ChocolateReignRemix
-
Posts
1,040 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Classifieds
Store
Posts posted by ChocolateReignRemix
-
-
3 minutes ago, Ordinary Shoes said:
If all of the Christians in this country voted for candidates that supported sensible gun control, we would have gun control.
This is a democracy and there are plenty of public policies that could make these tragedies much less likely to happen (like they rarely happen in other countries).
1.) Depends on what you define as "sensible", doesn't it?
2.) You didn't say less likely to happen, You said they would stop.
You also specified the white supremacist shootings, which as terrorist attacks would be the ones less affected by most gun control proposals that been put forth.
-
1
-
-
8 minutes ago, shawthorne44 said:
The offense dates hadn't been THAT much before the sentencing dates. Generally a few months.
The 1 month/victim's age wasn't anything written down anywhere. But, look at enough of the perverts near you and I think you will find it pretty accurate. Particularly with younger victim meaning lesser sentence. Maybe where you are, they are really strict and it is 2 months/victim's age. But, Texas has the rep. as hang-em-high, so if this is what we are doing, I weep for the rest of the country.
That guy that made it a business should NEVER have been walking around in the public.That's unusual in criminal cases unless there is a plea bargain.
And no, that is not accurate for my state. In general, unless there is a plea to a lesser charge, offenses against younger victims get longer sentences everywhere I have lived. On the flip side, plea bargains in those cases are common as children are tough to use as witnesses for many reasons.
I find the child p*rn business case particularly surprising as both state and federal average sentences for CP are very high, partly because those cases have large amounts of physical evidence and also because each image can be counted as a separate offense.
Edit:
Just went to the sex offender registry for my state. I did a search for those convicted for child molestation and currently incarcerated. First 7 hits were still in prison and have been serving sentences of 9-17 years.
-
6 minutes ago, gstharr said:
http://www.nycourts.gov/courthelp/Criminal/crimeVictimsRights.shtml New York's Victims rights. Enough said.
Still do not see what point you think you are making. The victim can submit an impact statement. That does not mean 1.) it will be used after a plea bargain is set, or 2.) that the victim is allowed to testify at sentencing. The mother not attending the sentencing after the plea did not affect the sentence.
-
1
-
-
45 minutes ago, Ordinary Shoes said:
If the hundred million or so Christians in this country were interested in stopping another Neo-Nazi shooting, or another college shooting (guess we'll be due for another one of those in about a month), then they would stop.
It's really that simple.
You're deliberately misunderstanding the issue here. No one is saying that praying is worthless. Make an effort to understand where the objections to "thoughts and prayers" are coming from. And before you turn this into being about you (again), the onus here is you. You are of the majority faith. You belong to the faith tradition of the shooter. They don't need to understand you. You need to understand them.
Have you done the work to understand the very deep roots of anti-semitism in Christianity or white supremacy in the United States and how they are intermingled?
Not sure I can agree with this statement. Not sure why you believe Christians can directly stop the actions of others.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, shawthorne44 said:
I find this totally not surprising. Have a look at your local pervert registry. Make a list of the 20 people nearest you, and study their information. I live in Texas and they used to say how long the person was actually locked up, but they don't do that anymore. Obviously because the data really pissed people off. But, you can still get a general idea based on where they registered. There is the sentence and then there is the time actually served and they only seem to have a vague relationship to each other. For example, near me was a guy that had a child p. business. He filmed a gazillion kids being molested. He was sentenced to 18-years. I don't know how long he actually served but he lived near me 3-years after sentencing. I keep an eye on the registry and they move all the time, so there is a different set every time I look. The ONLY times that someone served their complete sentence was twice. It was two black guys and they served more than their time. Because it was more time, I assume that the system cared more about whatever they did to get their sentence extended.
I figured out a formula for sentencing. One month of jail time for every year of the victim's age. Yes, that is right, raping a three-year-old will get someone a 3-month sentence. And then they won't serve even that. I talked to some lawyer friends of mine. The reason is that the defense will threaten to traumatize the victim if an acceptable plea deal isn't offered. When the victim is an old lady then they get a long sentence.
Then there are those that the jail doesn't want to take care of, i.e. those with medical expenses. Near me is an old guy that had multiple convictions. He molested an 8-year-old girl DURING his 3-month probation for MOLESTING AN 8-YEAR-OLD GIRL. You want to know what his sentence was for that later offense? Give it some thought and get something in your head before reading on. 6-months probation. Does that not totally make your brain explode?
I can't comment on Texas, but I can say in the states I have been in there is no 1 month/age of victim rule. Also keep in mind that if someone is sentenced to prison any time served in jail awaiting trial is (correctly) deducted from the prison sentence.
FWIW it is rare anyone serves the full time for any sentence, partly due to our prisons being over crowded thanks to our insistence of treating certain nonviolent drug offenses with sentences in the same range as child molestation.
-
1
-
-
8 hours ago, gstharr said:
You miss the point. Regardless of whether victim impact may or may not have been mandated, the mother was not in court at sentencing to even attempt being heard..
The mother can't just show up and demand to be heard. If she knew the deal was in place and isn't allowed to give a statement, why would you expect her to attend the hearing?
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, gstharr said:
"Piche was arrested Sept. 5, 2018. He was charged with second-degree rape, first-degree unlawfully dealing with a child and endangering the welfare of a child.
As the Daily Times reported, Piche pleaded guilty on Feb. 21 to a lesser charge of third-degree rape."
An open plead to the court (trial judge) would have required him to plea to all charges. However, an additional count of 3rd degree rape, or statutory rape under N.Y. law, was added. The District Attorney would have had to agree to dismiss other counts for him to have pleaded guilty to the single count. In other words, trouble with the case: the girl might not have cooperated, or might not even be around, since there are no statements from the girl in any news report. Also, while the mother gave the press a victim impact statement, the press reports that it was not read in court?! Not read in court means it was most likely not given to the judge. Also, where is mother at the sentencing. These are public hearings everywhere. Victims, and certainly the mother of minor , in every U.S. court would be allowed to testify on impact. In the video's I've seen, no victim or family members in court? While the headlines read that he "admitted to "RAPE" , conjuring up the vilest sense, he only pleaded guilty to 3rd degree/ staturory rape, with the District Attorney's permission. The sentence range is significantly less what the term rape would imply. This is no means on my part to excuse the perp or the judge in this case. Just attempt of trying to understand the lack of victim or her family in court.
Most states do not require that a victim impact statement be heard after a plea bargain. Based on what I can find online New York is one of the states that doesn't mandate the victim be heard.
-
1
-
-
For those questioning the sentence, the defendant did take a plea deal which explains partly why he received a lighter sentence. The article did not detail why the deal was reached but on these cases it is commonly because the prosecution is not sure if they get a conviction in court. I did find it surprising the judge went against the prosecution's request regarding the defendant being placed on the registry.
-
2
-
1
-
-
9 minutes ago, Katy said:
I honestly don't know. I'm guessing something more like 10. I would think given that he worked for the school district that whatever the normal requirements are wouldn't apply and he would get harsher sentencing, not none.
Varies by state but 12 is a common cut off. For example, Alabama: Sexual abuse of a child less than 12 years old, as provided by Section 13A-6-69.1.
https://law.justia.com/codes/alabama/2013/title-15/chapter-20a/section-15-20a-5
-
45 minutes ago, ***** said:
It seems like from the time he walked up to the woman to get help, it was almost if she was being very cautious and almost did not believe him regarding his identity. I am not trying to involve her or accuse her. Maybe it is how the news is presenting it. But I would have been like, "I'm dialing 911 and help will be on the way!"
I would have done this the minute he said he needed help because he had been kidnapped...but then he went into long detail about trying to convince her who he was. Why did he have to do that? (This point bugged me right from the beginning, it just seemed odd...)
I am not sure that would be unusual behavior from a 14yo who gets away from kidnappers. Although I don't know if anyone can for certain what normal behavior is in a situation like that.
I watched an interview with the woman and his appearance and they way he asked for help seemed to make her believe him.
-
1 hour ago, SquirrellyMama said:
I vaguely remember this case. I think she probably killed him. Maybe she really believed he would be safe that way. I've heard stories of parents killing kids because they are so paranoid and mentally ill.
Possibly, or he's just a jerk.
Kelly
He has a long wrap sheet and seems to have been involved in some other odd situations. Not sure what to make of him.
-
1 minute ago, Seasider too said:
Yes, hopefully he can provide information that leads to the recovery of not only one, but two missing children.
Perhaps the mix up was intentional, and part of what the mom meant by saying they’d never find Timmothy.
Considering he is a decade older than Timmothy I find that unlikely. Most likely this was someone with serious mental issues.
-
The only thing that makes a little sense is that he is older and possibly mentally ill. A younger teen wouldn't likely be capable of doing this.
I was curious as to why the police were being so tight lipped. I am thinking they figured out quickly he wasn't a teen.
-
4
-
-
8 minutes ago, Arctic Mama said:
Oh I hope that boy, whoever he is, gets help then! Lost juveniles are never a good situation.
He's 24.
-
I know the family was being cautioned that it may not be him but you know their hopes had to be up. This has to be crushing.
-
1
-
7
-
-
1 minute ago, Liz CA said:
Bizarre all around. Who were these 2 men? Was she related to them or just acquainted? Sounds like she had to have known them enough to be assured her boy would be safe. If Timothy felt fine and safe with them why would he run? I think we will likely never know any of this but I hope he can find a permanent home.
Sounds like acquainted at best. I don't think we will get many answers until they are caught.
He seems to have been abused based on what witnesses who saw him after his escape have reported, so clearly he didn't feel safe. And if this is him I assume his permanent home will be with the dad who has never quit looking for him.
-
1
-
-
36 minutes ago, Seasider too said:
What’s the father’s role in all this? Wondering why a depressed mom would go to lengths to permanently separate a child from his father, even if she planned to take her own life. Curious. I understand she was likely not thinking rationally at all, but I do wonder.
I pray this young man will be restored to health and loved ones soon.
I don't think there is any evidence to ask questions about the father.
"She also called Jim’s brother. She told him as well that everything was fine, but “Timmothy belongs to me,” according to True Crime Daily."
She clearly wasn't well.
-
1
-
-
I have also read that the men he was with were those he has been with for the past 7 years. I am not reading too much into the back story yet as we are only getting drips (for a good reason).
-
9 minutes ago, Aura said:
My thought on reading that was: who's got the 6 yr old while she's in the store? Seems possible that someone could have held the kid hostage while sending her into the store to get supplies to make the "suicide" seem more real. Or maybe she did commit suicide on her own, but maybe they also talked her into it (that everyone would be better off). Maybe they put her up to it. In which case, I would still put her death on them.
Regardless, there's a lot of unanswered questions, and it's all pure speculation. Why these men? How did they meet? Did the men stage the suicide? Did they convince her that she should? Did she sell her son to them? Did they take advantage of her/the situation?
I've seen some really convoluted scenarios. People can be messed up. So I'm just saying, I'm not ready to suspend doubt on suicide.
Them taking advantage of her situation is more likely than them being involved in the suicide. It should be noted she had attempted suicide in the past as well. If she was in the last hotel alone and there was no video of others coming/going then the speculation that her suicide was staged is unlikely.
-
2
-
-
12 minutes ago, Aura said:
I have doubt. Suffering from depression does not mean suicidal. And I have to wonder how these two (at this point, seemingly random) men ended up with her child. It isn't implausible to me that they could have forced her to write a note and then faked her suicide.
I'm not saying that's what happened. There's just a whole lot of unanswered questions, and at this point, I wouldn't throw that scenario out the window.
It seems unlikely based on the evidence. There is video of her buying the paper and pens she used to pen the note, and her son was not with her when she checked into the hotel room in which she committed suicide. If someone was behind this they would have been better off to just make her disappear as the police would always be looking for a mom and son rather than a missing child.
-
4
-
-
I vaguely recall when this child went missing.
"A boy appeared in Newport, Kentucky, on Wednesday, claiming to be missing child Timmothy Pitzen.
Timmothy's disappearance has remained a mystery since his mother took him out of school and traveled to multiple Midwest water parks in 2011.
She was found dead of an apparent suicide in a Rockford motel room and had left a note that the boy was safe but would never be found,"
-
1 hour ago, Bluegoat said:
If you are going to say I am lying because you don't like the way I worded something, you can screw off.
It isn't a phrasing issue.
-
1 minute ago, Bluegoat said:
Well, I am not inclined to respond to people "calling me out". If you are unsure of what I am saying, or specifically disagree, ask, and I'l answer. Calling people out requires some sort of authority, and when people with no authority do it, well...
However, I am not sure what you would call those groups besides a movement - the goal was to influence society. I agree they didn't last as a movement and certainly the bulk of regular people did not even jump on board, however they did have some real effect in the progressive community. Not a large one, but given that they were promoting sex between adults and children, something that seems pretty obviously wrong to most people, it's significant that they convinced even small numbers that their ideas were plausible. It was a real conversation that went on as part of the larger mindset of the sexual revolution, and it encompases things like man-boy stuff but also things like 14 year old groupies - all of which in hindsight seems like a terrible terrible idea.
And yes, their primary argument was on children's rights, but that comes out of the basic argument of the sexual revolution - that sexual desires are natural and natural desires should set the bar for what is normative, because to deny what is natural is unnatural and unhealthy. There is an underlying sense that any kind of limits places would simply be man-made and without any real authority. It's a very pervasive idea even now, but it also makes it very difficult to put any kind of boundaries on sexual behaviour. And it's more difficult because for many, it's kind of in the background of their thinking rather than really explicit.
They were promoting allowing adults to legally have sex with children. Two different times you claimed they were advocating " decriminalising sex for children" which is outright falsehood. It's hard to claim that these groups were actually part of the sexual revolution when society actually moved in the other direction of criminalizing sexual activity between adults and children during the same time (AOC laws increased in many places, the nearly universal ban against child p*rn, and increased enforcement of laws regarding the sexual abuse of children and the dissemination of child p*orn). Arguing these groups were part of the "real conversation" when they were booted from the conversation via criminal prosecution and other groups refusing to be associated with them is nonsensical.
Regarding the bolded, how else would the limits be made? If you try to argue religion, good luck picking which one!
-
1
-
-
7 hours ago, Bluegoat said:
No, back at that time, in the UK in particular but it existed in the US as well, there was a movement toward decriminalising sex for children - including pretty young children, and including sex between any age categories. THe logic was, quite deliberately I think, very close to other sexual liberation movements and tended to begin with a lot f true ideas - that sexuality is natural, that children too are sexual beings. Then that it is repression that causes sexual shame and psychological dysfunction, that love is love, that people should not be punished for the sexual desires they were born with and be forced to live a dark and pathetic life of celibacy.
I am calling this out yet again. There was no movement decriminalizing sex *for* children. There were very, very small groups (NAMBLA, PIE and the possibly fictitious Rene Guyon Society) that failed miserably in efforts to decriminalize sex *with* children by lowering the age of consent. Those are not the same things. Based on my limited knowledge of these groups they focused their arguments on children's rights more so than anything to do with forced celibacy.
The groups in question were as a rule not given much credibility, and based on a quick search most of those involved were in prison by the 80s. Police investigations moved rather quickly thanks to public pressure, so I think your insinuations that these groups had any sort of acceptability is a serious reach.
FWIW during the same time frame you referenced child p*rn was legally available in many places and was sold alongside adult p*rn. By the end of the attempts of these groups to lower the AOC most nations had changed their laws to outlaw it.
-
5
-
Man admits to raping 14 year old, gets probation
in The Chat Board
Posted
1.) Once a plea deal is reached, it goes before the judge with recommendations from the prosecution based on the deal that has been reached. The hearing before the judge is the sentencing portion.
2.) You do not know if the mother or victim submitted a written impact statement.
3.) Unless the mother is being permitted to give a statement to the judge (highly unusual in a plea deal), then she has no reason to be at sentencing. There is also no role for a civil attorney at sentencing. (Suggesting is a big WTF in my mind.)
4.) You are confusing a sentencing hearing after a trial with one after a plea deal.