Do you have adblock enabled?
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.

(WJHL Tri-Cities)   Girlfriend gives away fugitives location by "liking" the authorities on Facebook   (www2.wjhl.com) divider line 110
    More: Stupid, Facebook, fugitives, sex offenders, obstruction of justice, girlfriend  
•       •       •

18707 clicks; posted to Main » on 13 Sep 2012 at 11:52 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread
 
2012-09-13 11:38:30 AM  
img.photobucket.com
 
2012-09-13 11:54:37 AM  
How do you lick authorities on fa---

oh.

damn.
 
2012-09-13 11:54:41 AM  
Tazewell? You bet he did!
 
2012-09-13 11:56:59 AM  
I can rarely win a second date, but sex offenders can not only get girlfriends, but have them commit felonies on their behalf.

Maybe I just need to have more offensive sex.
 
2012-09-13 11:59:26 AM  
I don't understand how the girlfriend gets an obstruction of justice charge. She's the one who led them to him.
 
2012-09-13 12:03:57 PM  

DanZero: [img.photobucket.com image 214x79]


Ha ha! Love it!
 
2012-09-13 12:04:17 PM  

hitmanric: I don't understand how the girlfriend gets an obstruction of justice charge. She's the one who led them to him.


I'm guessing they asked her "where is he" and she said "I dunno"...
 
2012-09-13 12:05:04 PM  
Well, if we have to have criminals, let them be stupid criminals.
 
2012-09-13 12:06:24 PM  
Yeah, not gonna stick. I can hear her now. "He made me say I didn't know where he was but later, I tried to give you all a clue that he was really here. Ta da."

That's her story and she should stick to it.
 
2012-09-13 12:06:24 PM  

HotWingConspiracy: I can rarely win a second date, but sex offenders can not only get girlfriends, but have them commit felonies on their behalf.

Maybe I just need to have more offensive sex.


Hm. Or just be crazy. I'm guessing if you're already nuts, sticking it in more nuts just cancels each other out and you appear normal?
 
2012-09-13 12:07:05 PM  
Wonder if the guy is a real sex offender or one of those dudes that just got caught peeing in an alleyway.
 
2012-09-13 12:08:36 PM  
I wonder whether or not a subpoena was involved or if the police can just get this sort of information from FB by asking.
 
2012-09-13 12:09:05 PM  
Computers, how do they work?
 
2012-09-13 12:10:34 PM  
Did she like them? Or did she like like them?
 
2012-09-13 12:12:18 PM  
It sounds like she was afraid but wanted him caught.
 
2012-09-13 12:14:54 PM  
Tazewell that ends well.
 
2012-09-13 12:14:57 PM  

HotWingConspiracy: I can rarely win a second date, but sex offenders can not only get girlfriends, but have them commit felonies on their behalf.

Maybe I just need to have more offensive sex.


It's even worse than that.
wvva.images.worldnow.com
 
2012-09-13 12:15:06 PM  

HotWingConspiracy: I can rarely win a second date, but sex offenders can not only get girlfriends, but have them commit felonies on their behalf.

Maybe I just need to have more offensive sex.


Maybe it's just that; your sex is offensive.
 
2012-09-13 12:15:11 PM  
I just double checked, and liking a post doesn't give the person full access to your profile. You can get a name and possibly a location, though I've seen that second line be occupation, school, country, but usually completely blank. ... And, not to break out the tinfoil hat or anything, but are they really sitting there monitoring their police station's Facebook, munching on donuts while inventing new laws to enforce, instead of out doing something? ... We all know Facebook would roll over on anything without even needing a "Please" let alone a subpoena. I say they got sneaky and don't want to admit it.
 
2012-09-13 12:16:05 PM  

TyrantII: Wonder if the guy is a real sex offender or one of those dudes that just got caught peeing in an alleyway.


Guys peeing in alleys are seldom referred to as "dangerous sex offenders".
 
2012-09-13 12:16:07 PM  
Dyllan Otto Naecker, 29 year old white male with possible ties to gang activity

Oh she dead. He probably dead too. Homeys don't like being given up by stupid biatches--female or male biatches.
 
2012-09-13 12:17:01 PM  
Deputies were able to determine Naecker's girlfriends identity after she "liked" the Tazewell County Sheriff's Office Facebook page, police report.

This information provided deputies with critical information such as Naecker's girlfriend's residence and her name.

Today the girlfriend, Samantha Dillow, has been charged with obstruction of justice. A joint statement by the Sheriff's Office and the Tazewell County Prosecutor's Office thanked Dillow for the information and her aid in capturing Naecker, but reminded her that "snitches get prosecuted, as well as stitches."
 
2012-09-13 12:17:14 PM  
I'm thinking if you've decided on a life of crime, your first step should probably be deleting your Fb account. Also, don't choose the home of a Facebook junkie as your supersecret hideout.

Like.
 
2012-09-13 12:18:38 PM  
wat
i.imgur.com


Original mugshot?


TyrantII: Wonder if the guy is a real sex offender or one of those dudes that just got caught peeing in an alleyway.



I was wondering that myself, couldn't find anything. They threw around the "Adam Walsh Act" but with today's webnewscrap you never know if that is a hint of how bad he is or how inept the writer is.
But seeing as he was 26 when arrested, I'm thinking he did something that would have gotten him shot in a few places.
 
2012-09-13 12:19:21 PM  

JPSimonetti: I just double checked, and liking a post doesn't give the person full access to your profile. You can get a name and possibly a location, though I've seen that second line be occupation, school, country, but usually completely blank. ... And, not to break out the tinfoil hat or anything, but are they really sitting there monitoring their police station's Facebook, munching on donuts while inventing new laws to enforce, instead of out doing something? ... We all know Facebook would roll over on anything without even needing a "Please" let alone a subpoena. I say they got sneaky and don't want to admit it.


Aw, dammit, now I want doughnuts.
/So fat.
 
2012-09-13 12:20:38 PM  

twiztedjustin: wat
[i.imgur.com image 203x360]


Original mugshot?


TyrantII: Wonder if the guy is a real sex offender or one of those dudes that just got caught peeing in an alleyway.


I was wondering that myself, couldn't find anything. They threw around the "Adam Walsh Act" but with today's webnewscrap you never know if that is a hint of how bad he is or how inept the writer is.
But seeing as he was 26 when arrested, I'm thinking he did something that would have gotten him shot in a few places.


No, the article mentions both Maryland and Virginia but no one by his name is in either registry.
 
2012-09-13 12:23:06 PM  
I don't get it, the article says he is white, but then they call him Naecker.
 
2012-09-13 12:24:32 PM  

hitmanric: I don't understand how the girlfriend gets an obstruction of justice charge. She's the one who led them to him.


Once again, the article provided little info and made no sense.
Journalism, how does that work?
 
2012-09-13 12:25:06 PM  
fugitive's
 
2012-09-13 12:25:23 PM  

JPSimonetti: I just double checked, and liking a post doesn't give the person full access to your profile. You can get a name and possibly a location, though I've seen that second line be occupation, school, country, but usually completely blank. ... And, not to break out the tinfoil hat or anything, but are they really sitting there monitoring their police station's Facebook, munching on donuts while inventing new laws to enforce, instead of out doing something? ... We all know Facebook would roll over on anything without even needing a "Please" let alone a subpoena. I say they got sneaky and don't want to admit it.


Were they monitoring their wall? Sure, lots of businesses and public institutions do. They use it to interact with the public without having to pay for a web page. And they were probably keeping an eye on the walls of his family members and close friends.

I know a few probation officers (and no, none are mine) who use FaceBook (my MySpace, end every other social media site they can find) to keep track of their scallywags. You'd be amazed by the number of idiots who post about their probation violations.
 
2012-09-13 12:25:49 PM  
We probably won't see why he's a sex offender because many of those records will be sealed. However, he is a Tier 3 Registered Sex Offender. Under the Adam Walsh Law, this is the breakdown:

Tier III Offenses require lifetime registration and quarterly verification, involve:

sexual acts involving force or carried out under threat, 18 U.S.C. 2241(a)
sexual acts with one whom the actor causes unconscious, or impairs by drugging or intoxication, 18 U.S.C. 2241(b)
sexual acts with a child under the age of 12, 18 U.S.C. 2241(c)
sexual acts with one whom is mentally incapable of appraising, or physically incapable of declining, or communicates unwillingness of, the sex act, 18 U.S.C. 2242
sexual contact with a child under the age of 12, 18 U.S.C. 2244(c)

non-parental kidnapping or false imprisonment of minors,
any attempt or conspiracy to commit of any of the above, and
any new offense committed by a Tier II offender.
 
2012-09-13 12:26:15 PM  
I am more shocked that her Quantum Physics thesis regarding Bell's Theorem didn't give her away.
 
2012-09-13 12:28:10 PM  

fappomatic: sexual acts involving force or carried out under threat, 18 U.S.C. 2241(a)
sexual acts with one whom the actor causes unconscious, or impairs by drugging or intoxication, 18 U.S.C. 2241(b)
sexual acts with a child under the age of 12, 18 U.S.C. 2241(c)
sexual acts with one whom is mentally incapable of appraising, or physically incapable of declining, or communicates unwillingness of, the sex act, 18 U.S.C. 2242



So rape, kiddie rape, and "OMG I'M SOOOO DRUNK let's f*** and I'll press charges in the morning blaming you for getting me drunk and taking my innocence" are all on the same tier? Well, sure, that makes sense.
 
2012-09-13 12:28:13 PM  

HotWingConspiracy: I can rarely win a second date, but sex offenders can not only get girlfriends, but have them commit felonies on their behalf.

Maybe I just need to have more offensive sex.


You just need to switch to a coarser crazy filter. There aren't enough getting through.
 
2012-09-13 12:30:09 PM  

JPSimonetti: twiztedjustin: wat
[i.imgur.com image 203x360]


Original mugshot?


TyrantII: Wonder if the guy is a real sex offender or one of those dudes that just got caught peeing in an alleyway.


I was wondering that myself, couldn't find anything. They threw around the "Adam Walsh Act" but with today's webnewscrap you never know if that is a hint of how bad he is or how inept the writer is.
But seeing as he was 26 when arrested, I'm thinking he did something that would have gotten him shot in a few places.

No, the article mentions both Maryland and Virginia but no one by his name is in either registry.


In the article it says he was wanted for failing to register as a sex offender -- maybe that is why we can't find him on the list...
 
2012-09-13 12:30:48 PM  

fappomatic: We probably won't see why he's a sex offender because many of those records will be sealed. However, he is a Tier 3 Registered Sex Offender. Under the Adam Walsh Law, this is the breakdown:

Tier III Offenses require lifetime registration and quarterly verification, involve:
any new offense committed by a Tier II offender.


So he peed on a wall twice?
 
2012-09-13 12:31:08 PM  

JPSimonetti:
So rape, kiddie rape, and "OMG I'M SOOOO DRUNK let's f*** and I'll press charges in the morning blaming you for getting me drunk and taking my innocence" are all on the same tier? Well, sure, that makes sense.


Ugh, to clarify ... I expected kiddie rape to be on a Tier 7 or 8 and not carry the same weight as the usual stuff you hear about. That's not to say they're all but, but ... dude ... she was 3.
 
2012-09-13 12:33:56 PM  
i1095.photobucket.com

Hello, Tazewell PD? Hey, it's treesloth. Oh, hi, Linda! Oh, you know that notice to call you if we have information about where that Naecher guy is? Yeah... HE'S IN YOUR JAIL. You can stop asking for help finding him.
 
2012-09-13 12:34:23 PM  

red5ish: I wonder whether or not a subpoena was involved or if the police can just get this sort of information from FB by asking.


They didn't need to subpoena anyone. As soon as you "Like" something, the owner of the page is notified. And since a "Like" nowadays, is almost the equivalent of "Friending" someone, they could probably instantly see who she was, and where she was. Depending on your security settings, at least.

I remember one time, my sister tagged me for being someplace, and it actually showed a Google map pointing to my house!! I called her up immediately and was like, "Did you see what you just posted?!" All she could say was that it happened automatically thanks to some spiffy new app on her phone.

Considering I don't have my address or phone number listed on FB anywhere, something seems a little wrong about them being able to post that information from someone ELSE's post.
 
2012-09-13 12:35:03 PM  

DblDad: Tazewell? You bet he did!


Yea, that's not how you say it.

/grew up there
 
2012-09-13 12:35:23 PM  
Euthanize the girlfriend immediately. There's something SERIOUSLY farked up about women that knowingly date sex offenders. Hope they have lots of diddled kids together.
 
2012-09-13 12:35:47 PM  

JPSimonetti: twiztedjustin: wat
[i.imgur.com image 203x360]



No, the article mentions both Maryland and Virginia but no one by his name is in either registry.


Didn't the article say something about his being in trouble for failing to register?

/don't care enough to re-read it
 
2012-09-13 12:38:25 PM  
Loren

It sounds like she was afraid but wanted him caught.


seriously, what self respecting criminal "likes" a cops fb page?

Caught ones, apparently.
 
2012-09-13 12:39:00 PM  

HideMonkey: JPSimonetti: twiztedjustin: wat
[i.imgur.com image 203x360]



No, the article mentions both Maryland and Virginia but no one by his name is in either registry.

Didn't the article say something about his being in trouble for failing to register?

/don't care enough to re-read it


You're right. I figured they were referring to how you have to let them know where you are, though. I thought the authorities were the one that actually entered you into the database ... that's a little sloppy, isn't it? I wish I had more info of how that worked, but I haven't gotten caught getting the mail in my underwear, yet.

On a related note, I check the the entire US database and he wasn't in there.
 
2012-09-13 12:40:19 PM  

Loren: It sounds like she was afraid but wanted him caught.


Given that a Virginia was mentioned, there's a good chance she's the one who pressed the charges that led to the sex offender status, anyway.
 
2012-09-13 12:40:52 PM  

treesloth: [i1095.photobucket.com image 631x346]

Hello, Tazewell PD? Hey, it's treesloth. Oh, hi, Linda! Oh, you know that notice to call you if we have information about where that Naecher guy is? Yeah... HE'S IN YOUR JAIL. You can stop asking for help finding him.


For a second I thought I was looking at a Will Wheaton doppleganger.

/If I new how to photoshop I'd put that famous Wheaton sweater on him.
 
2012-09-13 12:41:33 PM  
Too bad cops who molest intoxicated women in bars don't have to register as sex offenders.
 
2012-09-13 12:44:22 PM  

Hermione_Granger: Yeah, not gonna stick. I can hear her now. "He made me say I didn't know where he was but later, I tried to give you all a clue that he was really here. Ta da."

That's her story and she should stick to it.


I very much doubt she's that smart.
 
2012-09-13 12:46:39 PM  

RoxtarRyan: Too bad cops who molest intoxicated women in bars don't have to register as sex offenders.


Don't forget to shame the victim for being a target!
 
2012-09-13 12:48:17 PM  

mat catastrophe: DblDad: Tazewell? You bet he did!

Yea, that's not how you say it.

/grew up there


ever eat at Cuz's? Haven't been there in a while, maybe 5 years ago stayed at their cabins for a couple days- they really took care of us.
Also, Rt 16 from 460 to Hungry Mother State Park is kick-azz on a bike. Wears you out more than Tail of the Dragon IMO.
 
2012-09-13 12:49:51 PM  
Most of these dummies have their profiles set to public with all their information visible.

I know bc I've used it to track down not only them but their momma, their boo, their BFF, and their associates with little to no effort on my part.

If you are so socially in demand to NEED a FB and so inclined to be a criminal, keep the information you provide minimal and under lock and key.
 
2012-09-13 12:50:24 PM  

mooseyfate: RoxtarRyan: Too bad cops who molest intoxicated women in bars don't have to register as sex offenders.

Don't forget to shame the victim for being a target!


I really can't pass judgement until I see what she was wearing to tell whether or not she was asking for it or not. Oh, and I'll also need to know her past to tell how sexually active she's been. And, I'll need to interview some of her friends to see if she's ever had a beer or smoked a doobie. Also, her race and the wealth of her family. History of government assistance or voting democrat. This is all vital to knowing if the cop did anything wrong.
 
2012-09-13 12:52:11 PM  

Ed Grubermann: HotWingConspiracy: I can rarely win a second date, but sex offenders can not only get girlfriends, but have them commit felonies on their behalf.

Maybe I just need to have more offensive sex.

It's even worse than that.
[wvva.images.worldnow.com image 600x798]


Hate to see an Amish boy go wrong like that. I don't care if he was on Rumspringa.
 
2012-09-13 12:52:13 PM  
Another day and another FB story of stupidity. FB sells their info to authorities so it woiuldn't be too difficult to get info.
No pics of the stupid chick?
 
2012-09-13 12:53:40 PM  

Old_Chief_Scott: TyrantII: Wonder if the guy is a real sex offender or one of those dudes that just got caught peeing in an alleyway.

Guys peeing in alleys are seldom referred to as "dangerous sex offenders".


According to an article published in The Economist, public urination gets you on the sex offender registry in 13 states: Link
 
2012-09-13 12:54:54 PM  

JPSimonetti: mooseyfate: RoxtarRyan: Too bad cops who molest intoxicated women in bars don't have to register as sex offenders.

Don't forget to shame the victim for being a target!

I really can't pass judgement until I see what she was wearing to tell whether or not she was asking for it or not. Oh, and I'll also need to know her past to tell how sexually active she's been. And, I'll need to interview some of her friends to see if she's ever had a beer or smoked a doobie. Also, her race and the wealth of her family. History of government assistance or voting democrat. This is all vital to knowing if the cop did anything wrong.


All you need to know is that she was out in a bar. Without a male escort. Whore.

I hear she also grocery shops alone after 10pm.
 
2012-09-13 12:55:35 PM  

JPSimonetti: fappomatic: sexual acts involving force or carried out under threat, 18 U.S.C. 2241(a)
sexual acts with one whom the actor causes unconscious, or impairs by drugging or intoxication, 18 U.S.C. 2241(b)
sexual acts with a child under the age of 12, 18 U.S.C. 2241(c)
sexual acts with one whom is mentally incapable of appraising, or physically incapable of declining, or communicates unwillingness of, the sex act, 18 U.S.C. 2242


So rape, kiddie rape, and "OMG I'M SOOOO DRUNK let's f*** and I'll press charges in the morning blaming you for getting me drunk and taking my innocence" are all on the same tier? Well, sure, that makes sense.


Yeah, that's exactly what it says there. Intentionally intoxicating or drugging someone so that they can't resist is perfectly characterized as "I'll press charges in the morning blaming you for getting me drunk." You're not a farking sociopath at all.
 
2012-09-13 01:02:23 PM  

Great Odins Raven: I don't get it, the article says he is white, but then they call him Naecker.


Naecker please.
 
2012-09-13 01:06:16 PM  

911Jenny: Most of these dummies have their profiles set to public with all their information visible.

I know bc I've used it to track down not only them but their momma, their boo, their BFF, and their associates with little to no effort on my part.

If you are so socially in demand to NEED a FB and so inclined to be a criminal, keep the information you provide minimal and under lock and key.


You sound stalkerish...
 
2012-09-13 01:06:23 PM  

HotWingConspiracy: I can rarely win a second date, but sex offenders can not only get girlfriends, but have them commit felonies on their behalf.

Maybe I just need to have more offensive sex.


yeah, but then you end up with a partner that gives up your location to the 5-0.
 
2012-09-13 01:09:06 PM  

Silverstaff: Old_Chief_Scott: TyrantII: Wonder if the guy is a real sex offender or one of those dudes that just got caught peeing in an alleyway.

Guys peeing in alleys are seldom referred to as "dangerous sex offenders".

According to an article published in The Economist, public urination gets you on the sex offender registry in 13 states: Link


The key word is "dangerous".
 
2012-09-13 01:12:12 PM  

Theaetetus: JPSimonetti: fappomatic: sexual acts involving force or carried out under threat, 18 U.S.C. 2241(a)
sexual acts with one whom the actor causes unconscious, or impairs by drugging or intoxication, 18 U.S.C. 2241(b)
sexual acts with a child under the age of 12, 18 U.S.C. 2241(c)
sexual acts with one whom is mentally incapable of appraising, or physically incapable of declining, or communicates unwillingness of, the sex act, 18 U.S.C. 2242


So rape, kiddie rape, and "OMG I'M SOOOO DRUNK let's f*** and I'll press charges in the morning blaming you for getting me drunk and taking my innocence" are all on the same tier? Well, sure, that makes sense.

Yeah, that's exactly what it says there. Intentionally intoxicating or drugging someone so that they can't resist is perfectly characterized as "I'll press charges in the morning blaming you for getting me drunk." You're not a farking sociopath at all.


Whiteknight much? It is the exact thing that tens of thousands of men in the US are accused of every year. Did you offer to buy that lady a drink at the bar? Uh oh. Did she regret it the next day? Oh dear, welcome to Tier III. ... that may not always be the case, but to deny that it happens regularly is complete ignorance. Regardless, my comment was sarcasm and clarified further down.
 
2012-09-13 01:15:15 PM  

HotWingConspiracy: I can rarely win a second date, but sex offenders can not only get girlfriends, but have them commit felonies on their behalf.

Maybe I just need to have more offensive sex.


I'm here to volunteer for the offensive sex...
 
2012-09-13 01:16:39 PM  

Theaetetus: JPSimonetti: fappomatic: sexual acts involving force or carried out under threat, 18 U.S.C. 2241(a)
sexual acts with one whom the actor causes unconscious, or impairs by drugging or intoxication, 18 U.S.C. 2241(b)
sexual acts with a child under the age of 12, 18 U.S.C. 2241(c)
sexual acts with one whom is mentally incapable of appraising, or physically incapable of declining, or communicates unwillingness of, the sex act, 18 U.S.C. 2242


So rape, kiddie rape, and "OMG I'M SOOOO DRUNK let's f*** and I'll press charges in the morning blaming you for getting me drunk and taking my innocence" are all on the same tier? Well, sure, that makes sense.

Yeah, that's exactly what it says there. Intentionally intoxicating or drugging someone so that they can't resist is perfectly characterized as "I'll press charges in the morning blaming you for getting me drunk." You're not a farking sociopath at all.


Obviously he is referring to "sexual acts with one whom is mentally incapable of appraising, or physically incapable of declining, or communicates unwillingness of, the sex act". Maybe that means someone who is retarded or handicapped, but it doesn't seem crazy to apply it to drunkeness.

What's with the over-the-top response, by the way? Did someone drug you and rape you last night?
 
2012-09-13 01:17:52 PM  
Naecker Please.
 
2012-09-13 01:23:07 PM  

TyrantII: Wonder if the guy is a real sex offender or one of those dudes that just got caught peeing in an alleyway.


Ah, the abuses of Megan's law.

What I don't understand is why we have to register people who pee in the alley or--okay--commit rape, and then tell all the neighbors, and they can't live near a school (no joke, you piss on tree, you can't live near school) or work with children...

... but if you shoot someone in the face in anger, you get second degree murder, not pre-meditated, go to jail for 5 years, then can go back to teaching vicious asshole school children that EVERYBODY wants to throttle to death, and you don't have to tell anyone you murdered people.

What?

Had a 20-ish year old guy go to jail for raping a 39-year-old woman once, moved somewhere, the guy down the block got the notice that a "sex offender" moved in and went out two days later and killed the dude. Told police, "I was just protecting my 9 year old daughter." Meanwhile there's like 2 or 3 murderers on your block, right dude?
 
2012-09-13 01:23:27 PM  

hitmanric: I don't understand how the girlfriend gets an obstruction of justice charge. She's the one who led them to him.


I was thinking "Charge her with "enablement of justice" and sentence her to one free ice cream cone".
 
2012-09-13 01:26:14 PM  

JPSimonetti: Theaetetus: JPSimonetti: fappomatic: sexual acts involving force or carried out under threat, 18 U.S.C. 2241(a)
sexual acts with one whom the actor causes unconscious, or impairs by drugging or intoxication, 18 U.S.C. 2241(b)
sexual acts with a child under the age of 12, 18 U.S.C. 2241(c)
sexual acts with one whom is mentally incapable of appraising, or physically incapable of declining, or communicates unwillingness of, the sex act, 18 U.S.C. 2242


So rape, kiddie rape, and "OMG I'M SOOOO DRUNK let's f*** and I'll press charges in the morning blaming you for getting me drunk and taking my innocence" are all on the same tier? Well, sure, that makes sense.

Yeah, that's exactly what it says there. Intentionally intoxicating or drugging someone so that they can't resist is perfectly characterized as "I'll press charges in the morning blaming you for getting me drunk." You're not a farking sociopath at all.

Whiteknight much? It is the exact thing that tens of thousands of men in the US are accused of every year.


[Citation needed]

Did you offer to buy that lady a drink at the bar? Uh oh. Did she regret it the next day? Oh dear, welcome to Tier III. ... that may not always be the case, but to deny that it happens regularly is complete ignorance. Regardless, my comment was sarcasm and clarified further down.

No, your statement is complete ignorance, and appears to be based on some mythical number you pulled out of your ass. In 2009, there were 88,100 reported rapes or attempted rapes, and you're saying that at least a quarter of those were "OMG I'M SOOOO DRUNK let's f*** and I'll press charges in the morning blaming you for getting me drunk and taking my innocence"? Go ahead, pull the other one. It's got bells on.
 
2012-09-13 01:28:30 PM  

keypusher: Theaetetus: JPSimonetti: fappomatic: sexual acts involving force or carried out under threat, 18 U.S.C. 2241(a)
sexual acts with one whom the actor causes unconscious, or impairs by drugging or intoxication, 18 U.S.C. 2241(b)
sexual acts with a child under the age of 12, 18 U.S.C. 2241(c)
sexual acts with one whom is mentally incapable of appraising, or physically incapable of declining, or communicates unwillingness of, the sex act, 18 U.S.C. 2242


So rape, kiddie rape, and "OMG I'M SOOOO DRUNK let's f*** and I'll press charges in the morning blaming you for getting me drunk and taking my innocence" are all on the same tier? Well, sure, that makes sense.

Yeah, that's exactly what it says there. Intentionally intoxicating or drugging someone so that they can't resist is perfectly characterized as "I'll press charges in the morning blaming you for getting me drunk." You're not a farking sociopath at all.

Obviously he is referring to "sexual acts with one whom is mentally incapable of appraising, or physically incapable of declining, or communicates unwillingness of, the sex act". Maybe that means someone who is retarded or handicapped, but it doesn't seem crazy to apply it to drunkeness.


If you know that someone is so drunk that they're physically incapable of declining, then having sex with them is rape.

What's with the over-the-top response, by the way? Did someone drug you and rape you last night?

No, I'm just sick and tired of the bullshiat "there's violent rape and there's lying women" dichotomy that assholes like him persist in spreading.
 
2012-09-13 01:30:57 PM  

poison_amy: HotWingConspiracy: I can rarely win a second date, but sex offenders can not only get girlfriends, but have them commit felonies on their behalf.

Maybe I just need to have more offensive sex.

I'm here to volunteer for the offensive sex...


That whirring sound you hear is your profile view counter.

/yeah, I know
 
2012-09-13 01:32:13 PM  

fappomatic: We probably won't see why he's a sex offender because many of those records will be sealed. However, he is a Tier 3 Registered Sex Offender. Under the Adam Walsh Law, this is the breakdown:

Tier III Offenses require lifetime registration and quarterly verification, involve:

sexual acts involving force or carried out under threat, 18 U.S.C. 2241(a)
sexual acts with one whom the actor causes unconscious, or impairs by drugging or intoxication, 18 U.S.C. 2241(b)
sexual acts with a child under the age of 12, 18 U.S.C. 2241(c)
sexual acts with one whom is mentally incapable of appraising, or physically incapable of declining, or communicates unwillingness of, the sex act, 18 U.S.C. 2242
sexual contact with a child under the age of 12, 18 U.S.C. 2244(c)

non-parental kidnapping or false imprisonment of minors,
any attempt or conspiracy to commit of any of the above, and
any new offense committed by a Tier II offender.


So he could be a lesser offender who peed behind a tree, and got Tier 3.

He could also have raped some older woman, but he's listed under the Child Under the Age of 12.

Also, as Maryland law states, it's illegal to have sex with a retarded person because they are mentally incapable of etc etc.

Also similar, he could have had sex with a drunk chick at a party who later accused him of rape and there's your mentally incapable etc, which is of course a crime that happens constantly (I've been told repeatedly--as serious advice--to just show up at the bars after 11 or 12, because the girls are already drunk and you can get a fast hook-up). According to this law the actor must "cause" intoxication, by buying a drink i Guess? What if she's out at a bar and gets drunk on her own and decides to hook up?

This is a bad law. It labels people who have done Bad Things(TM) as Child Molesters(TM), and that's very bad. There should be modifiers, like Tier II(r) for Tier II (at worst) Repeat offender. You shouldn't suddenly get the "I had sex with a 12 year old" tag because you pissed behind a tree A THIRD TIME.
 
2012-09-13 01:34:45 PM  

911Jenny:
If you are so socially in demand to NEED a FB and so inclined to be a criminal, keep the information you provide minimal and under lock and key.


If people wanted me that bad, they could come to me. biatch can't find me on facebook? Don't got time for that biatch, her cousin wants to jump in my lap tonight anyway.

Seriously, Facebook is for people who have no social life and can't figure out how to escape their basement; or whose home life is so bad they need to be with their friends even when they're not with their friends. If the whole god damn town worships the ground you walk on, you don't need Facebook.
 
2012-09-13 01:37:26 PM  

bluefoxicy: Also similar, he could have had sex with a drunk chick at a party who later accused him of rape and there's your mentally incapable etc, which is of course a crime that happens constantly


That's incorrect. The statute is:
18 USC 2242(2): Whoever... knowingly-
(2) engages in a sexual act with another person if that other person is-
(A) incapable of appraising the nature of the conduct; or
(B) physically incapable of declining participation in, or communicating unwillingness to engage in, that sexual act;
or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title and imprisoned for any term of years or for life.


See that knowingly bit? It's not a "gosh, we were drunk and had consensual sex and now she's regretting it," it's a "I know she's incapable of declining or appraising the nature of the conduct, and I'm going to have sex with her anyway." It's explicitly required in the crime that you know the other person is incapable of consenting, and if you have sex with someone while knowing that they're in such a state, then yes, you are a rapist.
 
2012-09-13 01:47:30 PM  

fappomatic: We probably won't see why he's a sex offender because many of those records will be sealed. However, he is a Tier 3 Registered Sex Offender. Under the Adam Walsh Law, this is the breakdown:

Tier III Offenses require lifetime registration and quarterly verification, involve:

sexual acts involving force or carried out under threat, 18 U.S.C. 2241(a)
sexual acts with one whom the actor causes unconscious, or impairs by drugging or intoxication, 18 U.S.C. 2241(b)
sexual acts with a child under the age of 12, 18 U.S.C. 2241(c)
sexual acts with one whom is mentally incapable of appraising, or physically incapable of declining, or communicates unwillingness of, the sex act, 18 U.S.C. 2242
sexual contact with a child under the age of 12, 18 U.S.C. 2244(c)

non-parental kidnapping or false imprisonment of minors,
any attempt or conspiracy to commit of any of the above, and
any new offense committed by a Tier II offender.


So he raped an 11 year old retarded cripple?

/aisle seat please.
 
2012-09-13 01:50:54 PM  

Theaetetus:
If you know that someone is so drunk that they're physically incapable of declining, then having sex with them is rape.


The problem is it's not that simple.

Let's start with peoples' internal motivations. Girls like to have sex. Take it at face value, it's true. In fact, most of the girls you meet would probably like to have sex with YOU.

Unfortunately for you, there's other things people think about. Morals, social pressure (parents, friends, etc), obligations (boyfriend etc). There's also just bare emotions: how do they feel about you? How do they feel about being used? Girls want sex to be kind of mutual, or at least they want to feel like they're important and valuable--they might want to get drilled, but if that's ALL they think they're worth it's kind of depressing.

There's a lot of crap on top, but it all comes down to somehow the built-in, undeniable, absolutely real id "I want to have sex with you!" being covered up by a lot of ego and superego that does NOT want to have sex with you. What makes a person more than a base, instinctual animal is their ego and how it interacts with their id and superego: for all intents and purposes, SHE doesn't want to have sex with you. QED.

Now, add alcohol.

Alcohol starts to change peoples' behavior. It's not just that it makes them "irrational," but rather it weakens the ego and superego. A girl you'll NEVER get in bed might just smile and shrug and go for it after even two or three drinks, barely buzzed or tipsy. The mood change is huge. The more emotional and impulsive they are, the easier this is; the more critical and thoughtful they are, the more they're prone to continue to refuse. You can tell because it goes from "I'm not interested" to an array of excuses--"I don't know you," "I'm not like that," etc. When a girl says, "I don't know you," what she means is "I'd totally let you pound it but I'm uncomfortable banging random guys."

So what now?

Totally, completely, I-can't-remember-last-night drunk isn't the beginning. One or two beers is already leaning on the pussy wrench. You'll pry those legs open easy enough on just that, sometimes, depending on how loose the bolt is.

I tend to say one or two normal drinks (not long island iced teas), and I reserve the right to decline anyway if I think the girl's out of character that night. I mean if there's a girl that I can't get with, and she's had a couple ciders and she's like, aww hell why not? I'm like, huh. Where'd that come from? It could happen but I'm suspicious. There's only two exceptions: pre-existing active/semi-active sexual relationship (i.e. reason to believe she'd be fine with it) or if she just upfront says go for it when she's sober (I've had that happen, girls that I'll never get with have flat out told me if they get drunk and jump me, go for it; not my fault). Beyond that, it's just not cool with me; if it doesn't feel right, I'd rather not do it.
 
2012-09-13 01:58:00 PM  

Theaetetus:
See that knowingly bit? It's not a "gosh, we were drunk and had consensual sex and now she's regretting it," it's a "I know she's incapable of declining or appraising the nature of the conduct, and I'm going to have sex with her anyway." It's explicitly required in the crime that you know the other person is incapable of consenting, and if you have sex with someone while knowing that they're in such a state, then yes, you are a rapist.


SHE is DRUNK. It didn't strike you that, maybe, possibly, potentially, she could make some "bad decisions"?

I live near a BAR named "Bad Decisions" because this is what drunk people do!

How are you going to argue that you didn't have a belief that the person's judgment may reasonably have been impaired? Reasonably means that there's a reason for it, not "well anyone's judgment can be impaired" or "she always turned me down before but tonight she's frisky." If she's emotionally distraught, high, or drunk, she might suddenly start doing things she wouldn't normally do--this is known. That she does something she wouldn't normally do isn't unreasonable; that she does such things when there's obvious signs of a widely understood cause-effect relationship makes it considerably likely that she may not be currently capable of making reasonable decisions.

Drunk chick. Cause-effect: she does stupid crap, pukes, or has sex with people. Well-known.

She's drunk. Unless you have a reasonable argument (we screw all the time, we came here together and she kept groping me through my pants before she started drinking, etc), it's reasonable to assume she's trying to bang you 'cause she's drunk.
 
2012-09-13 02:00:33 PM  
1) Holy fark, you're creepy, bluefoxicy. You apparently take repeated refusals as an invitation to continue. You talk about "prying" some girl's legs open. I sure as fark wouldn't want any woman to be drunk around you.

2) It is that simple. If you know that someone is so drunk that they're physically incapable of declining, then having sex with them is rape. Not "gosh, I don't know, and she just seems tipsy or buzzed," but "I explicitly know she's incapable of declining." If you know that, and you have sex with her, you are a rapist. It's very, very simple.
 
2012-09-13 02:00:36 PM  

Theaetetus: bluefoxicy: Also similar, he could have had sex with a drunk chick at a party who later accused him of rape and there's your mentally incapable etc, which is of course a crime that happens constantly

That's incorrect. The statute is:
18 USC 2242(2): Whoever... knowingly-
(2) engages in a sexual act with another person if that other person is-
(A) incapable of appraising the nature of the conduct; or
(B) physically incapable of declining participation in, or communicating unwillingness to engage in, that sexual act;
or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title and imprisoned for any term of years or for life.

See that knowingly bit? It's not a "gosh, we were drunk and had consensual sex and now she's regretting it," it's a "I know she's incapable of declining or appraising the nature of the conduct, and I'm going to have sex with her anyway." It's explicitly required in the crime that you know the other person is incapable of consenting, and if you have sex with someone while knowing that they're in such a state, then yes, you are a rapist.


So a drunk man is still legally responsible for his actions, but a drunk girl isn't. Got it.
 
2012-09-13 02:02:45 PM  

bluefoxicy: Theaetetus:
See that knowingly bit? It's not a "gosh, we were drunk and had consensual sex and now she's regretting it," it's a "I know she's incapable of declining or appraising the nature of the conduct, and I'm going to have sex with her anyway." It's explicitly required in the crime that you know the other person is incapable of consenting, and if you have sex with someone while knowing that they're in such a state, then yes, you are a rapist.

SHE is DRUNK. It didn't strike you that, maybe, possibly, potentially, she could make some "bad decisions"?

I live near a BAR named "Bad Decisions" because this is what drunk people do!

How are you going to argue that you didn't have a belief that the person's judgment may reasonably have been impaired? Reasonably means that there's a reason for it, not "well anyone's judgment can be impaired" or "she always turned me down before but tonight she's frisky." If she's emotionally distraught, high, or drunk, she might suddenly start doing things she wouldn't normally do--this is known. That she does something she wouldn't normally do isn't unreasonable; that she does such things when there's obvious signs of a widely understood cause-effect relationship makes it considerably likely that she may not be currently capable of making reasonable decisions.

Drunk chick. Cause-effect: she does stupid crap, pukes, or has sex with people. Well-known.

She's drunk. Unless you have a reasonable argument (we screw all the time, we came here together and she kept groping me through my pants before she started drinking, etc), it's reasonable to assume she's trying to bang you 'cause she's drunk.


You're seriously arguing that if a chick is drunk, it's okay to rape her because you can reasonably assume that's what she wants.

I want nothing more to do with you. Goodbye.
 
2012-09-13 02:05:14 PM  

stonicus: Theaetetus: bluefoxicy: Also similar, he could have had sex with a drunk chick at a party who later accused him of rape and there's your mentally incapable etc, which is of course a crime that happens constantly

That's incorrect. The statute is:
18 USC 2242(2): Whoever... knowingly-
(2) engages in a sexual act with another person if that other person is-
(A) incapable of appraising the nature of the conduct; or
(B) physically incapable of declining participation in, or communicating unwillingness to engage in, that sexual act;
or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title and imprisoned for any term of years or for life.

See that knowingly bit? It's not a "gosh, we were drunk and had consensual sex and now she's regretting it," it's a "I know she's incapable of declining or appraising the nature of the conduct, and I'm going to have sex with her anyway." It's explicitly required in the crime that you know the other person is incapable of consenting, and if you have sex with someone while knowing that they're in such a state, then yes, you are a rapist.

So a drunk man is still legally responsible for his actions, but a drunk girl isn't. Got it.


What actions did the drunk girl take? "Not declining" is not an action. It's a lack of action. Why do you think a girl should be held "legally responsible" for things that other people do to her while she's unconscious?
 
2012-09-13 02:05:59 PM  

bluefoxicy: Theaetetus:
See that knowingly bit? It's not a "gosh, we were drunk and had consensual sex and now she's regretting it," it's a "I know she's incapable of declining or appraising the nature of the conduct, and I'm going to have sex with her anyway." It's explicitly required in the crime that you know the other person is incapable of consenting, and if you have sex with someone while knowing that they're in such a state, then yes, you are a rapist.

SHE is DRUNK. It didn't strike you that, maybe, possibly, potentially, she could make some "bad decisions"?

I live near a BAR named "Bad Decisions" because this is what drunk people do!

How are you going to argue that you didn't have a belief that the person's judgment may reasonably have been impaired? Reasonably means that there's a reason for it, not "well anyone's judgment can be impaired" or "she always turned me down before but tonight she's frisky." If she's emotionally distraught, high, or drunk, she might suddenly start doing things she wouldn't normally do--this is known. That she does something she wouldn't normally do isn't unreasonable; that she does such things when there's obvious signs of a widely understood cause-effect relationship makes it considerably likely that she may not be currently capable of making reasonable decisions.

Drunk chick. Cause-effect: she does stupid crap, pukes, or has sex with people. Well-known.

She's drunk. Unless you have a reasonable argument (we screw all the time, we came here together and she kept groping me through my pants before she started drinking, etc), it's reasonable to assume she's trying to bang you 'cause she's drunk.


Did she willingingly and knowingly consume the alcohol? I dunno about her, but when I drink, I *know* that it changes my behavior. By still choosing to drink, I am accepting that. Why does it not work for chicks?
 
2012-09-13 02:07:19 PM  

Theaetetus: stonicus: Theaetetus: bluefoxicy: Also similar, he could have had sex with a drunk chick at a party who later accused him of rape and there's your mentally incapable etc, which is of course a crime that happens constantly

That's incorrect. The statute is:
18 USC 2242(2): Whoever... knowingly-
(2) engages in a sexual act with another person if that other person is-
(A) incapable of appraising the nature of the conduct; or
(B) physically incapable of declining participation in, or communicating unwillingness to engage in, that sexual act;
or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title and imprisoned for any term of years or for life.

See that knowingly bit? It's not a "gosh, we were drunk and had consensual sex and now she's regretting it," it's a "I know she's incapable of declining or appraising the nature of the conduct, and I'm going to have sex with her anyway." It's explicitly required in the crime that you know the other person is incapable of consenting, and if you have sex with someone while knowing that they're in such a state, then yes, you are a rapist.

So a drunk man is still legally responsible for his actions, but a drunk girl isn't. Got it.

What actions did the drunk girl take? "Not declining" is not an action. It's a lack of action. Why do you think a girl should be held "legally responsible" for things that other people do to her while she's unconscious?


Ah... doing it to a girl who is passed out, we're on the same page on that one. That's a no no. I was referring to the cases of next morning regret...
 
2012-09-13 02:09:46 PM  
www2.wjhl.com
"I can't go to juvie. They use guys like me as currency." 
 
2012-09-13 02:12:53 PM  

stonicus: Theaetetus: stonicus: Theaetetus: bluefoxicy: Also similar, he could have had sex with a drunk chick at a party who later accused him of rape and there's your mentally incapable etc, which is of course a crime that happens constantly

That's incorrect. The statute is:
18 USC 2242(2): Whoever... knowingly-
(2) engages in a sexual act with another person if that other person is-
(A) incapable of appraising the nature of the conduct; or
(B) physically incapable of declining participation in, or communicating unwillingness to engage in, that sexual act;
or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title and imprisoned for any term of years or for life.

See that knowingly bit? It's not a "gosh, we were drunk and had consensual sex and now she's regretting it," it's a "I know she's incapable of declining or appraising the nature of the conduct, and I'm going to have sex with her anyway." It's explicitly required in the crime that you know the other person is incapable of consenting, and if you have sex with someone while knowing that they're in such a state, then yes, you are a rapist.

So a drunk man is still legally responsible for his actions, but a drunk girl isn't. Got it.

What actions did the drunk girl take? "Not declining" is not an action. It's a lack of action. Why do you think a girl should be held "legally responsible" for things that other people do to her while she's unconscious?

Ah... doing it to a girl who is passed out, we're on the same page on that one. That's a no no. I was referring to the cases of next morning regret...


You mean those hypothetical cases of next morning regret with a frequency that is so widely overblown that the one guy who brought it up left this thread when called on it? Those cases of next morning regret that are a red herring you brought up to imply that women are liar, even though you're replying to a post about the above statute that explicitly requires that the guy know he's raping someone who can't decline? Those cases?
 
2012-09-13 02:16:56 PM  

Theaetetus:
2) It is that simple. If you know that someone is so drunk that they're physically incapable of declining, then having sex with them is rape. Not "gosh, I don't know, and she just seems tipsy or buzzed," but "I explicitly know she's incapable of declining." If you know that, and you have sex with her, you are a rapist. It's very, very simple.


"Gosh, I don't know, so I'm going to do it anyway, it's not rape" Wow your morals are warped. The very real possibility that someone's ability to make clear decisions is placed in front of you, and you want to hum and say "I DON'T SEE PROOF!" and go and continue your predatory behavior and call it consent.

Theaetetus: You're seriously arguing that if a chick is drunk, it's okay to rape her because you can reasonably assume that's what she wants.


See, this is why we need better schools. Reading comprehension is a skill you should acquire. Though your critical thinking skills seem to be terrible in general so maybe that's your problem.

Find a brain. Yours seems to be missing.
 
2012-09-13 02:18:33 PM  

Theaetetus:
You mean those hypothetical cases of next morning regret with a frequency that is so widely overblown that the one guy who brought it up left this thread when called on it? Those cases of next morning regret that are a red herring you brought up to imply that women are liar, even though you're replying to a post about the above statute that explicitly requires that the guy know he's raping someone who can't decline ...


Oh I get it. This guy is a bar hopper that routinely brings home drunk girls, and sends them off with cab fare at 2 in the morning. He needs to feel good about all the half-drunk girls he's nailing because they're still conscious so it's "not rape".
 
2012-09-13 02:19:43 PM  

Sock Ruh Tease: [www2.wjhl.com image 472x354]
"I can't go to juvie. They use guys like me as currency."


There was an article in the local paper about an older woman who had her teen aged son sent to juvie so he would learn a lesson about his doing some stupid little prank that got him in trouble with the cops.

It turns out juvie was full of gangs and he was skin and bones and stupid. He ended up having to give a blowjob every morning to a gangbanger who wouldn't give him his pants until he blew him off.

The woman has since changed her mind about putting your kid in the system to teach him a lesson.
 
2012-09-13 02:26:05 PM  

Boudica's War Tampon: Sock Ruh Tease: [www2.wjhl.com image 472x354]
"I can't go to juvie. They use guys like me as currency."

There was an article in the local paper about an older woman who had her teen aged son sent to juvie so he would learn a lesson about his doing some stupid little prank that got him in trouble with the cops.

It turns out juvie was full of gangs and he was skin and bones and stupid. He ended up having to give a blowjob every morning to a gangbanger who wouldn't give him his pants until he blew him off.

The woman has since changed her mind about putting your kid in the system to teach him a lesson.


That's ... inappropriately hilarious.

/TVTropes used to have a 'rape as comedy' page--there are still references to sub-pages of RapeAsComedy--but it seems to have been removed in a recent clean-up of the endless stream of pages about rape.
 
2012-09-13 02:34:40 PM  

stonicus: So a drunk man is still legally responsible for his actions, but a drunk girl isn't. Got it.


No, you can file fake rape charges too.

Only problem is, men generally don't get raped by women. It's far more likely that a man raped a woman. And that is why the law leans that way.

Life is not fair, sugar.
 
2012-09-13 02:34:50 PM  

Ed Grubermann: HotWingConspiracy: I can rarely win a second date, but sex offenders can not only get girlfriends, but have them commit felonies on their behalf.

Maybe I just need to have more offensive sex.

It's even worse than that.
[wvva.images.worldnow.com image 600x798]


Due, your fro is on upside-down.
 
2012-09-13 02:37:03 PM  

bluefoxicy: 911Jenny:
If you are so socially in demand to NEED a FB and so inclined to be a criminal, keep the information you provide minimal and under lock and key.

If people wanted me that bad, they could come to me. biatch can't find me on facebook? Don't got time for that biatch, her cousin wants to jump in my lap tonight anyway.

Seriously, Facebook is for people who have no social life and can't figure out how to escape their basement; or whose home life is so bad they need to be with their friends even when they're not with their friends. If the whole god damn town worships the ground you walk on, you don't need Facebook.


Because no one ever, say, goes away to college, or moves away from home for work. Facebook is only ever used for people who live in the same town as you.
 
2012-09-13 02:38:57 PM  

JPSimonetti: HideMonkey: JPSimonetti: twiztedjustin: wat
[i.imgur.com image 203x360]



No, the article mentions both Maryland and Virginia but no one by his name is in either registry.

Didn't the article say something about his being in trouble for failing to register?

/don't care enough to re-read it

You're right. I figured they were referring to how you have to let them know where you are, though. I thought the authorities were the one that actually entered you into the database ... that's a little sloppy, isn't it? I wish I had more info of how that worked, but I haven't gotten caught getting the mail in my underwear, yet.

On a related note, I check the the entire US database and he wasn't in there.


Remember, in many cases the police will use the term "sex offender" to refer to anyone accused of a sex crime, even when he has not yet been convicted. The information is only placed on a registry after such conviction. Tainting the jury pool has never been easier.
 
2012-09-13 02:41:02 PM  
FTFA: "Deputies were able to determine Naecker's girlfriends identity after she "liked" the Tazewell County Sheriff's Office Facebook page, police report. This information provided deputies with critical information such as Naecker's girlfriend's residence and her name."

I don't get this. If they didn't know the woman's name and location, how did they know that she was the girlfriend of the man they were looking for? Or did they investigate every one of the millions of Facebookers who liked them until they found shacked up with Mr Naughty?
 
2012-09-13 02:43:46 PM  

treesloth: [i1095.photobucket.com image 631x346]

Hello, Tazewell PD? Hey, it's treesloth. Oh, hi, Linda! Oh, you know that notice to call you if we have information about where that Naecher guy is? Yeah... HE'S IN YOUR JAIL. You can stop asking for help finding him.


It's coming... from INSIDE THE JAIL.

www.grouchoreviews.com
 
2012-09-13 02:44:06 PM  

Theaetetus: bluefoxicy: Also similar, he could have had sex with a drunk chick at a party who later accused him of rape and there's your mentally incapable etc, which is of course a crime that happens constantly

That's incorrect. The statute is:
18 USC 2242(2): Whoever... knowingly-
(2) engages in a sexual act with another person if that other person is-
(A) incapable of appraising the nature of the conduct; or
(B) physically incapable of declining participation in, or communicating unwillingness to engage in, that sexual act;
or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title and imprisoned for any term of years or for life.

See that knowingly bit? It's not a "gosh, we were drunk and had consensual sex and now she's regretting it," it's a "I know she's incapable of declining or appraising the nature of the conduct, and I'm going to have sex with her anyway." It's explicitly required in the crime that you know the other person is incapable of consenting, and if you have sex with someone while knowing that they're in such a state, then yes, you are a rapist.


Of course, the prosecution must prove intent. If they can't prove intent, they usually nolle prosequi. You guys need to stop looking at the black & white of a law. Don't take the text literally. The text is up for interpretation of what the law is meant to do.

Case in point: In tenant law, does the phrase "the tenant shall maintain the right to quiet enjoyment..." mean I'm not to be disturbed? Nope...it means you can't be put out of your lawfully leased property just because the owner sells it.

Reality can be so boring.
 
2012-09-13 02:45:23 PM  

Old_Chief_Scott: TyrantII: Wonder if the guy is a real sex offender or one of those dudes that just got caught peeing in an alleyway.

Guys peeing in alleys are seldom referred to as "dangerous sex offenders".


Except by those who are trying to make the sex offender problem seem bigger than it really is.

bluefoxicy: This is a bad law. It labels people who have done Bad Things(TM) as Child Molesters(TM), and that's very bad. There should be modifiers, like Tier II(r) for Tier II (at worst) Repeat offender. You shouldn't suddenly get the "I had sex ...


Yeah. If they are going to publish the registry they should give a short summary of the events, not just the charges. As it is very minor things can end up looking very bad.
 
2012-09-13 02:52:24 PM  
See, Facebook isn't completely worthless. Apparently, it is making it quite a bit easier for the authorities to apprehend stupid criminals. LOL
 
2012-09-13 02:53:54 PM  
I wonder if the cops tase well in Tazewell.

Sorry if someone has already noted this.
 
2012-09-13 02:58:50 PM  

Theaetetus: You mean those hypothetical cases of next morning regret with a frequency that is so widely overblown that the one guy who brought it up left this thread when called on it? Those cases of next morning regret that are a red herring you brought up to imply that women are liar, even though you're replying to a post about the above statute that explicitly requires that the guy know he's raping someone who can't decline? Those cases?


Now you're just being weird. That last post started to get crazy eyes.
 
2012-09-13 02:59:51 PM  

orbister: FTFA: "Deputies were able to determine Naecker's girlfriends identity after she "liked" the Tazewell County Sheriff's Office Facebook page, police report. This information provided deputies with critical information such as Naecker's girlfriend's residence and her name."

I don't get this. If they didn't know the woman's name and location, how did they know that she was the girlfriend of the man they were looking for? Or did they investigate every one of the millions of Facebookers who liked them until they found shacked up with Mr Naughty?


I don't have Fb, so I could be wrong here, but isn't there a whole whohaa about Fb's facial recognition feature, and autotagging? So if she had a pic of this guy on her page, he'd be clearly labled. So some cop who threw out his back or gave the mayor's kid a speeding ticket or pissed someone off somehow is stuck on desk duty with the shiat job of checking the Fb page wonders why someone "liked" them (who knows, maybe this thing happens often, using the "like" to snitch or to subtly request help) and he, bored, runs her name and the others on her page and bingo, there he is.
 
2012-09-13 03:30:27 PM  

stonicus: 911Jenny: Most of these dummies have their profiles set to public with all their information visible.

I know bc I've used it to track down not only them but their momma, their boo, their BFF, and their associates with little to no effort on my part.

If you are so socially in demand to NEED a FB and so inclined to be a criminal, keep the information you provide minimal and under lock and key.

You sound stalkerish...


I should have said that I've done it for work related purposes.
 
2012-09-13 03:39:59 PM  

durbnpoisn: red5ish: I wonder whether or not a subpoena was involved or if the police can just get this sort of information from FB by asking.

They didn't need to subpoena anyone. As soon as you "Like" something, the owner of the page is notified. And since a "Like" nowadays, is almost the equivalent of "Friending" someone, they could probably instantly see who she was, and where she was. Depending on your security settings, at least.

I remember one time, my sister tagged me for being someplace, and it actually showed a Google map pointing to my house!! I called her up immediately and was like, "Did you see what you just posted?!" All she could say was that it happened automatically thanks to some spiffy new app on her phone.

Considering I don't have my address or phone number listed on FB anywhere, something seems a little wrong about them being able to post that information from someone ELSE's post.


FB knows a lot about me from what friends have posted.

Jim Jones and 8 others says you went to Northbrook High School...
Bob says you are his brother and Sally is your sister...
etc.

They have it all figured out.
/tripwire
 
2012-09-13 03:57:04 PM  

cryinoutloud: stonicus: So a drunk man is still legally responsible for his actions, but a drunk girl isn't. Got it.

No, you can file fake rape charges too.

Only problem is, men generally don't get raped by women. It's far more likely that a man raped a woman. And that is why the law leans that way.

Life is not fair, sugar.


Men tend to drastically under report rape and sexual harassment perpetrated against them because as a society we tend to assume that men want it on some level no matter what. A man is perceived as having something wrong with him if he reports that a woman jumped his bones without his consent. Add in the fact that men can't really fight back, because it will be assumed that he was the aggressor if he harms the woman trying to get her to stop, and it's another layer of shame.

/Husband was raped by an ex-girlfriend.
//biatch never got charged because the cops chose to believe her story about a post-breakup booty call over his physical damage.
 
2012-09-13 03:59:33 PM  

stonicus: Theaetetus: stonicus: Theaetetus: bluefoxicy: Also similar, he could have had sex with a drunk chick at a party who later accused him of rape and there's your mentally incapable etc, which is of course a crime that happens constantly

That's incorrect. The statute is:
18 USC 2242(2): Whoever... knowingly-
(2) engages in a sexual act with another person if that other person is-
(A) incapable of appraising the nature of the conduct; or
(B) physically incapable of declining participation in, or communicating unwillingness to engage in, that sexual act;
or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title and imprisoned for any term of years or for life.

See that knowingly bit? It's not a "gosh, we were drunk and had consensual sex and now she's regretting it," it's a "I know she's incapable of declining or appraising the nature of the conduct, and I'm going to have sex with her anyway." It's explicitly required in the crime that you know the other person is incapable of consenting, and if you have sex with someone while knowing that they're in such a state, then yes, you are a rapist.

So a drunk man is still legally responsible for his actions, but a drunk girl isn't. Got it.

What actions did the drunk girl take? "Not declining" is not an action. It's a lack of action. Why do you think a girl should be held "legally responsible" for things that other people do to her while she's unconscious?

Ah... doing it to a girl who is passed out, we're on the same page on that one. That's a no no. I was referring to the cases of next morning regret...


What if the girl and the guy are both drunk? Does his drunkenness preclude him from satisfying the "knowing" requirement?
 
2012-09-13 04:02:09 PM  

Amberwind: cryinoutloud: stonicus: So a drunk man is still legally responsible for his actions, but a drunk girl isn't. Got it.

No, you can file fake rape charges too.

Only problem is, men generally don't get raped by women. It's far more likely that a man raped a woman. And that is why the law leans that way.

Life is not fair, sugar.

Men tend to drastically under report rape and sexual harassment perpetrated against them because as a society we tend to assume that men want it on some level no matter what.


If a man has an erection and inserts said erection into a nearby vagina I assume he does so voluntarily.
 
2012-09-13 04:06:19 PM  
He should be easy to find ANYWAY, what with that tattoo of an arrow on his forehead

wvva.images.worldnow.com
.
 
2012-09-13 04:12:15 PM  
So if the cops didn't know the identity of this guy's girlfriend before, how were they able to figure it out simply by her liking their fb page? So confused...
/not on fb
 
2012-09-13 04:17:35 PM  

Theaetetus: 1) Holy fark, you're creepy, bluefoxicy. You apparently take repeated refusals as an invitation to continue. You talk about "prying" some girl's legs open. I sure as fark wouldn't want any woman to be drunk around you.

2) It is that simple. If you know that someone is so drunk that they're physically incapable of declining, then having sex with them is rape. Not "gosh, I don't know, and she just seems tipsy or buzzed," but "I explicitly know she's incapable of declining." If you know that, and you have sex with her, you are a rapist. It's very, very simple.


3.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-09-13 05:50:05 PM  

mat catastrophe: DblDad: Tazewell? You bet he did!

Yea, that's not how you say it.

/grew up there


Yes, not like "Don't tase me, bro!" Say it like this:

upload.wikimedia.orgwww.shastaconservationfund.org
 
2012-09-14 04:13:51 AM  

rkallister: mat catastrophe: DblDad: Tazewell? You bet he did!

Yea, that's not how you say it.

/grew up there

Yes, not like "Don't tase me, bro!" Say it like this:

[upload.wikimedia.org image 230x259][www.shastaconservationfund.org image 400x400]


Tazmanian devilwell?
 
Displayed 110 of 110 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report