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.

(WFTV Orlando)   Not News: Sex offender gets 5 years for probation violation. FARK: according to the comments and some of the rest of the internet, he posted some heartwarming YouTube videos, and should be free based on their merit   (wftv.com) divider line 204
    More: Asinine, YouTube, sex offenders, videos online, Pretty Woman, probation officers, consumer debt, jail, Lake County  
•       •       •

10779 clicks; posted to Main » on 16 Jan 2010 at 7:19 PM (4 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



204 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2010-01-16 11:21:43 PM
so uh, its illegal to be a utube creep now?
 
2010-01-16 11:24:40 PM
AGHHHHHHHHHHHHahhhhh

I watched that guy for about 2 seconds and I'm going to be haunted for the rest of my life.

Why oh why oh why oh why ... and let me guess ... some well-meaning dopes are going to befriend this freakizoid and somebody's young son will end up molested.

\this guy probably thinks HE'S the pretty woman
 
2010-01-16 11:28:40 PM
ZeroCorpse: Oh, and before you get on your high horse little girl, let me point out that when you were in diapers (or before that), I was working rape crisis hotlines, getting in physical fights with my then-girlfriend's sexually abusive father, suffering through someone I loved being gang-raped, and helping women get past hordes of screaming, physically-abusive fundamentalist wackos standing outside womens' health clinics.

So when I say, "How DARE you imply that I'm in favor of sexual assault or in the habit of defending actual child molesters?" I really mean it......



Sorry to hear about your experiences.

But honestly, when you said "It's only sex.", in reference to sexual offenders, it really does come off as sounding rather dismissive. It sounds as though you really don't think of it as a big deal.

It wasn't an implication that vonapathy made. It wasn't a paraphrase. It was a direct quote.

If you are this unstable about a comment on the internet, I would suggest not trying to council any more troubled people. Because you really do sound a bit on the edge yourself. I'm just telling the truth, from your posts here. I'm sure you are a great person.
 
2010-01-16 11:31:23 PM
So only people who haven't been raped are supposed to debate the penalties? Nearly every bit of legislation relating to sex crimes today has been a result of sex assault victims and their families lobbying for harsher penalties. Believe me, we would love it if their sentences were increased and they never got out at all, but we haven't made it so yet. The current system is better than nothing.

The sentencing decisions need to come from all sorts of people. Our opinion doesn't stop counting just because we were victims. And someone who hasn't experienced it will NEVER truly understand how awful it is. If you're a man, you have a significantly greater chance of never having to endure it, or even worry about it. I don't know a lot of men who are scared to walk to their cars alone after a late college class and cling to a can of mace and a cell phone glancing around uneasily. I think some men trivialize it because they just don't get it and what an utter violation it is.
 
2010-01-16 11:32:51 PM
ThrobblefootSpectre: But honestly, when you said "It's only sex.", in reference to sexual offenders, it really does come off as sounding rather dismissive. It sounds as though you really don't think of it as a big deal.

Only if you take the quote out of context. Taken in context with the rest of his post it is petty obvious that it means "these lists only apply to crimes involving sex."
 
2010-01-16 11:35:54 PM
Lollerwaffle: So only people who haven't been raped are supposed to debate the penalties? Nearly every bit of legislation relating to sex crimes today has been a result of sex assault victims and their families lobbying for harsher penalties. Believe me, we would love it if their sentences were increased and they never got out at all, but we haven't made it so yet. The current system is better than nothing.

Way to make his point for him. Advocating life in prison for rape shows you have lost all perspective.
 
2010-01-16 11:40:57 PM
Lollerwaffle: ZeroCorpse: Do you feel all big and strong being a condescending dickhole to someone who has made clear implications that they are a past victim of sexual abuse? Do you think you could maybe be sensitive enough to stop and think about why they reacted in such a visceral way?

Once again, I was there. More than a few times. You act as if it's something that only happens to girls... And I'd rather not get into it because it's none of your your farking business. Suffice it to say that you don't need to tell me "what it's like" because I know. I sleep with a knife under my mattress because I'd rather not go through it again. Don't deign to lecture me about it.

However, I'm not so sensitive about it that I just scream "FRY THE BASTARD" every time I hear the words "sex offender", because I'm realistic enough, and adult enough, to know that people CAN be rehabilitated, and that a man who spent many years in prison and who hasn't committed any similar crimes in the several decades since then is probably not a threat to anyone, and HAS PAID HIS DEBT TO SOCIETY.

I'm all for punishing real sex offenders with severe penalties; Longer sentences, chemical castration, and in some cases capital punishment would be appropriate. But if the courts sentence a person to serve time, and they do it, then why should society continue to treat that person as a pariah. People do grow, and change, and they do "get better".

And some of them didn't do anything to deserve the severe punishment in the first place. The words "Sex Offender" are sure scary when they don't explain the whole situation, but I've known perfectly well-adjusted, kind, decent people who ended up being a "registered sex offender" because they were streaking at a party, or dating someone whose parents didn't like them dating their one-year-younger "princess".

The registry is only a good idea if we're going to use it for ALL criminals. Singling out one type of criminal, just because their crimes involve (gasp!) S-E-X or nudity, makes no sense. Is a guy who went to prison for beating the hell out of someone any less of a danger than a guy who went to prison for feeling up his 15-year-old cousin when he was 19 years old? Or the guy who gets busted for pissing in his own yard? Sure, you might catch a rapist in the "net", but you also catch a bunch of regular guys who just screwed up, were in the wrong place at the wrong time, or fell for the wrong girl with the wrong parents.

If you're so willing to punish the innocent and the not-so-guilty just to feel more secure, then you might as well just give up all your freedoms right now, because some day it could be you that gets nailed as a sex offender for losing your top in a public pool, or mooning someone at a sporting event while you're drunk.

Punish the criminals when you sentence them; Not after they've served their time. If we can't agree that time served is punishment enough, then I can only hope that we don't end up with a world where every bad thing you ever do continues to haunt and hinder you for the rest of your life.

What you seem to be advocating is the complete and utter destruction of anyone who is sentenced for a sex crime. If that's how you feel, then at least have the honest decency to lobby for the death sentence in every sexual assault case. That would be far more human and decent than making a person go through life without the ability to find shelter, work, or a place to call home.

What you are asking for is revenge. You might want to reflect on that, and ask yourself if it's about the specific crime each individual committed, or if it's about you, and how getting life-long revenge serves justice in our society.

And more to the point. how allowing true justice to erode in favor of personal vengeance will eventually come back to bite you one the ass.

/Unless you can say you've never harmed anyone, ever, in any way whatsoever.
 
2010-01-16 11:42:01 PM
Well, because there are no crimes more serious than sex offender crimes. Sex crimes are the ultimate offense against society and children. There is no greater evil or human atrocity greater than that.

That's the problem I with how people view sex offenders. It's all lumped into one insane pile. 18 year old has sex with his 17 year-old girlfriend? He gets the same punishment as the sick bastards that prey on children.

Stealing has different levels (grand theft, embezzlement, petty theft) so does murder. Why is it this is any different?

And to the response of people who claim they need to know the sex offenders that live in their area, take a good long look at the people you know.

"80 percent to 90 percent or more of all child molestations are committed by people who know the victim. And sex offenders who abduct children they don't know make up only about 5 percent of those who have served time in state prison"

We are at the point now where children can be accused of molesting themselves. Every time I see pictures of someone's kid in the bath tub in the family album i cringe thinking that someone could just accuse them of child pornography and there's a good chance they'd go to jail.

The worst part of all of this is that no matter how many people we punish and put on lists this is going to keep happening. Yes maybe a few people will realize that touching some kid isn't worth ruining the rest of your life, but then again, if they were rational in the first place, they wouldn't even consider doing it in the first place.
 
2010-01-16 11:44:38 PM
Angrarulz: And to the response of people who claim they need to know the sex offenders that live in their area, take a good long look at the people you know.

Your own quote says they are molested by people they know, not people their parents know. There is a difference, and that is why some people want to know if the guy with no kids hanging around the park is a sex offender. I am less in favor of the registries than I used to be but your point is off the mark.
 
2010-01-16 11:47:15 PM
Where are all the Kansas City Farkers at? This is Uncle Ed from All Night Live back in the 80's! If you want to know the back story of this guy go here:
Link (new window)
He was funny back then
/Caffina the cat
//The bananaphone
 
2010-01-16 11:47:17 PM
TsukasaK: icanhazstapler: Sex offender laws are a joke. You can kill someone and your neighbors won't ever find out, but screw a 17 year old and your life is effectively over. I think this whole thing is a complete waste of time, the guy wasn't hurting anyone.

This

Why do we have registries for sex offenders but not for other (even more serious) crimes?

It's a farking retarded law.


Because of the very very high rate of reoffending for people that rape children, combined with the particularly damaging nature of the crime. The law might need to be tweaked, but there definitely is a reason for it.
 
2010-01-16 11:48:34 PM
PaulieVegas: Good ol' US justice system. Putting senior citizens in prison over some trivial little youtube vids (especially for a 20-something year old crime) sounds like an excellent use of taxpayer money.

Umm..sexually molesting a 14 year old boy is wrong dude. And not registering when the law says you should because you molested a 14 year old boy..is umm...wrong too. Look at the sex offenders in your area...see the seniors..now see what they did. Old people don't get a free pass to be nasty.
 
2010-01-16 11:48:34 PM
How is life in prison unfair for a vicious crime like rape? These people have been shown again and again to have a very high rate of re-offending. A rape victim's life is ruined. Their life should be ruined too.

Isn't the fact that we have rules and laws covering anything some sort of societal bias in and of itself? Are you no longer impartial enough to judge a murderer because you've grown up all your life thinking murder is bad? If you were raped, how would you feel knowing that person was back out on the streets with opportunities to live a happy and fulfilling life, not to mention the chance to rape again. We want to deter sexual assault. We as a society have decided it's a really farked up thing to do. If someone doesn't want to face a harsh penalty, maybe they should, I don't know, stop cramming their dicks into the orifices of people who do not consent!

Tell me, what do you think is an appropriate sentence for violating a person's body, emotionally anihilating them, causing years of pain and suffering on the part of that victim's family and friends, making a person so scared they only sleep an hour a night and won't take off their running shoes even when they go to bed, causing a person to need years of therapy and antidepressants, ruining their chances at ever thoroughly enjoying sex again, etc etc.?

But I'm the crazy one for wanting these people to suffer as much as the victims do. Which they don't. They get to go to prison and watch tv and do art projects and earn as many goddamn college degrees they want for farking free.
 
2010-01-16 11:53:04 PM
Lollerwaffle: How is life in prison unfair for a vicious crime like rape? These people have been shown again and again to have a very high rate of re-offending. A rape victim's life is ruined. Their life should be ruined too.


No, it isn't. Life is rough and just about everyone faces adversity. The strong move on.
 
2010-01-16 11:55:55 PM
jst3p: ThrobblefootSpectre: But honestly, when you said "It's only sex.", in reference to sexual offenders, it really does come off as sounding rather dismissive. It sounds as though you really don't think of it as a big deal.

Only if you take the quote out of context. Taken in context with the rest of his post it is petty obvious that it means "these lists only apply to crimes involving sex."


Thanks.

They're partially right. I should have realized some people fail at reading comprehension, and inserted a "for" in-between "only" and "sex"... But I had high expectations and was writing fast.

Still, she went on a long tirade and made some pretty serious accusations about someone she didn't know, based on that misinterpretation. It's not the first time she's done that to me on FARK, and frankly, I got mad.

Sorry, but I *am* touchy about this subject. I've seen (and heard) things I wouldn't even wish on an enemy. Nobody should experience what I have, and when people assume that I'm a pro-rape dirtbag just because I'm male, I take offense.

I no longer counsel anyone. I'm too much of a nihilist these days to do it! But when I did it, one of the hardest things to deal with were the women who were so damaged by their experience that they decided they hated all men, and that we were all villains. I hated the men who hurt them for making them feel that way, and I couldn't help but feel hurt when I'd try to help and get nothing but scorn because these women were completely incapable of trusting a man ever again.

Either way, it's rude and tasteless to accuse a man of supporting rape, in any sense, when you don't know that man or what he has experienced in his life. However, I also realize that youth tends to make people say and do stupid things.

Which is, coincidentally, why I don't support leaving someone on a sex offender registry for the rest of their life. A bad youthful decision shouldn't ruin your life if you've taken the punishment and accepted responsibility.

Blanket laws only serve to weaken the idea of justice.
 
2010-01-17 12:01:23 AM
Do not put words in my mouth. I advocate having a sex offender registry that only includes violent offenders who deserve to be there, as I have already stated. Romeo and juliet cases, pissing in public, flashing your tits do not belong. Forcing someone down, ripping their clothes off and forcibly raping them DOES count.

You want to talk about revenge? Let's talk about revenge. Have a look at our entire judicial system. Look at how we try kids for adults who commit heinous murders. Look at how we kill people who have committed murder. Maybe no one wants to admit it, but our justice system is BASED on revenge. In order to change that, we would need to do some serious renovations to the entire system. We as human beings see and hear the details of certain acts that are so brutal, so disgusting, that we have an emotional visceral reaction and just want that person to die.

Every human being has the potential for good and evil. Maybe some people can forgive what some criminals have done. But as our system clearly illustrates, the vast majority of us can't. That's why we have more people in our prisons than anywhere else. That's the American way.

People who choose to live in this country are given a set of standards and rules to live by. The information is all out there. If you do x, then x will be your punishment. The rapists and kid farkers know what they are risking if they get caught, and they choose to take that risk anyway. Well, there are consequences for those actions, and whether that consequence is 5 years in prison or being tossed alive into a tank of piranhas, it's written in the law, and I have no sympathy for someone who knows what they are facing and they decide "Nope, I'm above that, I deserve to do what I want when I want," and then they get caught and get to pay their pound of flesh.

Idealism is nice. Rehabilitation would be great if we actually had a system that was ran by people who cared to take it in that direction, but we don't. Politicians lie, Santa Claus isn't real, and people don't like violent sex offenders. Sorry to snuff out your daydreams.
 
2010-01-17 12:04:23 AM
mongbiohazard: TsukasaK: icanhazstapler: Sex offender laws are a joke. You can kill someone and your neighbors won't ever find out, but screw a 17 year old and your life is effectively over. I think this whole thing is a complete waste of time, the guy wasn't hurting anyone.

This

Why do we have registries for sex offenders but not for other (even more serious) crimes?

It's a farking retarded law.

Because of the very very high rate of reoffending for people that rape children, combined with the particularly damaging nature of the crime. The law might need to be tweaked, but there definitely is a reason for it.


Then we should do these things:

1. In cases of REAL rape or child molestation (not just statutory rape when the "victim" is a willing participant and the complaint was made by someone else) we should consider chemical castration, life in prison, or capital punishment. IN other words, treat it like murder. No Sex Offender Registry needed because these guys aren't put back into society.

2. In cases of non-rape "sex crimes" such as public exposure, sexting your boyfriend, statutory rape with a willing partner, etc., the person should serve their time and then get back into society to rebuild their life without being on a Sex Offender Registry, because they didn't rape or molest anyone. They're no danger to society, and are unlikely to rape people since that's not what they were convicted of in the first place.

There. Problem solved. No need to make a big list of "bad people who we punished and then let go, but still can't trust enough to allow them to rejoin society so we'll just fark them over for the rest of their lives."

And you can walk the streets knowing that the worst sex offense you'll see from a repeat offender is when your neighbor comes home drunk and pisses on your azaleas.
 
2010-01-17 12:06:09 AM
Okay. If a rape victim's life isn't ruined by rape, then a sex offender should be just fine facing life being on a sex offender registry. It's just a little adversity, right?
 
2010-01-17 12:08:42 AM
Lollerwaffle: Okay. If a rape victim's life isn't ruined by rape, then a sex offender should be just fine facing life being on a sex offender registry. It's just a little adversity, right?

And if a fish could walk then the moon is a potato.


What the fark are you trying to say?
 
2010-01-17 12:14:11 AM
I am trying to say that a victim of a violent sex crime will face adversity for life. That damage is permanent. They can go on and be successful and happy eventually, maybe, but that's a big maybe, and the scar of what happened to them will always be there. I believe the person who did it to them deserves their own scar. That can be having to be known for life as a rapist. They do not deserve to get out and start over with a clean slate. They don't deserve to get to move to a new state and create a new life where no one knows the atrocities they have committed. A rape victim NEVER gets a clean slate. If a rape victim has to endure life long adversity as a result of what happened to them, so should the rapist. The rapist knew the consequences of their actions and decided to do them anyway. They earned their punishment. The victims never saw it coming and never had a chance to avoid it.
 
2010-01-17 12:16:26 AM
Isn't sexual battery a violent offense?
 
2010-01-17 12:18:25 AM
Lollerwaffle: I am trying to say that a victim of a violent sex crime will face adversity for life. That damage is permanent. They can go on and be successful and happy eventually, maybe, but that's a big maybe, and the scar of what happened to them will always be there. I believe the person who did it to them deserves their own scar. That can be having to be known for life as a rapist. They do not deserve to get out and start over with a clean slate. They don't deserve to get to move to a new state and create a new life where no one knows the atrocities they have committed. A rape victim NEVER gets a clean slate. If a rape victim has to endure life long adversity as a result of what happened to them, so should the rapist. The rapist knew the consequences of their actions and decided to do them anyway. They earned their punishment. The victims never saw it coming and never had a chance to avoid it.

Personally I believe having a felony on your record (plus the original sentence) is enough.
 
2010-01-17 12:24:25 AM
Clearly the majority/those in power do not share your beliefs, as evident with the increasingly harsh penalties for violent sex crimes and how juries often react to them.
 
2010-01-17 12:32:29 AM
Lollerwaffle: Clearly the majority/those in power do not share your beliefs, as evident with the increasingly harsh penalties for violent sex crimes and how juries often react to them.

Well, the majority isn't always right, but I am ok with longer sentences. Life though? That's crazy talk.
 
2010-01-17 12:35:21 AM
MrCrazyInsane: theBigBigEye: No, but what I'm trying to say is, who cares about gangs? They're not worthy of having their own shunning list because they are nothing but small frys, no matter how many drive-by shootings they do or how much cocaine they sell. They'll never be as terrible as sex offenders are. That's what I'm getting at.

Coke dealers exist because there are people who knowingly make the choice to put it in their bodies.

I don't think any child molestor could say "I know she's 7, but you didn't see what she was wearing. She was asking for it." No child is begging for rape like an addict would beg for a drug.

That is the difference.


Yes, you're right, that's the difference. The main point I'm also trying to establish is that ONLY sex offenders should be specially discriminated against, and alongside no other crime besides itself. That means no drug dealer list, no drive-by shooting list, no armed robbery list, no high treason list, no mass graves war crimes list, etc., nobody gives Thor's flying fark-all about any of that.

Like I've said, sex offenses are the ultimate crime. And there's a reason for that.
 
2010-01-17 12:41:48 AM
MrCrazyInsane: I don't think any child molester could say "I know she's 7, but you didn't see what she was wearing. She was asking for it." No child is begging for rape like an addict would beg for a drug.

I once saw a video tap of a sex offender in prison explaining that the way a two year old wiggled her but as she crawled was provocative. He seemed serious in his insistence that she had wanted him and was flirting with him. He showed no remorse.

On an unrelated note, reading all the Farker comments about public urination made me google the sex offender list. The National Sex Offender Registry is color coded: red for crimes involving children, yellow for rape, blue for sexual battery and green for other offenses. If you click on the results of a search, you can see the exact crimes for which the person was found guilty and the ages of the victims. It does not treat all the crimes the same. Also, since I discovered some disturbing information about some people in my neighborhood, the part where they are require to do door to door and tell people they are moving in must not be enforced in my area. Is that last requirement real or did farkers make that up?

/I see no reason why you couldn't add other violent crimes to this list with new color codes if you really want that
//This should be a great ice breaker at block parties
 
2010-01-17 12:43:52 AM
I see all the child molester apologists are out in force on Fark. Yay.
 
2010-01-17 12:48:50 AM
The majority may not be right, but it is what it is.

Ours is a system about "justice," fairness, and punishment. You only have to watch a handful of courtroom proceedings to get the picture fairly quick. Countless times when a judge issues a sentence, it is accompanied by a scathing speech on how much of a piece of shiat they are. The easy way for a criminal to avoid all of that is personal restraint and responsibility. They know the price.
 
2010-01-17 12:55:55 AM
Lollerwaffle: The majority may not be right, but it is what it is.

Ours is a system about "justice," fairness, and punishment. You only have to watch a handful of courtroom proceedings to get the picture fairly quick. Countless times when a judge issues a sentence, it is accompanied by a scathing speech on how much of a piece of shiat they are. The easy way for a criminal to avoid all of that is personal restraint and responsibility. They know the price.


Unless you are rich.
 
2010-01-17 12:56:06 AM
Stonerbloopers: I know a lady who's son is a registered sex offender. He's a good kid. His 16 y/o girlfriend's parents didn't like him, so when he turned 18 they called the cops. He is now forever branded as a sex offender. Prison was the best criminal education he ever could have asked for though, so he's always got a fall-back career path.

When I was in law school, I interned at the local Public Defender's office. One of our clients was an 18 y/o guy who had a 15 y/o girlfriend. Girlfriend's parents farking hated him, and he got charged with statutory rape. We had to literally beg the prosecutor to accept an extended sentence in exchange for keeping him off the sex-offender registry. Somehow, miraculously, we got her to agree not to put him on the registry, but it was like pulling teeth. Prosecutors like putting people on the sex-offender list because it makes them look tough on crime.

/the whole experience turned me off to the field of crim law.
 
2010-01-17 01:01:01 AM
I am not aware of any required door to door notifications of a sex offender moving in. I live in Florida. The only way to learn about sex offenders in your neighborhood is to log onto the FDLE website and enter your zip, they will email you a note everytime a sex offender moves within a 5 mile radius IF YOU SIGN UP for that service. You can check zip codes at any time on the website just to browse who is nearby.

There's a kid farker living with his elderly mom down the street from my house. The street is full of families with young kids that are out playing basketball or going for walks along the street all the time. It's a low traffic dead end street. I doubt most of the families know we have a childfarker in our midsts. They wouldn't unless they took the time to sign up for the FDLE notification list.
 
2010-01-17 01:32:10 AM
Lollerwaffle: I am not aware of any required door to door notifications of a sex offender moving in. I live in Florida. The only way to learn about sex offenders in your neighborhood is to log onto the FDLE website and enter your zip, they will email you a note everytime a sex offender moves within a 5 mile radius IF YOU SIGN UP for that service. You can check zip codes at any time on the website just to browse who is nearby.

There's a kid farker living with his elderly mom down the street from my house. The street is full of families with young kids that are out playing basketball or going for walks along the street all the time. It's a low traffic dead end street. I doubt most of the families know we have a childfarker in our midsts. They wouldn't unless they took the time to sign up for the FDLE notification list.


Such a shame we have no way to legally do anything to his family members as well. I believe they both ought to be lined up in front of their house by a swat team in the middle of the night and executed. The offspring for his crime, and the mother for failure to disown him completely.
 
2010-01-17 01:35:01 AM
for a moment, I was worried that this might be the Phantom Menace review guy... but it's not, so carry on.
 
2010-01-17 01:35:24 AM
TheFarkinEmpress: I see all the child molester apologists are out in force on Fark. Yay.

No. Just people who are skeptical that you should go to jail for five years for going on YouTube.

He served his time for a single offense that occured 20-odd years ago. It should be over.
 
2010-01-17 01:42:01 AM
Again, do not put words in my mouth, asshole.

I feel great sympathy for the families of violent criminals. They suffer just as much as the victims and often get overlooked as far as recovery services go. My contempt is for the kidfarker, not his mother.
 
2010-01-17 01:42:58 AM
AllShelleyAllTheTime: Isn't sexual battery a violent offense?

z.about.com
What sexual batteries might look like
 
2010-01-17 01:43:07 AM
WFern: TheFarkinEmpress: I see all the child molester apologists are out in force on Fark. Yay.

No. Just people who are skeptical that you should go to jail for five years for going on YouTube.

He served his time for a single offense that occurred 20-odd years ago. It should be over.


According to TFA, he didn't fully serve his time. He was on probation. He was sent back to serve the rest of his time for violating probation. There is a difference.
 
2010-01-17 02:46:29 AM
Aunt Crabby: According to TFA, he didn't fully serve his time. He was on probation. He was sent back to serve the rest of his time for violating probation. There is a difference.

Don't bother. I've already tried to explain that probation is part of the sentence for his original crime. He was still a ward of the state, with less than full civil rights. Just not incarcerated. Many people don't seem to realize what probation is.

Personally I feel bad for him. It sounds like he made a terrible mistake one time in his life, and hasn't repeated his crime since then. Other than that, it sounds like he is probably a funny guy. He achieved some limited amount of celebrity status at one time in years past. And probably posting on youtube was like reliving a lost part of his life for him. Being popular, making people laugh. Maybe that's all he had left. That's the part that makes me sad.

Unfortunately, I'm quite certain we can't set a standard whereby people can flagrantly knowingly violate the terms of their probation.

It's just a sad case all around. I wish the judge could have just given him 60 days in county lockup, just as a way of saying "Look, I'm really serious this time. Cut it out. Live your life, but live by the terms of your probation. "
 
2010-01-17 03:21:22 AM
Read the article's headline and the first thing to come to mind was GORGOR. Now we won't get any more Gorgor postings. I then read the article. PHEW!!! Will be watching for more Gorgor links.
 
2010-01-17 03:34:02 AM
Lollerwaffle: Clearly the majority/those in power do not share your beliefs, as evident with the increasingly harsh penalties for violent sex crimes and how juries often react to them.

Clearly the majority/those in power believed that the earth was flat once Link, so?
 
2010-01-17 03:37:30 AM
Forget the squirrel with balls, THIS guy should be the Fark mascot.
 
2010-01-17 03:55:32 AM
Aunt Crabby: According to TFA, he didn't fully serve his time. He was on probation. He was sent back to serve the rest of his time for violating probation. There is a difference.

Fair enough. Let me rephrase: posting on YouTube 20-odd years after an offense should not be a violation of probation.
 
2010-01-17 04:01:05 AM
theBigBigEye: Do you really need a registry to tell where the gangbangers are so you don't move there? I'm pretty sure I know well enough to stay out of north philly, but I don't think I'd be able to tell my new neighbor is a rapist just by looking.

No, but what I'm trying to say is, who cares about gangs? They're not worthy of having their own shunning list because they are nothing but small frys, no matter how many drive-by shootings they do or how much cocaine they sell. They'll never be as terrible as sex offenders are. That's what I'm getting at.


I have to say, that's some fine trolling you're rolling.
 
2010-01-17 07:42:02 AM
Most sex offenders are REPEAT OFFENDERS. Not all, but most.

With that said, they all deserve to die a slow and painful death.
 
2010-01-17 07:47:31 AM
Genevieve Marie: TsukasaK: There is zip, zilch, nada reason for such a registry to exist.

Personally, I think that if I were a parent and a sex offender convicted of molesting children moved onto my street, I'd appreciate a letter warning me to keep my kids away from their yard. That's what it was intended to do. Is it abused? Yes. Do people get caught up in it that shouldn't be? Yes. But I get the logic behind it and don't think it's a bad idea.


Communism started of as a good idea. How'd that work?
 
2010-01-17 10:37:47 AM
youtube profile found here (new window)

check out the comments section...wtf?
 
2010-01-17 10:39:54 AM
Bet this guy's going to write children's books, too.
 
2010-01-17 11:49:57 AM
His Noodly Appendage: Holy god (new window)

good god that is creepy.
 
2010-01-17 12:42:35 PM
Aunt Crabby: WFern: TheFarkinEmpress: I see all the child molester apologists are out in force on Fark. Yay.

No. Just people who are skeptical that you should go to jail for five years for going on YouTube.

He served his time for a single offense that occurred 20-odd years ago. It should be over.

According to TFA, he didn't fully serve his time. He was on probation. He was sent back to serve the rest of his time for violating probation. There is a difference.


According to the TFA, he did fully serve his time. At least for the crime he committed in the 80's. He was serving probation because he didn't register his change of address, a separate crime.
 
2010-01-17 01:11:15 PM
desynch: Most sex offenders are REPEAT OFFENDERS. Not all, but most...

Wrong. (new window)
 
Displayed 50 of 204 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