If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Some Guy)   Minutes after a jury finds a previously convicted sex offender guilty of trying to lure a girl into a park bathroom, the judge overrules the verdict because the bathroom isn't a secluded place   (greenbaypressgazette.com) divider line 213
    More: Asinine  
•       •       •

11171 clicks; posted to Main » on 13 Sep 2007 at 5:07 PM (7 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



213 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
Ra_
2007-09-13 04:09:15 PM  
I think the solution here is clear?
Someone needs to rape the Judge.
 
2007-09-13 04:14:29 PM  
Just because he was previously convicted of a sex crime doesn't mean he was going to do it a second time. Criminals are punished, they go to jail, they change their ways and are reformed, that's the point of the justice system. It's not possible that this guy tried to do it again.
 
2007-09-13 04:19:00 PM  
Judge Timothy Van Akkeren overturned the verdict after a daylong jury trial, saying the shelter was not a "secluded place" as required by state statute...

Then why in hell was there a trial and a jury? If you already know he didn't violate the statute, why waste all the time and money going through the motions?

Nice work, dickhead.
 
2007-09-13 04:19:04 PM  
soledsoled: Just because he was previously convicted of a sex crime doesn't mean he was going to do it a second time.

FTFA - He repeatedly offered the girl candy while gesturing she should follow him toward the area of the shelter and the shelter's bathroom, but she refused.

Clearly he was just trying to offer a little girl some candy. Why do you people think children shouldn't have candy?

I understand the idea that the sex offender registry is out of control, but give me a break.
 
2007-09-13 04:20:17 PM  
soledsoled: Just because he was previously convicted of a sex crime doesn't mean he was going to do it a second time

i agree but if you read the article he's being held in jail for another case of inappropriately touching a woman...
it doesn't take much to put 2 and 2 together in this case..
they guy is a scum bag and the judge is just as bad for waiting till after the jury had made its decision to determine that the bathroom wasn't a "secluded" place.. seems to me the judge had made up his mind way in advance...

the judge needs to be reviewed and suspended imho...
 
Ra_
2007-09-13 04:21:13 PM  
soledsoled: Just because he was previously convicted of a sex crime doesn't mean he was going to do it a second time. Criminals are punished, they go to jail, they change their ways and are reformed, that's the point of the justice system. It's not possible that this guy tried to do it again.


That's true.
I wonder if he's interested in some babysitting work?
 
2007-09-13 04:28:04 PM  
sparky1013: they guy is a scum bag and the judge is just as bad for waiting till after the jury had made its decision to determine that the bathroom wasn't a "secluded" place.. seems to me the judge had made up his mind way in advance...

It happens. Judges will know what the law says, or interpret the law to a reasonable degree of certainty, but may not want to take the case out of the jury's hands for a number of reasons - pissing off the public, which generally doesn't understand the law, being one of the paramount reasons. The judge will let it go to the jury, hoping the jury acquits (or, in civil cases, finds for the defendant) so that he or she doesn't have to make that legal finding. But the judge doesn't always get his or her wish, and then has to come in and enter a judgment notwithstanding the verdict.
 
2007-09-13 04:31:05 PM  
Also, that prosecutor is either an absolute moron or completely full of crap in claiming he's never even heard of a judgment notwithstanding the verdict.
 
2007-09-13 04:34:11 PM  
Cut the judge some slack, he's probably got a pair of pants on his mind.
 
2007-09-13 04:43:50 PM  
But did he have a wide stance? PEOPLE WANT TO KNOW!
 
2007-09-13 04:48:20 PM  
www.smh.com.au

/ demands a recount
 
2007-09-13 05:01:32 PM  
veedeevadeevoodee

Wow, looks like he's got a mouthful of Chicklets.

Oh yeah, and the judge is an asshat. Blah, blah, blah.
 
2007-09-13 05:10:40 PM  
Judges can do that? wtf? I thought they had to go along with the jury's findings, and the most they could do is give a felon the minimum penalty if they didn't agree.
 
2007-09-13 05:10:49 PM  
submitter: Minutes after a jury finds a previously convicted sex offender guilty of trying to lure a girl into a park bathroom, the judge overrules the verdict because the bathroom isn't a secluded place

Farking activist Republican judiciary....
 
2007-09-13 05:10:55 PM  
www1.whdh.com

Bathroom sex?
 
2007-09-13 05:11:16 PM  
Another judge to remove from the bench.

/with a baseball bat
 
2007-09-13 05:11:42 PM  
soledsoled: Just because he was previously convicted of a sex crime doesn't mean he was going to do it a second time. Criminals are punished, they go to jail, they change their ways and are reformed, that's the point of the justice system. It's not possible that this guy tried to do it again.

Is that sarcasm I'm smelling all over that post?
 
2007-09-13 05:12:15 PM  
And also:

img235.imageshack.us

Pedo smile. Maddox was right.

/grimace?
//good enough.
 
2007-09-13 05:12:17 PM  
And should anyone wonder why the entire legal system is such a joke?
 
2007-09-13 05:12:25 PM  
Are little girls really salty?
 
2007-09-13 05:12:28 PM  
"Look at those sexy little salty girls."

This may be the best pick up line ever.
 
2007-09-13 05:12:36 PM  
colslax: Bathroom sex?

How else is he going to prove that he's not gay?
 
2007-09-13 05:12:39 PM  
Wisconsin judges make Minnesota judges look "law and order".
 
2007-09-13 05:12:48 PM  
surprise
cmsimg.greenbaypressgazette.com
underage buttsecks!
 
2007-09-13 05:13:20 PM  
FTFA: "Look at those sexy little salty girls."

*Shudder*
 
2007-09-13 05:13:35 PM  
ExRedStater: Is that sarcasm I'm smelling all over that post?

No, it couldn't possibly be.
 
2007-09-13 05:13:42 PM  
celebrity death match, between the pedo and the judge. Hopefully it ends in a draw, both dead.
 
2007-09-13 05:13:51 PM  
Where is that judge that threw Paris' arsh in jail when you need him?
 
2007-09-13 05:14:20 PM  
img265.imageshack.us

Ripe for photoshop
 
2007-09-13 05:14:24 PM  
This judge needs to DIAF. One that doesn't instantly kill.

Failing that I think a higher court should rule on his competency.
 
2007-09-13 05:14:44 PM  
Eight year olds Dude...in this case Nine year olds Dude...



/that judge is a tard
 
2007-09-13 05:16:00 PM  
True story:

I had sex with a Sheboygan once.

/end of story.
 
2007-09-13 05:16:28 PM  
I'm not surprised at the judge's ruling. The dutch are notorious pedophiles.
 
2007-09-13 05:16:39 PM  
HotWingConspiracy
Are little girls really salty?


Someone needs to keep a real close eye on you.


//I am slowly backing away now.
 
2007-09-13 05:16:46 PM  
The Grinch: Judges can do that? wtf? I thought they had to go along with the jury's findings, and the most they could do is give a felon the minimum penalty if they didn't agree.

No, judges can enter judgments notwithstanding the jury's verdict (sometimes called a "jnov"). It happens very rarely in civil cases, and I'd imagine even more rarely in criminal cases, but it can happen.

The judge could also have entered a directed verdict after the prosecution was done with its case, where he determines that the prosecution did not prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt and finds the defendant not guilty. Also rare in both civil and criminal cases, but possible.

And with that boring lecture, I'll STFU.
 
2007-09-13 05:16:56 PM  
http://mw1.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/secluded

secluded--screened or hidden from view

A state park bathroom fits that definition. People go to a place screened or hidden from the view of others to go to the bathroom, I've heard.

Judge shamed by the dictionary, not even case law.
 
2007-09-13 05:17:18 PM  
ultraholland: surprise

underage buttsecks!


It seems to me that I've seen that pic somewhere before. Oh yeah, it was in a Funk & Wagnalls right beside the definition of 'child molester'. Bet he's even got the white econoline with black windows, too.

/cold chills
 
2007-09-13 05:17:39 PM  
He wasn't luring her into a bathroom, but to a picnic pavilion. Let's get the fact right before we comment, OK?

He still needs to be castrated, because he's a repeat offender.
 
2007-09-13 05:18:16 PM  
kronicfeld: It happens. Judges will know what the law says, or interpret the law to a reasonable degree of certainty, but may not want to take the case out of the jury's hands for a number of reasons - pissing off the public, which generally doesn't understand the law, being one of the paramount reasons. The judge will let it go to the jury, hoping the jury acquits (or, in civil cases, finds for the defendant) so that he or she doesn't have to make that legal finding. But the judge doesn't always get his or her wish, and then has to come in and enter a judgment notwithstanding the verdict.

This

kronicfeld: Also, that prosecutor is either an absolute moron or completely full of crap in claiming he's never even heard of a judgment notwithstanding the verdict.

And This.

There was probably a lazy prosecutor and a crappy jury charge to boot.
 
2007-09-13 05:18:31 PM  
img265.imageshack.us
PENIS GOES WHERE?
 
2007-09-13 05:19:41 PM  
Precioustaters: "Look at those sexy little salty girls."

This may be the best pick up line ever.


this
 
2007-09-13 05:19:49 PM  
Oops, to be more accurate, a directed verdict would , in a criminal case, be if the prosecution failed to introduce any proof of some element of the crime.

/why I'm not a criminal lawyer
//and now I'll really STFU
 
2007-09-13 05:19:54 PM  
I don't think the judge could have thrown out the case until the the prosecution had a chance to prove that the bathroom was a secluded place (as required by law, and the prosecution didn't prove it) OR until the jury found the guy guilty, in which case the judge would have to throw it out as the guilty verdict wasn't in line with the law he was charged with.

Not sayin the guy's not scum, just that the law was farked up. What were the legislators thinking limiting this kind of behavior to 'secluded' areas? Law should have read something like "luring a minor for sex anywhere..."
 
2007-09-13 05:21:16 PM  
img207.imageshack.us
 
2007-09-13 05:21:53 PM  
FTFA - The jury, which earlier traveled to the park, found Pask guilty after about 30 minutes of deliberations. But Van Akkeren then overturned the verdict, saying the jury could not have determined the shelter was a secluded place as required by statute.

I'm pretty sure the jury went to the park and determined for themselves the shelter was secluded. You don't get to tell the jury the definition of "secluded" if it isn't defined in the statute, Judge dingleberry.
 
2007-09-13 05:22:33 PM  
I hate to say it, but the judge did the right thing in this one. While obviously the guy's a sick dude who deserves to be anally ravaged by his cellmate using a broken-off shaft from a plunger, the charge wasn't correct for what the guy did.

Judges have overturned jury verdicts before in other such matters...it's just that this guy is so disgusting. The blame for this is on the prosecutor: you can't make the case for a "secluded" place when he was trying to get her to what amounts to a glorified patio.
 
2007-09-13 05:22:55 PM  
lawofnoncontradictio.tripod.com

I can haz loophole?
 
2007-09-13 05:23:47 PM  
Hey Judge, this secluded enough for ya?

awesomecoloradoland.com

/idiot
 
2007-09-13 05:24:17 PM  
img62.imageshack.us

/not mine
 
2007-09-13 05:24:49 PM  
Judging by that picture the defendant was also, pleasantly, shocked that the judge overturned the verdict.
 
Displayed 50 of 213 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report