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.

(Daily Mail)   Protip: If you're going to turn yourself in to the police to confess raping high school girls, make sure you're aware of the length of the statute of limitations. (with mugshot goodness)   (dailymail.co.uk) divider line 57
    More: Fail, statute of limitations, Donald Ingerson, St. Louis County, high school girls, stoned to death, Hoda Kotb  
•       •       •

26180 clicks; posted to Main » on 01 Aug 2012 at 12:49 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



57 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-08-01 10:56:20 AM  
Yikes! Thanks Subby, duly noted.
 
2012-08-01 11:28:20 AM  
Oh, and he even has the pedo stache.

How fitting.

/yes, they're TEENAGE girls, but still
//CREEP!!!
 
2012-08-01 11:28:33 AM  
Trying to turn yourself in after you think the statute of limitations has expired? Isn't that just bragging?
 
2012-08-01 12:51:43 PM  
Huh. The internet surprised me today.
 
2012-08-01 12:52:05 PM  
why
 
2012-08-01 12:53:27 PM  
Why would you even do that?
 
2012-08-01 12:53:32 PM  
make mustaches illegal
 
2012-08-01 12:54:33 PM  

cretinbob: Trying to turn yourself in after you think the statute of limitations has expired? Isn't that just bragging?


If I Did It?
 
2012-08-01 12:54:33 PM  
'This is the first time we've had someone contact our office and say, `I want to talk about what I did,' McCulloch told the AP.

Why are you telling me this?

"Hey, I'm telling EVERYBODY!!"
 
2012-08-01 12:55:09 PM  
Doesn't matter if the laws have changed. What were the laws at the time they occurred? Retroactive laws are generally frowned upon by the courts.
 
2012-08-01 12:58:14 PM  

deadcrickets: Doesn't matter if the laws have changed. What were the laws at the time they occurred? Retroactive laws are generally frowned upon by the courts.


O'rly. Tell that to all the men who are in prison right now for molesting their children decades ago. They might need your legal advice.
 
2012-08-01 12:58:22 PM  
Man, that guy looks like an older John Waters. But with him, it probably WOULD just be bragging.
 
2012-08-01 12:59:29 PM  

Snargi: deadcrickets: Doesn't matter if the laws have changed. What were the laws at the time they occurred? Retroactive laws are generally frowned upon by the courts.

O'rly. Tell that to all the men who are in prison right now for molesting their children decades ago. They might need your legal advice.


Section 9 of the Constitution is my reply.
 
2012-08-01 12:59:53 PM  
This makes no goddamn sense.

"Well, I had sex with some underage girls over 20 years ago. Ayup. Well, I'll be going now. Just had to get that off my chest. Thanks for listening."

"Where do you think you're going? Sit down, pal."
 
2012-08-01 01:00:31 PM  

deadcrickets: Snargi: deadcrickets: Doesn't matter if the laws have changed. What were the laws at the time they occurred? Retroactive laws are generally frowned upon by the courts.

O'rly. Tell that to all the men who are in prison right now for molesting their children decades ago. They might need your legal advice.

Section 9 of the Constitution is my reply.


Of Article 1 that is.
 
2012-08-01 01:02:27 PM  
For rape? Really? Shouldn't there not be any statute of limitations on that?
 
2012-08-01 01:03:03 PM  

Lando Lincoln: This makes no goddamn sense.

"Well, I had sex with some underage girls over 20 years ago. Ayup. Well, I'll be going now. Just had to get that off my chest. Thanks for listening."

"Where do you think you're going? Sit down, pal."


cause sex = BABIES

plus that tainted feeling that results in lawsuits, + free money (prizes)
 
2012-08-01 01:04:50 PM  
He can tell all the fellas in prison, I'm sure it would get a lot off his chest. They will all be supportive of his decision to come clean; then proceed to shanking him in the abdomen and pulling his intestines out through the wound, as is prison tradition of course.
 
2012-08-01 01:07:35 PM  
WOOOO ST LOUIS!!!!
 
2012-08-01 01:08:41 PM  
students.cis.uab.edu
 
2012-08-01 01:11:48 PM  

Snargi: deadcrickets: Doesn't matter if the laws have changed. What were the laws at the time they occurred? Retroactive laws are generally frowned upon by the courts.

O'rly. Tell that to all the men who are in prison right now for molesting their children decades ago. They might need your legal advice.


WTF?

Ex Post Facto laws and statute of limitation are completely different things.

"Retroactive" criminal laws, or Ex Post Facto (i.e. "after the fact") make something illegal that was legal when you did it, so there was no way to avoid criminal liability (since you can't go back in time and undo it, it was legal when the act was performed). That's explicitly banned in Article I of the Constitution.

Statute of Limitations is something else entirely. That is a clock that counts down to when they can't prosecute you for a crime. When they file charges, the clock stops. If you shoplifted something as a dumb kid, and 30 years later you want to go back to the store and apologize, it's what keeps them from calling the cops on you. It was illegal when you did it, but the law recognizes that enough time passes that it doesn't matter anymore. Generally speaking, there is no statute of limitations on murder, and in many jurisdictions there isn't one on child abuse.

/IANAL
 
2012-08-01 01:12:51 PM  
Wow! Inspector Clouseau sure let himself go
 
2012-08-01 01:13:25 PM  
I have the weirdest boner right now.
 
2012-08-01 01:13:39 PM  

Jon iz teh kewl: [students.cis.uab.edu image 700x900]


That is a really creepy image when you're scrolling up the page backwards...

/ what do you mean underage girl, look at those hips, tits and gyaaaaaahHH!
 
2012-08-01 01:16:40 PM  
I'm going out on a limb here, but I'm guessing he didn't teach law.
 
2012-08-01 01:19:28 PM  
Better late than never.
 
2012-08-01 01:22:57 PM  
4.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-08-01 01:25:46 PM  
Rule #1 about teacher rape club is.......
 
2012-08-01 01:30:56 PM  
Hey should have looked in a law book before he did that.
 
2012-08-01 01:31:13 PM  

JDAT: Rule #1 about teacher rape club is.......


You never rape teachers at teacher rape club?
 
2012-08-01 01:39:33 PM  
McCluer has a greatschools rating of 2/10

I see it hasn't improved much over the years.
 
2012-08-01 01:42:21 PM  
Saw this on the local news here. The detective they interviewed could barely keep himself from laughing at the stupidity.
 
2012-08-01 01:43:20 PM  

Lando Lincoln: This makes no goddamn sense.

"Well, I had sex with some underage girls over 20 years ago. Ayup. Well, I'll be going now. Just had to get that off my chest. Thanks for listening."

"Where do you think you're going? Sit down, pal."


Well, confession is good for the soul. Maybe not for the body, but that's not the point, now is it?
 
2012-08-01 01:45:09 PM  
A long-time St. Louis-area teacher has been charged with rape and statutory sodomy after turning himself in, apparently in the mistaken belief that the statute of limitations had expired, authorities said Tuesday.


So the sodomy was consensual but the rape wasn't? What?
 
2012-08-01 01:52:46 PM  

Mouser: Lando Lincoln: This makes no goddamn sense.

"Well, I had sex with some underage girls over 20 years ago. Ayup. Well, I'll be going now. Just had to get that off my chest. Thanks for listening."

"Where do you think you're going? Sit down, pal."

Well, confession is good for the soul. Maybe not for the body, but that's not the point, now is it?


He's about to learn what it's like to be on the other side of sodomy.
 
2012-08-01 01:55:50 PM  

Need_MindBleach: So the sodomy was consensual but the rape wasn't? What?


"Rape" is one of those words that already carries with it the connotation of being not-consensual, I believe.

That said, I'm not sure why the word "statutory" needs adding to the charge of Sodomy. Unless we're talking here about some weird application of laws that were likely on the books since the state was founded (Sodomy laws are generally those sorts of laws), and were just added to the list of charges to trump things up.

Not that I think the guy is undeserving of being punished, but what else, really could be the point of segregating the (vaginal) rape charge from the anal rape charge? Is one not as bad as the other in some way I was previously unaware of?

...possibility of pregnancy... maybe?

I dunno. It's certainly odd to me.
 
2012-08-01 01:58:10 PM  
I would say it's good he didn't educate himself first, actually...
 
2012-08-01 02:00:17 PM  

SkunkWerks: Unless we're talking here about some weird application of laws that were likely on the books since the state was founded (Sodomy laws are generally those sorts of laws), and were just added to the list of charges to trump things up.


Basically. "Sodomy" is one of those words like "narcotics" that don't really mean what they mean in legalese, most narcotics don't "make you sleep" either.
 
2012-08-01 02:00:36 PM  

deadcrickets: Doesn't matter if the laws have changed. What were the laws at the time they occurred? Retroactive laws are generally frowned upon by the courts.


The 'laws have changed a lot' comment was probably more that it was nearly impossible to be sure that the correct time interval really had passed, since you'd have to go down to a law library and look up old copies of the statutes and case history. There are lots of laws where the limitation has been raised or lowered.

Statute of limitations extensions might not actually count as retroactive, as long as they were extended before the original time to make a case ran out, since it applies to the prosecutor's action. I don't have any idea if that's true or not, don't mock my GED in law.
 
2012-08-01 02:10:34 PM  

Fark Rye For Many Whores: SkunkWerks: Unless we're talking here about some weird application of laws that were likely on the books since the state was founded (Sodomy laws are generally those sorts of laws), and were just added to the list of charges to trump things up.

Basically. "Sodomy" is one of those words like "narcotics" that don't really mean what they mean in legalese, most narcotics don't "make you sleep" either.


Maybe. But even the legalese generally covers the notion that you're engaging in intercourse of a sexual nature "in the wrong way".

When you're at the level of raping high school girls, is there really any merit in subtracting points for "form"? It's a heinous crime, not a high-diving competition

i.e.: "Well, raping that little girl was an awful thing to do, but it wasn't quite as awful as when you stuck your prick in her pooper!"

This is even putting aside the even finer detail of whether or not it was "statutory". Can't we just agree that raping a little girl- no matter what hole you stick it in- is a pretty friggin reprehensible thing to do?

O_o
 
2012-08-01 02:21:57 PM  
Eh, fark this guy. He thought he could thumb his nose at the law and he lost.
 
2012-08-01 02:30:11 PM  

Silverstaff: Snargi: deadcrickets: Doesn't matter if the laws have changed. What were the laws at the time they occurred? Retroactive laws are generally frowned upon by the courts.

O'rly. Tell that to all the men who are in prison right now for molesting their children decades ago. They might need your legal advice.

WTF?

Ex Post Facto laws and statute of limitation are completely different things.

"Retroactive" criminal laws, or Ex Post Facto (i.e. "after the fact") make something illegal that was legal when you did it, so there was no way to avoid criminal liability (since you can't go back in time and undo it, it was legal when the act was performed). That's explicitly banned in Article I of the Constitution.

Statute of Limitations is something else entirely. That is a clock that counts down to when they can't prosecute you for a crime. When they file charges, the clock stops. If you shoplifted something as a dumb kid, and 30 years later you want to go back to the store and apologize, it's what keeps them from calling the cops on you. It was illegal when you did it, but the law recognizes that enough time passes that it doesn't matter anymore. Generally speaking, there is no statute of limitations on murder, and in many jurisdictions there isn't one on child abuse.

/IANAL


Looks like the statute of limitations for sex crimes against minors in Missouri is 30 years after the victim reaches 18.

Link
 
2012-08-01 02:43:03 PM  

bugontherug: Looks like the statute of limitations for sex crimes against minors in Missouri is 30 years after the victim reaches 18.


For "sexual contact", anyway. It looks like there's no statute of limitations for forcible rape or forcible sodomy, which is good.
 
2012-08-01 03:04:53 PM  
Dude should have waited for the death bed confession.
 
2012-08-01 03:28:50 PM  
McCulloch said the crimes had never been reported and declined to name the district where Ingerson worked in an effort to help protect the identities of the victims.

So lets post pictures of a few of the schools he's worked at...
 
2012-08-01 03:35:19 PM  

bugontherug: Silverstaff: Snargi: deadcrickets: Doesn't matter if the laws have changed. What were the laws at the time they occurred? Retroactive laws are generally frowned upon by the courts.

O'rly. Tell that to all the men who are in prison right now for molesting their children decades ago. They might need your legal advice.

WTF?

Ex Post Facto laws and statute of limitation are completely different things.

"Retroactive" criminal laws, or Ex Post Facto (i.e. "after the fact") make something illegal that was legal when you did it, so there was no way to avoid criminal liability (since you can't go back in time and undo it, it was legal when the act was performed). That's explicitly banned in Article I of the Constitution.

Statute of Limitations is something else entirely. That is a clock that counts down to when they can't prosecute you for a crime. When they file charges, the clock stops. If you shoplifted something as a dumb kid, and 30 years later you want to go back to the store and apologize, it's what keeps them from calling the cops on you. It was illegal when you did it, but the law recognizes that enough time passes that it doesn't matter anymore. Generally speaking, there is no statute of limitations on murder, and in many jurisdictions there isn't one on child abuse.

/IANAL

Looks like the statute of limitations for sex crimes against minors in Missouri is 30 years after the victim reaches 18.

Link


Look at the date the law went into effect: 1987. What was it for his crimes in the 1960s and 1970s? If it's not that long then he can only really be tried for the one in 1992.
 
2012-08-01 03:36:07 PM  

Skyrmion: bugontherug: Looks like the statute of limitations for sex crimes against minors in Missouri is 30 years after the victim reaches 18.

For "sexual contact", anyway. It looks like there's no statute of limitations for forcible rape or forcible sodomy, which is good.


Yes, should have specified non-forcible sex crimes against minors.
 
2012-08-01 03:39:03 PM  

deadcrickets: bugontherug: Silverstaff: Snargi: deadcrickets: Doesn't matter if the laws have changed. What were the laws at the time they occurred? Retroactive laws are generally frowned upon by the courts.

O'rly. Tell that to all the men who are in prison right now for molesting their children decades ago. They might need your legal advice.

WTF?

Ex Post Facto laws and statute of limitation are completely different things.

"Retroactive" criminal laws, or Ex Post Facto (i.e. "after the fact") make something illegal that was legal when you did it, so there was no way to avoid criminal liability (since you can't go back in time and undo it, it was legal when the act was performed). That's explicitly banned in Article I of the Constitution.

Statute of Limitations is something else entirely. That is a clock that counts down to when they can't prosecute you for a crime. When they file charges, the clock stops. If you shoplifted something as a dumb kid, and 30 years later you want to go back to the store and apologize, it's what keeps them from calling the cops on you. It was illegal when you did it, but the law recognizes that enough time passes that it doesn't matter anymore. Generally speaking, there is no statute of limitations on murder, and in many jurisdictions there isn't one on child abuse.

/IANAL

Looks like the statute of limitations for sex crimes against minors in Missouri is 30 years after the victim reaches 18.

Link

Look at the date the law went into effect: 1987. What was it for his crimes in the 1960s and 1970s? If it's not that long then he can only really be tried for the one in 1992.


It also depends on whether the revised statute of limitations is interpreted to apply retroactively. I can see arguments for why it should be so interpreted, and why it shouldn't be so interpreted. But the constitutional prohibition on ex-post facto punishment isn't part of the picture.
 
2012-08-01 03:40:11 PM  
I'm still puzzled as to this guy's motive. Was he just bragging? Was he trying to taunt prosecutors by confessing to crimes he thought he couldn't be prosecuted for? It's a very weird situation.
 
2012-08-01 04:34:08 PM  
Bring forth the Statue of Limitations!
 
Displayed 50 of 57 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report