Entrapment—
(1) A law enforcement officer, a person engaged in cooperation with a law enforcement officer, or a person acting as an agent of a law enforcement officer perpetrates an entrapment if, for the purpose of obtaining evidence of the commission of a crime, he or she induces or encourages and, as a direct result, causes another person to engage in conduct constituting such crime by employing methods of persuasion or inducement which create a substantial risk that such crime will be committed by a person other than one who is ready to commit it.
The Florida Internet Crimes Against Children's Task Force (as well as other agencies in Florida) is alleging that they investigate and prosecute only people that are using the internet to prey on children. However, the truth is they are manufacturing crime and enticing innocent people by going to places on the internet where people are already talking about sex or may even already be actively looking for sex, but not with children. Examples of such activities that constitute the entrapment are:
Placing ads on Craigslist in the ADULT personals section advertising sex.
Setting up fake profiles on dating websites such as OKCupid which is a dating site for ADULTS.
Setting up fake profiles in ADULT chat rooms that are rampant with pornography and sexual conversations.
Violating the terms of use agreements for these websites which violates the Constitutional Rights of the suspects because of the malicious intent of “law enforcement” while using the service.
The people that the “law enforcement” agencies in Florida are arresting are innocent because they were not seeking for minors to have sexual encounters with. It is obvious because the stings are not even being performed in minor oriented websites and “law enforcement” agencies such as the Polk County Sheriff's Office blatantly lie and tell the public that the stings were performed in minor oriented websites just to give the impression of guilt.
The “law enforcement” officials are ONLY using the principle of first contact to assert that these stings do not constitute entrapment but they are sadly mistaken. They incorrectly operate under the assumption that as long as these “criminals” contact them first, they can induce and encourage these individuals any way they want to. The officers are not only portraying themselves as minors, but they are portraying themselves as willing participants in sexual communications encouraging the “illegal” activity. These circumstances DO NOT constitute a violation of the child solicitation statute as stated in Cashatt.
…sexually oriented communication on a computer on-line service which is viewed by a child is not a violation of the statute unless the sender of the communication “knowingly” attempts by the communication to seduce the child.
The fact of the matter is, you cannot seduce the willing. Also, when it comes to sexual communication, what kind of communication do the “law enforcement” officials expect when they visit ADULT chat rooms or place ads advertising for sex, talks about the weather? Finally, what else are these so called “criminals” being bribed with other than sex, maybe money?
WAKE UP FLORIDA! The statistics alone on child molestation cases prove that there is something wrong with these internet stings. Far too many arrests are being made and far too many of the people being arrested are just average citizens. STOP BEING LIED TO by overzealous “law enforcement” agencies that don’t care who they arrest as long as they can make them LOOK guilty!
You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all of the time.
Abraham Lincoln (1809 – 1865)
16th President of the United States of America
It is difficult, if not impossible, for most people to think otherwise than in the fashion of their own period.
George Bernard Shaw (1856 – 1950)
Anglo-Irish playwright, critic. Saint Joan, preface (1923)
Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph.
Thomas Paine, The Crisis, December 1776
That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.
Matthew 5:45 (King James Version)
Let us not therefore judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a stumblingblock or an occasion to fall in his brother's way.
Romans 14:13 (King James Version)
Not to worry people, the comments are in the old comment section, lol. Tomorrow is an important day for us i do believe. Keep the faith
ReplyDeleteupdate, the most recent comments are not viewable at this time....we will have em back up under another "old comment" tab soon......everything is OK
ReplyDeletethey can falsify my arrest report, and they can lie to the public, but i'll be damned if they can break my spirit and determination to expose the truth. That day is coming soon!
ReplyDeleteRALLY PEOPLE!!! THE TIME IS NOW, YOU CAN'T BE AFRAID. Your face is only a few clicks and links away anyways. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE go to the rally, your life depends on it!!! "We" have the proof, and most importantly the opportunity, take it!
ReplyDeletewhat rally?when and where?
DeleteI go today to plead not guilty before a jury trial on my arrest in a sting.. I traveled to meet an adult not a child like they say and I did not try to gain consent for anything they consented without my request.. prayers please as I go to try to get case dismissed before going to jury decision.. didn't take the deal they already tried throwing at me.. if I make it out will let you know how it went.. never stop fighting against cops committing crime to find non criminals
ReplyDeleteGood luck!
ReplyDeleteillegitimis non carborundum
Yes there is a serious problem when 78 people get arrested for the same thing in four days and it's not because the people are criminals. IT IS BECAUSE THE POLK COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE THINKS THAT THEY ARE ABOVE THE CONSTITUTION AND CAN CREATE CRIME JUST TO ARREST INNOCENT PEOPLE. Visit Florida Scandal for another type of internet sting that people are afraid to question.
ReplyDeleteGrady Judd thinks he is above the constitution. Grady Judd thinks that criminals hide behind it. Grady Judd thinks that it is law enforcement to create a crime just to arrest someone for "committing it". GRADY JUDD IS GOING DOWN AND THE STATE OF FL WITH HIM! Hello Attorney General, are you ready for your laxative?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/15/78-people-arrested-prostitution-florida_n_2479005.html
remember, prostitution is illegal.....going online looking to meet somebody from the "adult encounter" section of Craigslist is not
DeleteWhat happened to the old comments?
ReplyDeletewe will put them back up under another tab, sorry about that!
ReplyDeleteThanks. I was looking for the name of the Florida Legislator who was/is responsible for the current statutes that are being used to convict people in these highly questionable "stings".
DeleteBroad Reach and NOT ENTRAPMENT -
ReplyDeleteSince entrapment is a "dirty phrase" that the judicial system does not like to use then we can just word it differently. This is why the stings are illegal: The guilty knowledge (mens rea) MUST BE joined with the criminal act. Because we are talking about the internet and un-prediposed "passerby's" ON AN ADULT SITE WHERE ADULTS ARE LOOKING FOR SEX, there is no way to prove that the mens rea existed with the actus reus (criminal act) or even that the act is criminal in the first place. The sexual conversations that occur on the adult sites do not occur during a sting because the undercover officers say they are minors. They occur because they were already occurring and law enforcement are using the "heckler's veto" that is talked about in Williams and Reno. They are merely stating that they are a minor when the other person has no actual knowledge that the other person is a minor and, in fact, IS NOT A MINOR! Therefore, THE ENFORCEMENT OF THE CHILD SOLICITATION STATUTE IN THE STINGS AT ISSUE VIOLATE DUE PROCESS AND FREE SPEECH!
While it may be true that the "target" may come to actually believe that the other person "is a minor", they did not come to believe that at the same time as the "criminal acts" in question. This of course is the worst case scenario but we have found that what happens most of the time is that the men never believe that they are really conversing with minors AND ONLY SHOW UP TO SEE WHO THE PERSON IS! The guilty "knowledge" will never exist with the "criminal act" until the "target" has actual, physical proof that they are conversing with a minor. Because we are talking about the internet, this physical proof DOES NOT include a photograph or the undercover simply stating they are a minor. THESE THINGS DO NOT GIVE ACTUAL KNOWLEDGE ON THE INTERNET. THE ONLY THING THAT WOULD GIVE ACTUAL KNOWLEDGE IS TO SEE THE "MINOR" IN PERSON. Therefore, in order to be actually guilty of these crimes charged in an internet sting, the police MUST use a decoy that looks like a minor TO FIND OUT THE ACTUAL CRIMINAL INTENT OF THE "TARGET". If the man still would want to pursue the "minor" for sex after he "sees the minor exists", THEN AND ONLY THEN CAN HE BE GUILTY.
Wegner v. State, 2D04-2486
At common law, the general rule was that guilty knowledge or mens rea was a required element in the proof of every crime. It was necessary that the act or omission be joined with the mental intent to commit a crime. United States v. United States Gypsum Co., 438 U.S. 422, 436, 98 S.Ct. 2864, 57 L.Ed.2d 854 (1978); United States v. Balint, 258 U.S. 250, 251, 42 S.Ct. 301, 66 L.Ed. 604 (1922). “In fact, the United States Supreme Court ‘has on a number of occasions read a state-of-mind component into an offense even when the statutory definition did not in terms so provide.’ Moreover, because of the strength of the traditional rule that requires mens rea, offenses that require no mens rea are generally disfavored.” Giorgetti, 868 So.2d at 515 (quoting United States Gypsum, 438 U.S. at 437, 98 S.Ct. 2864). Often, the disfavor is due to a violation of the Due Process Clause, which incorporates the principle that the state is required to prove an accused guilty of all essential elements of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt. Amend. XIV, U.S. Const.; see also art. I, § 9, Fla. Const.
Michael John Simmons vs. State, SC04-2375.
ReplyDeleteJudge Browning concurred with the majority on the constitutionality of section 847.0135, but dissented as to section 847.0138. Judge Browning found that the transmission statute was not narrowly tailored to serve a compelling state interest, is void for vagueness and overbreadth, and violates the Commerce Clause. Simmons, 886 So. 2d at 407-14 (Browning, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part).
However, the state may regulate the content of constitutionally protected speech in order to promote a compelling interest if it chooses the least restrictive means to further the articulated interest. See United States v. Playboy Entm’t Group, Inc., 529 U.S. 803, 813 (2000); Sable Commc’ns, 492 U.S. at 126.
GOING TO AN ADULT WEBSITE POSING AS A PROMISCUOUS TEEN IS NOT THE LEAST RESTRICTIVE WAY! THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THE STATUTE, IT IS HOW IT IS ENFORCED!
In doing so, however, the means must be narrowly tailored to achieve that end so as not to unnecessarily deny adults access to material which is constitutionally protected indecent material. No similar tailoring is required when the material is obscene material, which is not protected by the First Amendment. See Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coal., 535 U.S. 234, 244-45 (2002).
A criminal law may violate due process if it fails to give a potential offender fair notice that his contemplated conduct is forbidden or if it encourages arbitrary enforcement and gives the police too much discretion in determining whether it is applicable to a particular individual. When the law fails these tests, it is “void for vagueness.” Papachristou v. City of Jacksonville, 405 U.S. 156, 162 (1972).
THERE IS NO CONTEMPLATED CONDUCT IN AN INTERNET STING! THE MEN DO NOT CONTEMPLATE THAT THEY WILL BE INTERACTING WITH MINORS! THEREFORE, THE STATUTES ARE UNCONSTITUTIONAL AS APPLIED!
Because of its imprecision, a vague statute may also invite arbitrary or discriminatory enforcement. See Southeastern Fisheries, 453 So. 2d at 1353. A statute is not void for vagueness if the language conveys a “sufficiently definite warning as to the proscribed conduct when measured by common understanding and practices.” Hitchcock v. State, 413 So. 2d 741, 747 (Fla. 1982) (quoting United States v. Petrillo, 332 U.S. 1, 8 (1947)). However, the Supreme Court has indicated that a statute that lends itself to arbitrary enforcement can be void for vagueness even if it gives fair notice of what conduct it prohibits. See Kolender v. Lawson, 461 U.S. 352, 358 (1983) (stating that the “more important aspect of the vagueness doctrine is not actual notice, but the . . . requirement that a legislature establish minimal guidelines to govern law enforcement”) (internal quotation marks omitted). Further, the need for definiteness is even greater when the ordinance imposes criminal penalties on individual behavior or when it implicates constitutionally protected rights.
IT IS NOT COMMON UNDERSTANDING NOR COMMON PRACTICE THAT MINORS LOOK FOR SEX WITH ADULTS ON THE INTERNET.
Additionally, the statute incorporates a knowledge element, requiring the sender to actually know or believe that the recipient of the communication is a minor who is located in Florida. § 847.0138(1)(a), (2)-(3).
DeleteTHAT IS THE STATUTES "LOOPHOLE" AND SO IT IS OURS TOO! THE KNOWLEDGE REQUIREMENT UNDER THE CURRENT STING SCENARIO CANNOT BE MET THEREBY MAKING IT UNCONSTITUTIONAL AS APPLIED.
The Supreme Court noted that “there are a number of plausible, less restrictive alternatives to the statute,” including blocking and filtering software which would “impose selective restrictions on speech at the receiving end, not universal restrictions at the source.”
HOW DO YOU FILTER OUT AN UNDERCOVER OFFICER ON AN ADULT WEBSITE TRYING TO CREATE A CRIME!
Statutes that are facially neutral but impose an incidental burden on interstate commerce are analyzed under the Pike balancing test, which provides:
Where the statute regulates even-handedly to effectuate a legitimate local public interest, and its effects on interstate commerce are only incidental, it will be upheld unless the burden imposed on such commerce is clearly excessive in relation to the putative local benefits. If a legitimate local purpose is found, then the question becomes one of degree. And the extent of the burden that will be tolerated will of course depend on the nature of the local interest involved, and on whether it could be promoted as well with a lesser impact on interstate activities.
WHAT KIND OF LOCAL BENEFIT CAN BE HAD FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT TO SOLICIT RANDOM LAW ABIDING MEN FOR SEX ON ADULT WEBSITES? NONE! MOREOVER, THE STATUTES CAN BE ENFORCED IN A WAY THAT DOES NOT HAVE SUCH A SEVERE IMPACT ON THE COMMUNITY THAT WOULD NOT ENCROACH ON THEIR RIGHTS TO FIND SEX ONLINE.
In contrast, the court identified a number of burdens on interstate commerce: the chilling effect of the statute was bound to exceed actual cases likely to be prosecuted; Internet users would either have to self-censor or risk prosecution, which would impose an unreasonable restriction on interstate commerce; and the costs associated with trying to comply with the statutory defenses would be excessive. Id. at 179-80.
SINCE THE WAY THE STINGS ARE PERFORMED FORCES "TARGETS" TO "SELF-CENSOR" THEIR OWN COMMUNICATION TO SOMEONE CLAIMING TO BE A MINOR ALSO INTERESTED IN SEX, IT VIOLATES THE COMMERCE CLAUSE. WE SHOULD NOT HAVE TO SENSOR OUR OWN SPEECH WHEN THAT SPEECH SERVES THE LEGITIMATE AND LEGAL PURPOSE OF LOOKING FOR SEX ONLINE!
Because “[f]urther development of the Internet requires that users be able to predict the results of their Internet use with some degree of assurance,” the court struck down the New York statute as a violation of the Commerce Clause. Id. at 183.
THE PREDICTED RESULT OF USING AN ADULT SITE IS TO FIND AN ADULT TO HAVE SEX WITH AND THAT THE USERS ON THE SITE WILL BE USING INDECENT AND OBSCENE SPEECH. THEREFORE, AND YET AGAIN, AS APPLIED THE STATUTES ARE UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
As the district court explained in Pataki...
DeleteNor can a participant in a chat room prevent other participants from a particular state from joining the conversation...
WE CANNOT PREVENT SOMEONE FROM JOINING THE ADULT SITE THAT IS NOT SUPPOSED TO BE THERE. YET AGAIN, THIS PROVES THE STATUTES ARE UNCONSTITUTIONAL AS APPLIED.
The court noted that “Internet speakers have no practical, reliable means of determining the geographic location of the recipients of their online communications” nor any way of “ensuring their communications are not accessed in a certain geographic location.” Id. at 787.
NOR CAN PEOPLE ENSURE THAT THEIR ONLINE COMMUNICATIONS ARE NOT VIEWED BY ACTUAL MINORS DESPITE THE FACT THAT EVERYONE SAYS THAT THEY ARE, AND ARE SUPPOSED TO BE, ADULTS. THIS PROVES THE IMPORTANCE THAT LAW ENFORCEMENT SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO VIOLATE THE TERMS OF USE OF A WEBSITE!
Furthermore, the Florida transmission statute provides that the sender who transmits the e-mail containing material that is harmful to minors must either know or believe that the specific individual who is the recipient of the e-mail is a minor located in Florida. § 847.0138(3).
Simmons also challenges Florida’s luring statute as violating the Dormant Commerce Clause. The First District rejected this challenge with citation to its prior opinion in Cashatt v. State, 873 So. 2d 430 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004). In Cashatt, the First District found no violation under the Pike balancing test. Id. at 436. The court reasoned that “[t]he state has a compelling interest in protecting minors from being seduced to perform sexual acts, and no legitimate commerce is burdened by penalizing the transmission of harmful sexual material to known minors in order to seduce them.” Id. The court found the effect of the luring statute on interstate commerce to be “incidental at best” and “far outweighed by the state’s interest in preventing harm to minors.” Id. Finally, the court found that the statute does not burden Internet users with inconsistent state regulations because the “intent to seduce” element narrows the scope of the statute. Id.
SO IF THE INTENT TO SEDUCE LIES WITH LAW ENFORCEMENT AND NOT THE "TARGETS" THEN THE STATUTE IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL AS APPLIED!
You can give us ANY case that says the FL statutes on child solicitation are constitutional and we WILL rip it apart!
DeleteDoes anyone know of a FL case that's ultimately challenged the constitutionality of the FL statutes. It appears to me no one is willing to challenge it in court.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteKarwoski v. State, 867 So. 2d 486 - Fla: Dist. Court of Appeals, 4th Dist. 2004
ReplyDeleteCashatt v. State, 873 So. 2d 430 - Fla: Dist. Court of Appeals, 1st Dist. 2004
Simmons v. State, 886 So. 2d 399 - Fla: Dist. Court of Appeals, 1st Dist. 2004
Simmons v. State, 944 So. 2d 317 - Fla: Supreme Court 2006
This link "should" take you to a bunch of case law directly concerning FS 847.0135:
ReplyDeleteFS 847.0135 case law
Correct. NO ONE will challenge it. You can't get a fair trial. You are presumed guilty from the get go and will be until you leave this world. They should have your Scarlet letter ready for you to pin on the minute you are first arrested.I have talked to so many who are either out on multiple appeals or in due to taking a plea. My son was strongly encouraged to plea. Entrapment defense doesnt fly in our courts in Florida. He is in Prison fearing his well being mentally and physically. We still pray someone will find a way to get these men out. In the meantime we will do our part to research/educate/encourage all those involved. Thank you to those of you on here that have obviously spent countless hours doing research. If nothing else it encourages us ti keep fighting for Justice in a place where it seems Justice doesnt exist. My next direction is to make sure my sons humanitarian rights in prison are not violated. That should keep me busy!
ReplyDeleteI don't mean harm to anyone who's loved one has been convicted of this crap, but honestly I think the reason there's so many convictions is because no one is taking on the NECESSARY defense. I don't think I've seen anyone show the judge/jury what evil, manipulative, money hungry people law enforcement is. I know there's some people who already see us as guilty, but I also believe some people have hearts and are willing to hear both sides. They're gonna make us look like the devil we have to make them look 10x worse! I advise EVERYONE to find a local news article pertaining to your case and show the judge/jury how they've sat there and blatantly lied to THEIR FACES about what happened. We all know once you tell one lie in court, everything you say from then on is suspect, I know that I don't like to be lied to! But I know the problem in many cases is those damn public defenders who don't give a damn, and don't FIGHT. I wish I could fight these cases I swear they wouldn't stand a chance! I think if the jury sees just what happened and the REASONING behind it, that WOULD change things, I don't see anyone bringing that up in court. I think public defenders are afraid to take these people on, or are getting something from it. Bring up the things that MAKE THEM LOOK EVIL, just like they are doing.
ReplyDeletethe biggest problem anyone faces that got caught up in a sting is that all these local, federal, and state law enforcement agencies are all collaborating and planning these stings well in advance and the courts know this so it is a "win-win" for the state and creates such an unfair advantage to any defense! They are not catching the true predators...its all about free money and skewing statistics. These stings are nothing more than training exercises that are putting innocent men behind bars and the judicial system has been anything but fair! The truth will be exposed!
ReplyDeleteWHAT'S GOING ON?!?! IT SEEMS LIKE NO ONE CARES ABOUT THIS BLOG ANYMORE...
ReplyDeleteI just wanted to make a comment about these stings the cops are doing. They go to these adult web sites trying to trap men that are innocent. I believe that if the cops need to go to any web sites, it should be web sites with actual real minors, and get the perverts that are purposely on a teen site looking to hook up with underage girls. That would be looking out for these kids and not trapping all these men that were looking to get to meet adult women. My son is waiting for his court date and hopefully with prayer we can get these charges dropped. Good luck to all that are dealing with this same stuff.
ReplyDeleteWell NINETY-TWO(92!!!) more people's lives have been ruined by another illegal sting! This time prostitution, but still the same thing, targeting and ensnaring innocent people. This shit has to stop ASAP!!! Law enforcement are sick, disgusting human beings who don't give a damn about other people's lives. They will not stop until they can lock up every man in Florida
ReplyDeleteHi everyone.. I was arrested on the sting in sarasota on february this year. I had to say that i dont have idea how this is even legal. I just responded an ad on craiglist to a general woman looking too talk. When they told me the age i said i cant talk to you and they kept coming at me over and over again. Enticing to come to see the person. The thing is they are asking me 6 years. I have never been in any problem wih law, im a family guy and dont know what to do. Every place i read online looks like we dont stand a chance on court. The public already belive we are guilty and we are looking for underage to have sex. And they need to know he true. But how can we expose this? Any ideas what my lawyer could do to help me out.? I dont see a light at all is all dark in my life now. Thanks yo all those are letting their voices hear out.
ReplyDeleteFirst off don't take the plea! I advise you to read this website from top to bottom and write down important things like case law etc. anything that will help your case. I also advise you to find a news article/video on your sting and show the courts how they've blatantly lied about what had happened, showing that they are liars and only want to make you appear guilty will help. Also look at all the old comments on the blog they are very helpful, it's your decision but I don't think you should give up, fight for your freedom. If you have a paid lawyer that's great, they'll most likely do what you ask. Have your lawyer file a motion to receive the operational procedures that law enforcement has to abide by when conducting the sting. Also I would have him file a motion for all the websites that were targeted in your sting and see if they were all adult oriented sites, if they were that proves our point further, if they did target sites were minors are actually allowed to go like Facebook, Myspace, etc. I can guarantee they probably got no arrests or very little compared to the adult oriented sites so that also proves our point. But don't be surprised if your motions get shot down, as many judges are corrupt as well. It's not going to be an easy road but just keep praying and pushing. And read this WHOLE blog!
DeleteHavana, email me at Talknstang@yahoo.com ASAP please
DeleteWell it looks like nobody is wanting to step up to the plate to expose these stings and i am almost out of time. I thought i had it covered but after over a month, i am about to throw in the towel and that is unfortunate. I didnt think it would be this difficult to find somebody who met the criteria i stated before. If somebody wants to help expose these stings email me at talknstang@yahoo.com. Time is of the essence
ReplyDeletethe old comments are now under the "old comments 2" tab
ReplyDeleteI think we should all contact the news channel in florida and expose this true and talk to them about this blog and what s going on. Justice need to be served. Lets all contact the news channel and send them emails or call them and show them to look at this info. I bet someone with a heart will look into this and realized what is being done.
ReplyDeleteCan you please contact Talkn Stang, his email address is talknstang@yahoo.com
DeleteIt pains me to see anyone rarely comments anymore! I remember when I first started visiting this blog everyday there would be at least one new comment. Even if nothing new is going on in your/your loved one's case, this blog is not only here to educate but also for us to be there for each other, and lift each other up. I would like to know how people are doing at the least, especially since these recent suicides and all. I HOPE WE AREN'T GIVING UP, AND THROWING IN THE TOWEL!!! I am praying for everyone and will continue to. Again...
ReplyDeleteHOW IS EVERYONE DOING?!?!...
ok,heres my sons update,we had the sentancing hearing,my son originally got a score of 42,but when prosecutor was allowed a third charge(same as first)its a double jepardy charge,but it makes his score 63.so now he gets sentanced to 63 months in prison,plus 1year sex offender probation.i;m not sure of anything else,there was no downward departure for us.although the judge did not let the prosecutors suspected child porn thing to pile on more,it's been 3 months,so i guess they got nothing on that crap.but kathy ray,prosecutor wants to use my son as an example.and he got sentanced to more than most from the tallyop sting.now waiting for appeal to get done.i've been told to expect registery for life on sex offender classification too.i'm not giving up,but i;m not gonna hold my breath for a hero to come help us,two of our alli's are still working hard to help.trey&lightfoot.both are doing everything they can,but i am not sure if anything can save us now.but in court today judge hankinson did say that these guys should not be under house arrest,just gps with open schedules,my kid was under full house arrest for 16months
Deletethe one he told this too was a attorney busted in the april fools sex sting.and one other guy from that sting.pisses me off,why now,not back then?my kid could'nt even go find work.or go to church,heonly could go to gps weekly,court appearances,and to see his lawyer,nothing else.well now its fight the big guys now.im doing everything i can to help my kid,whatever that might be.
It's hard to keep the momentum when u r being kicked harder and harder no matter which way u turn. When u have been tried in the media and don't stand a chance when u go to court. Heard Judge Hankinson, Leon County, was bragging at a mixer that he was amazed at how fast they were returning the guilty verdicts on these cases. So I guess justice is not blind but how the peosecutor and judge decides it will be. Most of these attorneys who have taken these cases do not have the integrity to do the right thing and should hang up their shingles.
ReplyDeleteGod don't like ugly, they'll get what's coming to them BUT we HAVE to continue to fight to make that happen. As of right now we are letting these people win, and they will not stop until somebody makes them and I know that for a fact. I'm baffled that there hasn't been a rally or anything, when months ago a lot of people were on board.
DeleteDUEPROCESS WHERE ARE YOU? HAVEN'T HEARD FROM YOU IN A MINUTE!
the reason why the verdicts are returned so quickly is because of the publicity that WCTV has provided for all of Leon county. There is no way to select a fair and impartial jury in these cases. They all have their minds made up because of this. Because Tally is the Capital, they try to set the example and there is nothing fair about that. There are cases that should have been tossed, that are being dragged out for no reason. It's such an injustice it makes me want to puke.
DeleteMost of us are trying to figure this out. Its a HUGE financial burden in so many ways for many. Because of lost careers, legal expenses, etc. many are trying to keep a roof over our families heads and food in their stomachs. If there were a rally I could not justify the gas to travel! Much less a place to stay when I got there. Some of the bloggers are probably incarcerated or lost their ability to communicate. Some like me are overwhelmed and disgusted. Anyway, I would love to meet those affected with these stings face to face. A support group would be nice but would be hard to pull off. I am a person of faith and will continue to pray for Justice to be done.
ReplyDeleteIt's amazing that 90% of these guys do not have a criminal record but is being sent to prison for make believe. They let a teacher from Deer Lake Middle school off with child abuse, no sex offender and probation for actually soliciting a 15 yr old. Go figure
ReplyDeleteI think i heard something about that and it doesnt surprise me. Just wanted to let people know i will be dipping off the radar in a week or so but DueProcess should be back around more once he remedies his internet situation. I won't be gone for too long, but that's just the way it is unfortunately when your life is ruined for "no particular reason". They might be winning the battle, but we will eventually win the war. We all know what they are doing is beyond unethical/immoral in so many ways.....our country has some serious issues when they do this to its own citizens. It's almost embarassing to be an American....this is no longer the land of the free, thats for damn sure.
ReplyDeletei am still looking for somebody who was in a mother daughter, stepfather/stepdaughter, etc type scenario who did not say anything sexual directed to the fictitious minor nor had any communications with them either. If we find somebody like this we will have BIG success
ReplyDelete