They were the agressors?

[Moshe]

Obviously, he would not be on trial if he were not a pederast.  Frankly, at my age 18 year olds look like little girls to me. He knew damn well what he was doing, and probably got caught for the first time in years.  Older pederasts tend to have hundreds of victims.    There is zero justification for this.

[SC Tiger]

16 hours ago, Brown Hawk said:

To me, the problem is that the judge used the excuse of the girls being the aggressors to reduce the sentence of the pervert.  He was still searching online and initiated contact.  Would he have gotten off if he had been greeted by a female cop?  If not, there should have been no reduction in this case.  Period.  That is the true insanity of this ruling.  

Hawk

That is a major problem.  Big time major problem.  Dude is probably (hopefully) gonna die in prison from rectal trauma anyway but this is fucked up by the numbers.

15 hours ago, Rizzo said:

It’s missing some details, but I think Moshe is correct in that these kids didn’t get to the house by themselves; in other words, they were sent. In other words, against their will by a pimp. That’s how online trafficking rings work, and is the main reason backpage.com got shut down.

And anyone stupid enough to claim that child sex-trafficking victims should be charged for their “crime” needs to be tied to a tree and beaten.

14 hours 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. 

Cot Damn.  This just gets more fucked up by the second.  Sounds like some parents need their ass beat.  Of course if we look into THAT who knows what we'll find.......

Sounds like several people need someone to go John Creasy on their ass.

14 hours 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?

 

And for the "pimp"

after

13 hours ago, UnifiedFieldTheory said:

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

[SC Tiger]

12 hours ago, Rizzo said:

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.

Dude - you feel bad for not looking for more info on this fucked-up mess?  Hell, I already wish I didn't know what I know NOW.  

13 hours 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. 

 

 

 

Where did you find this?  Not sure I wanna go look but I am curious.

[steve4102]

35 minutes ago, Moshe said:

Obviously, he would not be on trial if he were not a pederast.  Frankly, at my age 18 year olds look like little girls to me. He knew damn well what he was doing, and probably got caught for the first time in years.  Older pederasts tend to have hundreds of victims.    There is zero justification for this.

Yes he did and he was convicted and sent to prison.

These two young hookers also knew what they were doing and the Judge also knew what they were doing.

These two should be prosecuted for prostitution and not given a free pass because of their age. They knew selling themselves for money was illegal, yet they made the decision to break the law anyway.  Prosecute them.

[Moshe]

3 minutes ago, steve4102 said:

Yes he did and he was convicted and sent to prison.

These two young hookers also knew what they were doing and the Judge also knew what they were doing.

These two should be prosecuted for prostitution and not given a free pass because of their age. They knew selling themselves for money was illegal, yet they made the decision to break the law anyway.  Prosecute them.

So, how many victims of sexual violence would you imprison?

[steve4102]

10 minutes ago, Moshe said:

So, how many victims of sexual violence would you imprison?

None.

How many criminals, as in hookers, would you refuse to prosecute?

These little darling were not even close to victims, they were running an organized prostitution ring.

[Moshe]

3 minutes ago, steve4102 said:

None.

How many criminals, as in hookers, would you refuse to prosecute?

These little darling were not even close to victims, they were running an organized prostitution ring.

Children? Zero.  The pimp, the rapists that messed up their wiring, and the old pederast.  Death.

[steve4102]

5 minutes ago, Moshe said:

The pimp,

You mean the oldest sister, right.  That pimp.

[Moshe]

1 minute ago, steve4102 said:

You mean the oldest sister, right.  That pimp.

You know zero about human and child trafficking, and it shows.

[steve4102]

22 minutes ago, Moshe said:

You know zero about human and child trafficking, and it shows.

That's true.

 

But this isn't about human trafficking.  It is about a couple sisters that set up a prostitution ring and sold their bodies for money.

Read the court transcripts.  Nothing in their about human trafficking.  If these hooker were victims of HT, this would have been  their golden opportunity to get out from under it, or at least try.  They did no such thing, they didn't even show up for the sentencing hearing, they cared that little.

Not every minor involved in crimes is a victim and is being manipulated by some evil third party.  These little darlings were on their own, committed crimes on their own and were not involved in any HT scheme.  

Calling these two hookers victims of HT, diminishes the term and is a slap in the face of those that truly are victims of HT.  

 

There is Zero evidence that these hookers were victims of HT, there is court documentation that they were selling their bodies for money and that this old pervert was not their only "john".

Edited February 6, 2019 by steve4102

[Moshe]

I can read all kinds of nonsense by both sides of the case, that doesn't make it true.  Every minor who is sex trafficked is a victim of repeated molestation.  Regardless of the dim view liberals think of children in the first place.  Children are not the age of majority.  They cannot make logical decisions on their own.  Just like my 16 year old son, I can't just hand him a handgun, and then ask him, "So, how did your range day go?"  By law, he is not the age of majority to own a firearm in his own right.  Why is that?  Because he is a minor, and two years away from the Age of Majority.  Two years from enlisting if he wants to. 

[steve4102]

14 minutes ago, Moshe said:

I can read all kinds of nonsense by both sides of the case, that doesn't make it true.  Every minor who is sex trafficked is a victim of repeated molestation. 

Show any evidence you have that there was even a hint that  these hookers were involved in HT?

Opinions do not count.  Read the transcripts, research the little darlings life, whatever it takes.  Find even the slightest hint that they were victims of HT.

Good Luck, yur gunna need it.

[Moshe]

2 minutes ago, steve4102 said:

Show any evidence you have that there was even a hint that  these hookers were involved in HT?

Opinions do not count.  Read the transcripts, research the little darlings life, whatever it takes.  Find even the slightest hint that they were victims of HT.

Good Luck, yur gunna need it.

It really seems you are indifferent, along with no knowledge, how children and abused, and then trafficked.  Further, without that knowledge, you seem to want to stick up for the old pederast.  It does cause one to ponder.

[Brown Hawk]

2 hours ago, AK_Stick said:

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” 

I already conceded your point. I refer to three criminals.  You are totally ignoring both of mine.  

First, you say that you have facts not presented here, and say that others are only presenting opinion, so I asked that you present where you got those facts, to show that you are not posting opinion.

Second, the point that the judge reduced the sentence of the pervert for no lawful reason, just his opinion.  In some states, that could get the whole trial thrown out on that statement alone.  If you have facts to the contrary, please share them.  

Additionally, that “experience” is stating widely proven facts about the sex trade in young children.  Not saying it’s 100% true, but it is predominantly true.  

Hawk

[steve4102]

6 minutes ago, Moshe said:

It really seems you are indifferent, along with no knowledge, how children and abused, and then trafficked.  Further, without that knowledge, you seem to want to stick up for the old pederast.  It does cause one to ponder.

Not True.

You are claiming these hookers were victims of HT or Sex Trafficking, even without a shred of evidence to support it. 

Prove you premise if you can.  If you can't then you are just blowing smoke up your own ass.

[steve4102]

6 minutes ago, Brown Hawk said:

I already conceded your point. I refer to three criminals.  You are totally ignoring both of mine.  

First, you say that you have facts not presented here, and say that others are only presenting opinion, so I asked that you present where you got those facts, to show that you are not posting opinion.

Second, the point that the judge reduced the sentence of the pervert for no lawful reason, just his opinion.  In some states, that could get the whole trial thrown out on that statement alone.  If you have facts to the contrary, please share them.  

Additionally, that “experience” is stating widely proven facts about the sex trade in young children.  Not saying it’s 100% true, but it is predominantly true.  

Hawk

The judge did not reduce his sentence.  He did not follow the recommendation of the prosecution, happens all the time.  Sometimes the judges imposes a tougher sentence, sometimes a lesser sentence.  Nothing sinister about it.

That's what judges do, it's part of their job, to gather all the facts in the case and render a sentence based on the facts and their opinion.

The facts in this case were that the old pervert was not the only criminal involved here, the hookers were also in violation of the law.  His lawful reason was that the hookers played a yuge roll in this entire criminal event.  Not being innocent victims of a pervert, but instead being payed hookers, was indeed justification not to follow the prosecutors recommendation.

[Moshe]

https://arkofhopeforchildren.org/child-trafficking/child-trafficking-statistics

Sorry, but I don't have the means or wherewithal to put you through the hours and hours and hours of training we received as SSA's, but it was mandatory, as this is a large part of the mission that was pushed then and is now.  I have no sympathy for people that hurt children, never have, never will.  I almost shot a man while I was an SSA in Rio Rancho.  I was on leave, but with that job you are never completely on leave, as your firearm and credentials are supposed to be on you at all times, in case something crazy popped off.  My father and I were going to go out.  I saw a little girl on the other side of four lanes walking home from school and a van pull up and snatch the little girl.  I pissed off four lanes of traffic, and dad was desperately hanging on to "Oh ****!" handle.  I popped out pistol in hand.  The girl started giggling.  Apparently, dad was playing a nearly fatal joke on his daughter.  The man seemed surprised by squealing tires and the production of a pistol.  I would do the same today, retired or not.

[Brown Hawk]

4 minutes ago, steve4102 said:

Not True.

You are claiming these hookers were victims of HT or Sex Trafficking, even without a shred of evidence to support it. 

Prove you premise if you can.  If you can't then you are just blowing smoke up your own ass.

Steve, the preponderance of the evidence about underage sex trafficking shows that the underage who participate later were abused at a much younger age and trained that way.  So there is much more than a “shred of evidence” in favor of that being the background of these two.  That is statistical evidence.  

On an individual level, you have a point not to be ignored, but also not to be taken without evidence.  

Hawk

[steve4102]

11 minutes ago, Brown Hawk said:

Steve, the preponderance of the evidence about underage sex trafficking shows that the underage who participate later were abused at a much younger age and trained that way.  So there is much more than a “shred of evidence” in favor of that being the background of these two.  That is statistical evidence.  

On an individual level, you have a point not to be ignored, but also not to be taken without evidence.  

Hawk

Statistics are not evidence and are not admissible in court.

Show actual evidence that these two hookers were victims of HT or ST.  Just claiming that is might be possible does not cut the mustard.

They were in court, they testified, HT and ST never mentioned, only that they sold themselves to an old pervert for money, went to his house and the big sister was the pimp.

If there was any evidence presented in court that these hookers were victims of HT or ST, the Judge would have never made this statement.

Quote

The paper reported that Gibbens explained his reasoning for the more lenient sentence by saying that the two girls went to Soden’s house voluntarily and took money from him for sexual favors.

“They were certainly selling things monetarily that it’s against the law for even an adult to sell,” he said, according to the paper, which obtained a transcript of the sentencing.

 

Edited February 6, 2019 by steve4102

[Moshe]

22 minutes ago, steve4102 said:

Statistics are not evidence and are not admissible in court.

Show actual evidence that these two hookers were victims of HT or ST.  Just claiming that is might be possible does not cut the mustard.

They were in court, they testified, HT and ST never mentioned, only that they sold themselves to an old pervert for money, went to his house and the big sister was the pimp.

If there was any evidence presented in court that these hookers were victims of HT or ST, the Judge would have never made this statement.

 

A 13 year old girl doesn't have the sense to do that sort of thing.  How do I know that?  My little girl is 13, and if anyone tried to hurt her sexually.  Well, that is what my 1k rifle is for.  They will never know what hit them.  There will be no trace evidence except a guy that used to have a head.

[steve4102]

8 minutes ago, Moshe said:

A 13 year old girl doesn't have the sense to do that sort of thing.  How do I know that?  My little girl is 13, and if anyone tried to hurt her sexually.  Well, that is what my 1k rifle is for.  They will never know what hit them.  There will be no trace evidence except a guy that used to have a head.

Human beings mature at different rates of development.

To say that ALL 13 year old girls are void of common sense and cannot distinguish between right and wrong, legal and illegal, is retarded at best.

These girls knew what they were doing and they knew it was illegal, there was NO evidence presented in court to the contrary.

Most states allow for legal hunting at age 11-12.  These young hunters are given loaded rifles/shotguns and allowed to head out into the woods in search of game.  They have been taught how to handle a firearm safely, instructed on what the LAWS are and how these laws pertain to their choice of game, and they are trusted to make the right choices in the field.  Are you saying that a 13 year old Hunter has no sense to do the right thing in the field , has no sense of what is legal and what is not,  cannot distinguish between right and wrong while carrying a loaded firearm?  

At what age would you consider "sense to do that sort of thing" as it pertains to Hunting with a firearm?  Obviously it can't be 13 or younger, they lack that ability.

[Moshe]

 

[Moshe]

 

[SC Tiger]

2 hours ago, steve4102 said:

Statistics are not evidence and are not admissible in court.

Show actual evidence that these two hookers were victims of HT or ST.  Just claiming that is might be possible does not cut the mustard.

They were in court, they testified, HT and ST never mentioned, only that they sold themselves to an old pervert for money, went to his house and the big sister was the pimp.

If there was any evidence presented in court that these hookers were victims of HT or ST, the Judge would have never made this statement.

 

The girls were not on trial.  The old pervert was.  So why would evidence have been presented about how they got into this?

[steve4102]

1 hour ago, SC Tiger said:

The girls were not on trial.  The old pervert was.  So why would evidence have been presented about how they got into this?

Because is was.  Evidence was presented that these little darlings "Voluntarily" went to the perverts home and solicited sex for money.

His defense attorney presented the evidence that these girls were not innocent young children/victims, but members of a prostitution ring where the older sister was the pimp.  

Big difference and the Judge rightfully saw what really went down.