to be in at being charged by his own kids and his own department with such a heinous offense, he may have just nodded dully when his lame-ass PD said take the plea, and spent the next 20 years trying to rectify the situation.

It's a biatch trying to get past that first plea.

onebadgungan: What side of the story is missing? The kids said it didn't happen. The dad said it didn't happen. He was let out of jail 4 years ago. The mom was sleeping with his boss. His PD didn't even fashion a defense. Now he's trying to get his name cleared from the sex offender charges, since he was let out of jail because there was no abuse. The medical records even prove there was no abuse. What is missing from this story that will help you?

I'd like to hear what evidence convinced him that pleading nolo to the charges was a good idea at the time. We're not hearing from the prosecution side of this case, nor are we hearing why a judge accepted his plea.

It sounds like it was the mom of one of the three victims, not all three, that was sleeping with the boss.

FTA: In 1985, Spencer entered the no-contest pleas, a type of guilty plea, after learning his court-appointed attorney had not prepared a defense. He felt pleading no contest was his only option, and that he would appeal his convictions.

His attorney hadn't prepared a defense? He was facing two life sentences and he felt that a nolo plea was his only option? I don't buy it. Something just isn't sitting right with me on this one.

Gyrfalcon: You just don't like to think that a cop could get railroaded by the justice system you swore to protect and defend, do you? I'm not being snarky, hon, I totally understand. But you want to believe this guy was guilty, because you'd rather not think that EVEN A GOOD COP could get nailed by a runaway justice system.

Nope, it's not that at all. He may have been totally innocent. But I'm just having a hard time believing a cop would plead nolo when he knew he'd done nothing wrong. Cops are some of the hardest headed people you'll ever know, and it's hard enough to get them to admit they're wrong when they really are wrong let alone getting them to admit they're wrong when they're not.

Being a cop doesn't mean he has any unusual insight into the way the law works

I'd argue that point with you. Cops, more than anyone else including lawyers, know how the criminal justice system works. Cops see it from every angle.

, and I'm telling you, the way the courts were inclined towards child molesters, plus the mental agony he had to be in at being charged by his own kids and his own department with such a heinous offense, he may have just nodded dully when his lame-ass PD said take the plea, and spent the next 20 years trying to rectify the situation.

I admit that's possible, but it still doesn't sit well with me. I still think there's something more to this than we're being told in this article.

It's a biatch trying to get past that first plea.

Which is why I find it particularly hard to believe he entered that plea. It's like spotting the other team 20 runs in the first inning in hopes you can score 21.

CruiserTwelve: It sounds like it was the mom of one of the three victims, not all three, that was sleeping with the boss.

Did you not read the article? I mean I too am slightly suspicious and suspect retardation on either the part of the kids or the cop involved, but there were TWO "victims" and they were both children of the same woman, the one who was sleeping with his boss.

BTW from the article while it's not directly stated it seems pretty implied that mom still contends it did happen and the kids are in denial. CYA and all.

Children will say anything you tell them to.

My cousin was put in jail because his aunt made her kids tell police he molested them. She dropped the charges later when her conscience kicked in. Nobody knows why she did it.

skinink: Scary tag? How about a sad one. The guy lost 20 years of his life to jail. Any compensation he gets won't even begin to make up for that.
I don't know how many Farkers have look at a typical police report. I had one written on me after an incident and requested it (after my lawyer saw no need to get a copy for my case). Cops do like to embellish and I can't remember the movie but the quote went something like if a cop thinks your guilty, he's gonna make you guilty.
The cop's report was so bad he couldn't even get my name correct on the report even after copying down my license info. for a second I thought about ignoring the summons because it clearly wasn't my name on the report.

I was convicted on "expert eye witness testimony" that said my girlfriend was white.

Yeah but Michael Jackson is guilty because prosecutors never lie. And OJ, he's guilty too.

thanks for playing sheeple

Good cops work to change the world.

Bad cops work at superficially changing public opinion of themselves with generalisations.

Hi cruisertwelve.

It's_A_Farking_Secret: CruiserTwelve: It sounds like it was the mom of one of the three victims, not all three, that was sleeping with the boss.

Did you not read the article? I mean I too am slightly suspicious and suspect retardation on either the part of the kids or the cop involved, but there were TWO "victims" and they were both children of the same woman, the one who was sleeping with his boss.

BTW from the article while it's not directly stated it seems pretty implied that mom still contends it did happen and the kids are in denial. CYA and all.

You're asking a cop to get details right. Come on, be reasonable.

Paris1127: But did they get to have orgies in hot air balloons with giraffes and Chuck Norris? Because the McMartin kids did... and the cops believed it...

did they really say that? that's worse than the made up crap from the kids that I heard. this is horrible.

nothing justifies this kind of crap. the question is how to enact justice after the fact for something as heinous as these kinds of cases?

austerity101: doyner: And yet people don't understand why it's a bad idea to allow capital punishment for child rapeanything.

FTFM.

Dude, sad, but true.

Gen. Apathy: Yeah but Michael Jackson is guilty because prosecutors never lie. And OJ, he's guilty too.

thanks for playing sheeple

Can I favorite you?

brigid_fitch: Paris1127: But did they get to have orgies in hot air balloons with giraffes and Chuck Norris? Because the McMartin kids did... and the cops believed it...

Wow, I had completely forgotten about that trial. You forgot the whole Satanic Cult angle, though. That's the part I mostly remember. Oh, and the fact that the initial complaint came from a woman who had already been diagnosed with schizophrenia & ended up drinking herself to death before the trial began.

Compare and contrast what Happened in the McMartin and Wenatchee cases, with the historical accounts of a the Salem witch trials. You will find them disturbingly similar, down to many of the details of what the children alleged happened. And while I might be able to forgive 17th century New Englanders for believing in horned devils and witches flying through the air; I'm not sure what the 20th century cops' excuses were

fnordfocus: Loren: The problem was at the trial it turned out the public defender hadn't prepared a defense. What else was he supposed to do?

Again, WTF? Wouldn't his union provide a decent lawyer? If not, a cop could sure as heck afford to pay for one.

The charges were unrelated to his work, why should the union help? I don't know why he didn't have any money.

angst178n: In my opinion...

Since the age of 18 the children in this case have been committing a crime. They allowed a lie to keep going that cost an innocent man his freedom. They knew it was a lie.

After you are an adult then you should have to bear the burden of your crime fully. In situations like this the people who lied should have to serve the amount of time in prison that they caused an innocent man to serve.

Except they believed they really were victims. When they realized it was all garbage they came forward.

Gilligan_Buddy: JohnBigBootay: Sadly, this is only news because he may get out. I'd wager there's hundreds, if not thousands of people wrongfully imprisoned for this. It's the salem witch trials of the modern age. Not that there aren't real offenders, of course there are.

Probably more like tens of thousands of innocents. Child abuse has the highest rate of conviction of any crime (these are stats from 10 years ago or so, from the top of my head), yet it also has the highest false conviction rate of any crime.

Also, I'm too tired to reread the article, but I'm assuming he is already out? Said he was in prison nearly 20 years and was convicted in 1985, so I'm thinking he's been out for 4-5 years already.

Yeah, his sentence was commuted earlier when serious problems with the prosecution were found.

I wish that there were a special place in hell for a woman who convinces her children that they were violently sodomized by their father to get back at him for being a crummy husband.

Unfortunately. hell likely doesn't exist, so we're left to hope for cancer of the face. :\

det: Maybe they just wanted to get a new daddy...

I forgot about that one. Hilarious!

Noam Chimpsky: It's strange that there wouldn't be some obvious medical evidence at the time, considering the violent nature of the crimes he was charged with. If there was medical evidence, then something isn't adding up.

The dad's sentence was commuted by the governor after it was discovered that the prosecution sat on the medical reports that showed there was no evidence of such abuse. He now just needs to clear his name.

/I saw "Witch Hunt" about this very thing recently.. absolutely terrifying.

arcas: They said they realized as adults the abuse never happened, and they came forward because it was the right thing to do.

Adults? Uh hello? They're age 33 and 30 now. They became adults over a decade ago. Why did they wait to come forward until now? Did their supply of ice cream finally run out?

I was wondering that, too...

Fat and Nasty 86: What would YOU do for a Klondike bar?

This is why we should preemptively rape everyone.

Gen. Apathy: Yeah but Michael Jackson is guilty because prosecutors never lie. And OJ, he's guilty too.

thanks for playing sheeple

Trying to figure out of you're being snarky or if this is some sort of troll.

TFA:
For several years, Spencer's appeals failed. He was denied parole five times because he refused to admit guilt and enter a sex-offender treatment program.

One of the (many) problems I have with the way we treat "sex offenders".

We punish them for saying they are innocent, and reward them for saying they are guilty. Under such circumstances most innocent people will eventually say they are guilty. If this cop had said he was guilty like they tried to make him do for 20 years, they would still be telling his adult children they were blocking the memory of the abuse.

Seriously, I understand how important overcoming denial is to the treatment of sexual deviants. But we need to stop trying to force it.

Paris1127: But did they get to have orgies in hot air balloons with giraffes and Chuck Norris? Because the McMartin kids did... and the cops believed it...

If Chuck Norris wants to rape your child it is a privilege.

Tex_Arkana: arcas: They said they realized as adults the abuse never happened, and they came forward because it was the right thing to do.

Adults? Uh hello? They're age 33 and 30 now. They became adults over a decade ago. Why did they wait to come forward until now? Did their supply of ice cream finally run out?

I was wondering that, too...

Several possibilities:

1) They were told for a decade, while growing up, that something happened they don't remember. This would not seem so strange to a child who also hears stories about what they were like as babies. After a while they would put it out of their mind. It might well take a while for enough bits and pieces to surface for them to put together some kind of coherent whole.

2) No one wants to think they put their innocent father in prison. When everyone tells you he was guilty and you just don't remember it, it can be much easier to just accept that version of events. Later when the truth starts to surface, you don't want to face it. So you go into denial.

3) They may have been working on this for a while. The wheels of justice turn slowly. They may have been trying to get a hearing before a judge for years. Typically prosecutors will do anything to avoid admitting error, so they probably fought against the children's efforts.

If this guy really is innocent, then my heart goes out to him.

This situation sucks in so different many ways that it's almost overwhelming to contemplate.

It's_A_Farking_Secret: Did you not read the article? I mean I too am slightly suspicious and suspect retardation on either the part of the kids or the cop involved, but there were TWO "victims" and they were both children of the same woman, the one who was sleeping with his boss.

I don't know what you read, but here's what I read:

"In 1985, Spencer was also convicted of abusing a 4-year-old stepson, who was not at Friday's hearing.

The Court of Appeals ruled his testimony was not necessary, given his age at the time of the alleged crimes and the fact that his mother had had an affair with Krause's supervisor."

It's quite clear that he was also convicted of a charge of abusing a third child, his stepson. The mother of that child was having an affair with his boss, not the mother of his two real children who are now recanting their testimony.

Retort: Good cops work to change the world.

Bad cops work at superficially changing public opinion of themselves with generalisations.

Hi cruisertwelve.

Generalizations? Like assuming things about people because of their occupation?

CruiserTwelve: It's_A_Farking_Secret: Did you not read the article? I mean I too am slightly suspicious and suspect retardation on either the part of the kids or the cop involved, but there were TWO "victims" and they were both children of the same woman, the one who was sleeping with his boss.

I don't know what you read, but here's what I read:

"In 1985, Spencer was also convicted of abusing a 4-year-old stepson, who was not at Friday's hearing.

The Court of Appeals ruled his testimony was not necessary, given his age at the time of the alleged crimes and the fact that his mother had had an affair with Krause's supervisor."

It's quite clear that he was also convicted of a charge of abusing a third child, his stepson. The mother of that child was having an affair with his boss, not the mother of his two real children who are now recanting their testimony.

Don't forget this part: According to Krause, the detective, the children were together when they were abused.

Both Matthew Spencer and Tetz testified their stepbrother was never abused by their father.

Selective quoting is disingenuous.

Retort: You're asking a cop to get details right. Come on, be reasonable.

Go back and read the article again. Then tell me who gets the FAIL at reading comprehension. Hint: It's not me.

onebadgungan: Selective quoting is disingenuous.

I was refuting this post by It's_A_Farking_Secret:

Did you not read the article? I mean I too am slightly suspicious and suspect retardation on either the part of the kids or the cop involved, but there were TWO "victims" and they were both children of the same woman, the one who was sleeping with his boss.

The part of the article I quoted directly refuted his statement. The part of the article you quoted was irrelevant to what he said.

I'll say it very simply: It's_A_Farking_Secret said there were two "victims." The article says there were three. It's_A_Farking_Secret said that the mother of those two "victims" was sleeping with the cop's boss. The article says the mother of the third victim was sleeping with his boss.

See? That's what I was trying to point out. This: According to Krause, the detective, the children were together when they were abused.

Both Matthew Spencer and Tetz testified their stepbrother was never abused by their father. was irrelevant to my point.

mud_shark: doyner: mud_shark: The anti-death-penalty-pansies just want to ban capital punishment but have no regard for anyone else unfairly convicted.


This ruins what otherwise was an ok argument. Where do you get this shiat?

Okay, I've already admitted to being a bit "unfocused" today (actually getting more and more out of focus as the beer leaves my fridge), but there are people who argue that we should not have capital punishment because sometimes innocent people are convicted.

Are you with me so far? Have I used any words that confound your vocabulary?

Okay, good. Let's continue then. These same people who argue that innocents are sometimes found guilty and sentenced to death do not seem to give a flying fark if some innocent is found guilty and sentenced to life in prison.

Shouldn't we focus on reforming our courts so innocent people are never convicted rather than making sure they are not given the ultimate punishment?

Tell the guy serving 20 years for walking on water (or whatever - oh, sorry, was that obscure?) even though he didn't do it that it's okay because at least we're not executing him,

I look back to the last time I served on a jury - I couldn't believe the charges that were brought against the defendant. It was not something where the death penalty was even a consideration, but the charges brought against him were not supported by the evidence. And yet, the defendant spent months in jail of a crime he didn't commit (IMO and the opinion of every fellow juror that I spoke with).

Is that type of "justice" okay with you? Is it okay for someone to serve time in prison when they are innocent so long as they don't get the death penalty?

The principles upon which this country was founded do not state "innocent until proven guilty, unless it's a misdemeanor". I don't care if you are arrested for jay-walking, if you are going to be found guilty in a court of law, you must be proven guilty. If you are convicted of jay-walking while merely standing on the sidewalk, then we have a problem.

I agreed with your main point about innocents. I disagreed with you that anti death penalty folks like myself don't care about innocent people being incarcerated. Nice hair trigger though.

I agree with cruiser12....this guy had to know what the results of his guilty plea would be.

Something smells here. Could it be, the familty will now be very wealthy?

Wa had is own witchtrial in Wenatchee. I remember Perez the det. on 60 minutes. There was a true zealot. Our present Gov, then attorney gen., backed him to the hilt.

CruiserTwelve: onebadgungan: Selective quoting is disingenuous.

I was refuting this post by It's_A_Farking_Secret:

Did you not read the article? I mean I too am slightly suspicious and suspect retardation on either the part of the kids or the cop involved, but there were TWO "victims" and they were both children of the same woman, the one who was sleeping with his boss.

The part of the article I quoted directly refuted his statement. The part of the article you quoted was irrelevant to what he said.

I'll say it very simply: It's_A_Farking_Secret said there were two "victims." The article says there were three. It's_A_Farking_Secret said that the mother of those two "victims" was sleeping with the cop's boss. The article says the mother of the third victim was sleeping with his boss.

See? That's what I was trying to point out. This: According to Krause, the detective, the children were together when they were abused.

Both Matthew Spencer and Tetz testified their stepbrother was never abused by their father. was irrelevant to my point.

mea culpa. I thought you were talking about something else.

I'll just leave this here...



...no reason... just thought somebody might want some ice-cream or something.

/hot

mud_shark: This is another example of why guilty verdicts should be beyond a reasonable doubt.

This is an easy thing to say when reading a story about a guy who was clearly innocent. If it was decided that a greater level of proof was required for a conviction the inevitable follow-up story would feature victims dismayed at the amount of criminals being let off. Can you honestly say you would then not complain about how easy it is to get away with crime?

Where have some of you been. It has been shown that some officials work hard to convince children that they were molested even when there is evidence to the contrary. I think the father should have a chance to "molest" the officer that brow beat the kids into giving false testimony and then find the ex-wife for more of the same.

grumpyoldmann: Where have some of you been. It has been shown that some officials work hard to convince children that they were molested even when there is evidence to the contrary. I think the father should have a chance to "molest" the officer that brow beat the kids into giving false testimony and then find the ex-wife for more of the same.

I'm not convinced that happened in this case, particlularly because the guy pled no contest to the charges knowing he'd spend the rest of his life in prison. It doesn't make sense to me. If you're going to prison for the rest of your life at least take a shot at a trial.

This could just as easily been a case of the kids deciding that Dad had served enough time so they recanted their testimony. I'm not going to conclude that this guy was wrongly imprisoned because two of the three victims recanted after 25 years. I'm not saying he's guilty, I'm saying that this article doesn't provide enough information to come to a conclusion either way.

Zombalupagus: USA! USA! We're Number One!

... at jailing our citizens. The United States has the highest incarceration rate and the biggest prison population of any country in the world.

/my state doesn't have its own Fark tag but still holds the record for the highest percentage of people in the justice system out of all 50 states: 1 in 13 adults.

Your state is entirely peopled with criminals

Zombalupagus: USA! USA! We're Number One!
... at jailing our citizens. The United States has the highest incarceration rate and the biggest prison population of any country in the world.

Maybe because minor crimes don't earn us a beheading in a soccer stadium, or a visit from the roving Chinese execution van, etc.

IonBeam2 2009-07-11 08:27:41 PM
Why does everyone say kids are innocent? Children are monsters and should all be locked up until they are 18 for the sake of public safety.

I don't blame the kids.. I blame the farking overzeolous over ambitious prosecuter wanting to prove a point or whatever the fark she wanted to prove.. she manipulated the kids so she could get a farking conviction.

I hope she burns in hell.

As for the father? an ex cop who also is a child molester in prison AND he is still alive? WOW!! Well I guess God does look after those who are truly innocent!

I'm all for capital punishment for serious crimes such as child molestation BUT only if it is 110% irrefutable! and a child's recollection of events while by no means unimportant is definitely NOT irrefutable.
Unless someone is caught red handed raping a kid or murdering someone cold blooded etc no one should be put to death.

See what happens when you're within easy driving distance of Seattle? Seattle is a farking plague, and it spreads its tentacles far and wide.

SuperNinjaToad: I don't blame the kids.. I blame the farking overzeolous over ambitious prosecuter wanting to prove a point or whatever the fark she wanted to prove.. she manipulated the kids so she could get a farking conviction.

Your assertion assumes that this prosecutor woke up one day and thought," Hey, I'm not doing anything today. I think I'll pick some random person and talk his kids into saying he molested them and put him in jail for life. Yeah, that sounds like fun! Now, what kind of person would be most likely to not put up a fight. Hmmm... A cop! Yeah, cops always just give up and accept whatever happens to them! That's the ticket! I'll put a cop in jail for life for no reason in the world except to entertain myself! I guess I'll have to talk some other cops into helping me with my diabolical plan, but that'll be easy. Cops are never protective of each other and will be happy to put another cop in prison for no reason."

Your belief is totally irrational on its face.