They were the agressors?

[Silentpoet]

A coworker was married to the main guy who does forensic interviews of child abuse victims in this area.  She now works at one of the local counseling centers, still married to the same guy.  Anyway he shared a story of a I want to say 7-9 year old who was trafficked on Christmas day to about 6 men.  Might have been more.  Would that 9 year old be the aggressor?

[Moshe]

1 minute ago, AK_Stick said:

 

 

You realize the “pimp” was the older (still under age) sister right?

 

You made an awful lot of assumptions, that just a 5 min google would have pointed out were incorrect. Then you defend them as based on “experience”

 

it does not cast the mental image you are attempting to portray. 

A 13 and a 14 year old are incapable to transportation.  The Pimp was clearly in the picture trying to get his cut for pimping them Herbert the Pervert.  Unless, of course you believe the 14 year old is just driving around and finding her own clients?  The point remaining, that would be ridiculous.  They were molested at an early age to mess with their sexual wiring.  Even when you come to terms with it, you never get over something like that.  It happened to me at 5.  If affects your whole world view.  No one would listen to me, or take me seriously, so the rage built.  As it was an older teenage male, I assumed it was a homosexual thing.  I was the guy who wanted to beat the ever living hell out of homosexuals, until I realized homosexuals were not the problem.  These monsters were in a class of their own, pederasts.  The people I keep having to reign in my dark passenger not to hunt as many as I can and put them down.  My wife would get angry with me, because I refused to change my children's diapers. and I did not want them parading around the house nude.

Now, I hold no ill will toward homosexuals.  Pederasts on the other hand, my best bet would be to explode their melons at 1k yards.  Though the idea of kidnapping them, where they scream and not be heard as I dismantle them piece by piece I find ever so gratifying.  It leaves too much forensic evidence.  A sniper on the other hand is a law enforcement agencies worst night mare.  They are hard to catch.  I have the rifle, the means, and ability.

[Moshe]

3 minutes ago, Silentpoet said:

A coworker was married to the main guy who does forensic interviews of child abuse victims in this area.  She now works at one of the local counseling centers, still married to the same guy.  Anyway he shared a story of a I want to say 7-9 year old who was trafficked on Christmas day to about 6 men.  Might have been more.  Would that 9 year old be the aggressor?

Finally, some common sense to the debate.  Children should be allowed to be children, and left to be innocent.

[AK_Stick]

6 minutes ago, Moshe said:

A 13 and a 14 year old are incapable to transportation.  The Pimp was clearly in the picture trying to get his cut for pimping them Herbert the Pervert.  Unless, of course you believe the 14 year old is just driving around and finding her own clients?  The point remaining, that would be ridiculous.  They were molested at an early age to mess with their sexual wiring.  Even when you come to terms with it, you never get over something like that.  It happened to me at 5.  If affects your whole world view.  No one would listen to me, or take me seriously, so the rage built.  As it was an older teenage male, I assumed it was a homosexual thing.  I was the guy who wanted to beat the ever living hell out of homosexuals, until I realized homosexuals were not the problem.  These monsters were in a class of their own, pederasts.  The people I keep having to reign in my dark passenger not to hunt as many as I can and put them down.  My wife would get angry with me, because I refused to change my children's diapers. and I did not want them parading around the house nude.

Now, I hold no ill will toward homosexuals.  Pederasts on the other hand, my best bet would be to explode their melons at 1k yards.  Though the idea of kidnapping them, where they scream and not be heard as I dismantle them piece by piece I find ever so gratifying.  It leaves too much forensic evidence.  A sniper on the other hand is a law enforcement agencies worst night mare.  They are hard to catch.  I have the rifle, the means, and ability.

Literally none of that has the effect of making what I quoted accurate. 

 

 

The pimp was the older sister. Kids without a vehicle are not incapable of transportation. 

Edited February 5, 2019 by AK_Stick

[Moshe]

Just now, AK_Stick said:

Literally none of that has the effect of making what I quoted accurate. 

 

 

The pimp was the older sister. 

Yes, back to blaming the victim, I get it.

[UnifiedFieldTheory]

8 hours ago, steve4102 said:

They were hookers. selling their bodies and braking the law.  Not consenting to casual sex.

They were children.  What the hell is wrong with you?

[AK_Stick]

4 minutes ago, Moshe said:

Yes, back to blaming the victim, I get it.

Stating the facts isn’t blaming anyone. 

 

I just pointed out you had made some giant assumptions about the case without reading the facts. And when questioned on them, you replied you knew what the situation was based on “experience” and that your “experience” was in contravention to the facts. 

 

 

I do do understand why you’d be so dismissive of my post though. 

[AK_Stick]

2 minutes ago, UnifiedFieldTheory said:

They were children.  What the hell is wrong with you?

Uh. You really gotta ask that?

 

really really? 

[Moshe]

Just now, AK_Stick said:

Stating the facts isn’t blaming anyone. 

 

I just pointed out you had made some giant assumptions about the case without reading the facts. And when questioned on them, you replied you knew what the situation was based on “experience” and that your “experience” was in contravention to the facts. 

 

 

I do do understand why you’d be so dismissive of my post though. 

I guess you never had children, or you would get it.  Those with children understand the dangers all too well.

[UnifiedFieldTheory]

Just now, AK_Stick said:

Uh. You really gotta ask that?

 

really really? 

Well, I have to put it out there that someone is very simply appalled at the attitude of "They were hoors so they're the bad guys."  They were children, period, end of story.  I have a 15 year old and a 13 year old, they're most definitely CHILDREN, no matter how attractive or stacked they are.

[AK_Stick]

1 minute ago, Moshe said:

I guess you never had children, or you would get it.  Those with children understand the dangers all too well.

That does not give validity to your previous statements. 

You do understand that what you said is still factually incorrect in reguards to this case no matter how you attempt to discredit my argument right? No matter what qualification you attempt hold as the standard to pass judgement, it will not change the fact that the older sister was the pimp. 

[AK_Stick]

3 minutes ago, UnifiedFieldTheory said:

Well, I have to put it out there that someone is very simply appalled at the attitude of "They were hoors so they're the bad guys."  They were children, period, end of story.  I have a 15 year old and a 13 year old, they're most definitely CHILDREN, no matter how attractive or stacked they are.

I think at this point most have him on ignore or simply ignore him. 

 

I skipped right over it because its such a ridiculous  statement that I’m not even willing to spend the time to engage him on it. 

[Moshe]

1 minute ago, AK_Stick said:

That does not give validity to your previous statements. 

You do understand that what you said is still factually incorrect in reguards to this case no matter how you attempt to discredit my argument right? No matter what qualification you attempt hold as the standard to pass judgement, it will not change the fact that the older sister was the pimp. 

No.  Adults are culpable for soliciting and seeking sexual favors from children.  The things I would do those people, if I could kill them without a trace.  How did the 14 year old girl, who had been clearly treated deplorably to mess up her wiring get there?  An adult who had custody of control over them brought them to the old bastard who has probably been engaging in this behavior for decades, with scores more victims.  They were "sexual aggressive" and that is why he raped them is not an acceptable answer.  Just because a woman wears a revealing skirt, also means she does not deserved to be raped either.  Sex is something that happens between two consenting adults.  I am going on 20 years of marriage with my wife this year.  I have never cheated on her, never raised a hand to her. Frankly, as she ages, I will find her the only desirable woman in my life.  We are life bonded.  We have very different personalities.  But, that is what makes it work.  When did being a gentlemen get tossed in the gutter with everything else?

Simple things, like opening a door for a lady, not because she can't, but as a courtesy.  Simple things like offering a woman a seat in a waiting room.  Now, society has turned into a cesspool we are going to blame the victim and let the decades long pederast essentially walk, saying they were sexually aggressive, so he couldn't say "No."  Frankly, I have never considered myself G-d's gift to women, but I have been proposition by women when I was clearly married, and no matter how persistent they were I categorically rejected them.  Even as my wife ages, I still find her to be my love and my beauty.  To take it further, I told her she has no need to color her hair back to her blonde color through highlights. 

I told her you have just as much right turn grey as I do.  When I married her when she was going on 24, she constantly would call me at work to ask me if she could do this or that.  I decided this wasn't going to work, so I was determined to engender in her the ability to have her own "voice" and agreeing with me on all things was not by any means necessary.  Not to take a page from Ms. Caulder, but women fart too.  It doesn't in the least offend me.  Women are people, not simply objects. 

To that point, children, and little girls should be allowed to be little girls.  My daughter will always be a daddy's girl.  If anyone ever hurt her, G-d help them or anyone they ever knew.  This thread is disgusting on so many levels, I can't help but be enraged.  The abuse of innocence should never be acceptable, and those that do, should die a horrible, slow death,

[AK_Stick]

You do realize kids who can’t drive still get around, every day of the year all over the country right?

 

It is known that the older sister acted as the pimp. This is not a question, it’s not something you can argue. It’s one of the facts from the case. 

 

 

 

[Mrs.Cicero]

Who the pimp was is irrelevant to the crimes committed by the pederast.  Whether or not the UNDERAGE girls were prostitutes or pure-as-the-driven snow virgins is also irrelevant to the crimes committed by the pederast.  He was trolling online for underage sex.  The end.  There should be no leniency with regard to the supposed willingness of the UNDERAGE girls to put out.  Unless that state has an age-of-consent of 14, it was statutory rape.  Justifying leniency on the basis of the supposed willingness of the children makes a travesty of the concept of the age of consent and the definition of statutory rape.  

Personally, I think he should be taken out and shot and his corpse fed to the vultures.  The girls, and the rest of society, would benefit more from their removal from whatever "home" they are in, and significant amounts of psychological counseling, rather than time in juvie for prostitution.  Also, if the older one really was pimping out her younger sister, they need to be permanently separated.  

[Rizzo]

44 minutes ago, AK_Stick said:

It is known that the older sister acted as the pimp. This is not a question, it’s not something you can argue. It’s one of the facts from the case. 

 

 

Wow, I didn’t realize. Like I said the OP’s link was missing some details, and I admit to not doing a follow-up search. 

I was going off the annual training they give us about online sex-trafficking rings, which accounts for a lot of the stories about underage girls/teenaged runaways who get tricked, exploited or outright forced into the trade, and is unfortunately not just a third-world thing anymore.

Depressing story all around, and put me in the camp for putting the rotten SOB under the courthouse.

Edited February 6, 2019 by Rizzo

[Brown Hawk]

44 minutes ago, AK_Stick said:

You do realize kids who can’t drive still get around, every day of the year all over the country right?

 

It is known that the older sister acted as the pimp. This is not a question, it’s not something you can argue. It’s one of the facts from the case. 

You do realize that the problem here is that the judge reduced the sentence for the pervert because someone that the pervert advertised for actually answered.  So what you are saying is that reducing the sentence is okay if some underage hookers answered.  So you are saying to hammer the hookers, but let the pervert off lightly.  Because that is where your position logically ends up.  

Should the sentence be reduced if a sting operation catches someone advertising for underage sex?  After all, they were caught as well?  

Hawk

[AK_Stick]

42 minutes ago, Brown Hawk said:

You do realize that the problem here is that the judge reduced the sentence for the pervert because someone that the pervert advertised for actually answered.  So what you are saying is that reducing the sentence is okay if some underage hookers answered.  So you are saying to hammer the hookers, but let the pervert off lightly.  Because that is where your position logically ends up.  

Should the sentence be reduced if a sting operation catches someone advertising for underage sex?  After all, they were caught as well?  

Hawk

That’s not at all what I said.....

[Brown Hawk]

35 minutes ago, AK_Stick said:

That’s not at all what I said.....

Actually, that is the logical extension of what you said.  One criminal recruits other criminals, so the original criminal gets a lessor penalty because two other criminals came in to collaborate in the crime.  

By law, a murder committed during a robbery makes even the getaway driver a murderer.  It doesn’t get the ringleader extra time off.  So if you forget the age of the two girls and just look at it as three criminals and see where your logic takes you.  

Their age will give them special treatment, because the law reads that way, but that is not what the article was about.  And why so many here are upset by your position.  

Basically, the judge was guilty of malfeasance.  

Hawk 

[AK_Stick]

19 minutes ago, Brown Hawk said:

Actually, that is the logical extension of what you said.  One criminal recruits other criminals, so the original criminal gets a lessor penalty because two other criminals came in to collaborate in the crime.  

By law, a murder committed during a robbery makes even the getaway driver a murderer.  It doesn’t get the ringleader extra time off.  So if you forget the age of the two girls and just look at it as three criminals and see where your logic takes you.  

Their age will give them special treatment, because the law reads that way, but that is not what the article was about.  And why so many here are upset by your position.  

Basically, the judge was guilty of malfeasance.  

Hawk 

The problem, is you’re trying to “logically extend” something you obviously didn’t understand. 

 

I corrected King Aurthur’s factually incorrect statements with a pertienent fact from the case, and the fact that children without vehicles or liscenses still are capable of covering vast distances as they do everyday in america. 

 

 

If you didnt understand that, I would caution you against trying to “logically extend” anything I say. 

[Brown Hawk]

1 hour ago, AK_Stick said:

The problem, is you’re trying to “logically extend” something you obviously didn’t understand. 

 

I corrected King Aurthur’s factually incorrect statements with a pertienent fact from the case, and the fact that children without vehicles or liscenses still are capable of covering vast distances as they do everyday in america. 

I understand your point perfectly.  You are totally missing the point that the ringleader of the crime got a reduced sentence because he had accomplices, not for any other reason, such that he ratted them out to get a reduced sentence.  

You also keep stating that you have “facts pertaining to the case”, that aren’t posted here.  If you have those facts, please post them here.  We would all like to update ourselves.  

And how any of the criminals got to the crime scene is irrevelant to the fact that a crime was committed.  The problem we see is that the judge reduced the sentence of the ringleader by saying the accomplices were complicit, which is the definition of an accomplice.  

You’re complaining that the accomplices aren’t being prosecuted or punished, and ignoring the fact that the article was about the outrage at the criminal act of the judge in reducing the criminal penalty of the ringleader because of his OPINION that the accomplices helped in the crime.  

Hawk

[AK_Stick]

7 hours ago, Brown Hawk said:

I understand your point perfectly.  You are totally missing the point that the ringleader of the crime got a reduced sentence because he had accomplices, not for any other reason, such that he ratted them out to get a reduced sentence.  

You also keep stating that you have “facts pertaining to the case”, that aren’t posted here.  If you have those facts, please post them here.  We would all like to update ourselves.  

And how any of the criminals got to the crime scene is irrevelant to the fact that a crime was committed.  The problem we see is that the judge reduced the sentence of the ringleader by saying the accomplices were complicit, which is the definition of an accomplice.  

You’re complaining that the accomplices aren’t being prosecuted or punished, and ignoring the fact that the article was about the outrage at the criminal act of the judge in reducing the criminal penalty of the ringleader because of his OPINION that the accomplices helped in the crime.  

Hawk

You very obviously do not understand my point. If you did, you wouldn’t be trying to “logically extend” what I’ve been saying. 

 

You would understand that that I corrected the factually incorrect statements someone attempted to make based on his “experience” 

[steve4102]

12 hours ago, UnifiedFieldTheory said:

They were children.  What the hell is wrong with you?

They were hookers, not children, hookers and they got caught so they played the poor me I'm a victim card and the judge didn't buy it.  

These were just "children" too, right.

Mitchell Scott Johnson (born August 11, 1984) and Andrew Douglas Golden (born May 25, 1986) are former middle school students and the 13 and 11 year old perpetrators, respectively, of the March 24, 1998 massacreat Westside Middle School in unincorporated Craighead County, Arkansas near the city of Jonesboro.^[1] Johnson and Golden fatally shot four students and a teacher with multiple weapons, and both were arrested when they attempted to flee the scene. Ten others were wounded in the shooting. Both Golden and Johnson were charged with the five murders and 10 injuries that were caused by the shooting,

The Thurston High School shooting took place on May 21, 1998. Expelled student Kip Kinkel 15 first murdered his parents before engaging in a school shooting at Thurston High School in Springfield, Oregon that left two students, Ben Walker and Mikael Nickolauson, dead and 25 others wounded.^[1] Kinkel is currently serving a 111-year sentence without the possibility of parole.

Jeffrey James Weise (August 8, 1988 – March 21, 2005) was an American teenage mass murderer and spree killer, who was a student at Red Lake Senior High School in Red Lake, Minnesota, located on the reservationof the Ojibwe people. He murdered nine people in a shooting spree on March 21, 2005. He killed his grandfather and his grandfather's companion before going to the reservation high school, where he murdered seven more people and wounded five others. He committed suicide before being captured by police. He was 16 years old.

Charles Andrew "Andy" Williams (born February 8, 1986) is a convicted murderer who, as a 15-year-old, perpetrated the shooting at Santana High School on March 5, 2001. In the shooting, two students were killed and 13 others were wounded. Williams is currently serving life in prison with the possibility of parole after 50 years.

 

Edited February 6, 2019 by steve4102

[Moshe]

So, your premise is because some old pederast agreed to have sex with underage children, sought out underage children to have sex with, had sex with children, that is the children's fault?  Not in my world.  Every man who isn't wired wrong, is capable of saying "NO."  I had a very persistent woman (grown) in a FLETC class from the Washington Field Office solicit me for a one night stand.  I was married, and I made sure, despite her pressuring that I was married, and I don't cheat.  So, despite her insistence she got "NO" after "NO".  Saying "NO" isn't hard, unless you want to cheat.  Or, in this case, the old pederast was looking for and found what he wanted.  He could have slammed the door and yelled "NO."  But, clearly, he wanted to have sex with underage children, and given his age, probably had being going that most of his life. 

Because these children were abused doesn't mean, because they are damaged goods (and I don't mean that in any pejorative sense), someone else decided to make some money off of them.  Do you think the 12 year old drove there, or the 14 year old.  No, they were driven there, for the purpose of sex with the old Pederast.  These things are life long problems that can cause mental disorders.  For instance, a nameless person in Laredo, told her mother she had been raped, and the mother said, well since you are experienced, it is time to make some money off of you.  There was also a ring of Aunts and Uncles who molested their nieces and were stupid enough to record the encounter, so they could relive it over and over again.  Recording yourself committing a crime of that magnitude is not the way to go unless prison is your choice.

[steve4102]

27 minutes ago, Moshe said:

So, your premise is because some old pederast agreed to have sex with underage children, sought out underage children to have sex with, had sex with children, that is the children's fault?

That is not what happened, if it were what happened then no, that is not my premise.

What did happen is that these two young hookers actively sought out this old pervert knowing they could exchange sex for money. As the judge put it, “They were certainly selling things monetarily that it’s against the law for even an adult to sell,”

  They were complicit in these illegal acts, they were not innocents .  This old pervert did not agree to have sex with underage children, he paid hookers for their service. 

This old pervert did not go up to these "children" and say, "hey little girls, want a piece of candy"? "Come sit on my lap and I'll let you play with the first thing that pops up".

They went to him and his house and said, "hey old man, ya want some of this"? " you can have it, but it's gunna cost you this $much$".  

Edited February 6, 2019 by steve4102