Seconded. What's the story here? Some guy happens to have the last name "Murphy"? Really? The phone book must blow your damn mind.

The 2003 Ig Nobel Prize Winners

ENGINEERING: The late John Paul Stapp, the late Edward A. Murphy, Jr., and George Nichols, for jointly giving birth in 1949 to Murphy's Law, the basic engineering principle that "If there are two or more ways to do something, and one of those ways can result in a catastrophe, someone will do it" (or, in other words: "If anything can go wrong, it will").

WHO ATTENDED THE IG NOBEL CEREMONY: (1) Author Nick T. Spark , on behalf of John Paul Stapp's widow, Lilly. (2) Edward Murphy's Edward A. Murphy III, on behalf of his late father. (3) George Nichols, via audio tape.

Source: improbable.com/ig/winners/
emphasis mine

Why no newsflash?

According to Wikipedia, Edward A Murphy Jr. coined Murphy's law.

Edward A. Murphy III, profiled in the linked article, seems to be his son.

Link (new window)

/not subby

eddy: The 2003 Ig Nobel Prize Winners

ENGINEERING: The late John Paul Stapp, the late Edward A. Murphy, Jr., and George Nichols, for jointly giving birth in 1949 to Murphy's Law, the basic engineering principle that "If there are two or more ways to do something, and one of those ways can result in a catastrophe, someone will do it" (or, in other words: "If anything can go wrong, it will").

WHO ATTENDED THE IG NOBEL CEREMONY: (1) Author Nick T. Spark , on behalf of John Paul Stapp's widow, Lilly. (2) Edward Murphy's Edward A. Murphy III, on behalf of his late father. (3) George Nichols, via audio tape.

Source: improbable.com/ig/winners/
emphasis mine

Use bold to emphasize next time.

still not greenworthy. i would have bought it if it was eddy murphy.

You are boring me to death and I'm already dead, you're boring me back to death.

Ban the subby from the internet, he's far too dangerous and can't be trusted to run amok inside the tubes.

I see where subby wanted to go with his headline, but he kinda mucked it up a bit. Still not deserving of all the hate.

\better luck next time subster

You are Right Uncle Wiggly. He probably got caught relieving himself in a bush somewhere.

I'm more interested in the fact the site gives you the option to "track this predator".

I will now see which hot teachers are in their registry.

Edward Aloysius Murphy LII

Dang, he was the 52nd Murphy in a line with that name? Makes genealogy less challenging.

Great site. click on "have you seen"!Link (new window)

Way to go missing ANOTHER chance to use the Florida tag....

Uncle Wiggly: OK. So this *is* the son of Murphy's Law. Very interesting. But this isn't, you know, lost luggage on your honeymoon or accidentally erasing your hard drive while cloning it or putting baking soda instead of flour into a recipe...

Cuz that would just be ironic.

Cybernetic: Uncle Wiggly: OK. So this *is* the son of Murphy's Law. Very interesting. But this isn't, you know, lost luggage on your honeymoon or accidentally erasing your hard drive while cloning it or putting baking soda instead of flour into a recipe...

But is it like rain on your wedding day?

No no no no. It's like a free ride when you've already paid.

SevenizGud: Edward Aloysius Murphy LII

Dang, he was the 52nd Murphy in a line with that name? Makes genealogy less challenging.

Appears to be a kindly older babysitter who has been misunderstood.

FTWiki: "Murphy was said by his son to have regarded the many jocular versions of the law as "ridiculous, trivial and erroneous." His attempts to have the law taken more seriously were unsuccessful"

Sounds like Murphy's (re-interpreted) Law bit him in the ass. There should be a corollary "If an engineer disseminates something to the public in engineering terms, it will be re-interpreted until it makes some semblance of sense outside of your narrow scope". This kind of thing happens all the time in engineering and science, and it always seems to wind up with butt hurt engineers or scientists saying "B-B-But You're misinterpreting me in the worst possible way", which is often true.

See also: /theory/ of evolution. It's too hard to explain to people that "Science accepts this as hard fact, the reason it must be referred to as a 'theory' is because we can't reproduce the results at scale, because we don't have an extra universe lying around in the sock drawer". In this way it gets re-interpreted as "hypothesis of evolution" or at worst "WAG of Evolution".

Uncle Wiggly:
794.011(2)(b) Person Under 18 Commits Sexual Battery Upon Or Injures Sexual Organs Of A Victim Less Than 12 ... (2)(b) A person less than 18 years of age who commits sexual battery upon, or in an attempt to commit sexual battery injures the sexual organs of, a person less than 12 years of age commits a life felony, punishable as provided in s. 775.082,s. 775.083, s. 775.084, or s. 794.0115.


Can anyone explain how a man who was 45 in 1992 gets charged with an offense with language stating the offender is under 18?

GREEN LIGHT EVERYTHING.

Wonder if anyone else caught the joke in the headline. Not bad.

cyberspacedout: Wonder if anyone else caught the joke in the headline. Not bad.

the greenlight was the joke

Ghastly: Edward Murphy? And you didn't go with an Eddy Murphy joke?

I'd say the actual son of the guy whose responsible for Murphy's law is much more amusing a subject than Eddie. Also far less obvious or expected.

Rezurok:
Can anyone explain how a man who was 45 in 1992 gets charged with an offense with language stating the offender is under 18?

Interestingly enough, when you click on the link in the profile for the statute popup, it points to this:
"If conviction occurred prior to 1995:

794.011(8)(b) Commits Sexual Battery; Coerces By Authority (Engages In Sexual Activity With A Child)"

I did a little digging though, interested in the question ferretman brought up:
"Unless I'm missing something (very tired today) it seems he is being penalized (put on a list) for something he did almost 20 years ago or is it that he was just released or is there a more current charge?"

The statutes listed for penalties that he is punishable with, assuming it's 792.011(8)(b) they're using, are
775.082 which is
"(b) For a felony of the first degree, by a term of imprison,ent[sic] not exceeding 30 years or, when specifically provided by statute, by imprisonment for a term of years not exceeding life imprisonment;

(c) For a felony of the second dgree, by a term of imprisonment not exceeding 15 years;

(d) For a felony of the third degree, by a term of imprisonment not exceeding 5 years."

and some others which involve fines and extended sentences for habitual offenders (which his profile implies he isn't).

It's entirely possible he just got out of prison just shy of 20 years after the adjudication date listed in his profile, pursuant to (b) above.

Now, does that answer your question, or is the question really "why do we care that this 65 year old man molested a child 20 years ago?"