Topic: Ohio priest arrested, charged with trying to meet children for sex

[Kerdy]

Simple question:

Is a 41 year old who actually engages in sexual intercourse with a 12 year old a crime?

Yes or No

[FormerReformer]

Greetings in that Divine and Most Precious Name of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!

So, because most countries have gone crazy, we should, too? Although, since about WWI it's usually more along the lines of us starting the crazy laws and the rest of the world following suit. Regardless- attempting any physically violent act against a person that does not exist would under any other circumstances constitute insanity.

I am not quite sure I understand you, I can only hope you mean well. How exactly have other nations gone crazy in enforcing and targeting sexual predators?  Let me explain, nobody is more sympathetic to criminals than myself.  Further, I wholly agree with the Gospel message of Matthew 25 to visit, console, and comfort prisoners, all the more especially the guilty.  However, this does not exonerate their guilt, neither does this sympathy and concern null the need for punishment.  I also firmly believe in "innocent until proven guilty" and I am well aware of the witch-hunts which occur in American legal system and the hundreds of completely and absolutely innocent people doing a lot of time.  A dude in Long Beach just got out after serving 10 years in prison for a rape he never committed, the women completely lied and it finally came out under oath elsewhere and the guy was released.  It is a statistical reality that when people serve more than 5 years in prison, essentially their life if forever destroyed.  However, this priest pleaded guilty.  I am also aware of the pressures which the legal system places on people to take plea bargains, the LA Men's Central Country Jail is quite literally a dungeon, it is the single largest prison-facility in the WORLD, and it is a hell-hole.  The County does this on purpose, to encourage people to take the plea-bargain, because if they fight the case it make take several years, and they will serve the entirety of that process in that same County Jail dungeon.  Again though, in this instance a priest confessed, and considering that child molestation is both the most despicable crime in America and that in prison it is essentially a death sentence by other inmates, I think that in this instance the priest would hardly have fessed up if we was truly innocent.  Wouldn't he have faith in God? Perhaps not if he knew he was guilty

stay blessed,
habte selassie

Habte- as I seem to be repeating myself here, let me just say that I am in no way defending the priest or his crime. I AM amused at the idea of being charged with "attempting" a physical act against thin air- it just paints a funny mental image for me.

As far as crazy laws re: sexual predators (the other crazy laws I briefly referenced would be our War on Drugs- drugs are bad, m'kay, but prohibition is worse), yes, the world has gone slightly crazy. In every other instance of the punishment of criminals we strive to make the punishment fit the crime. Say a first time offender tries to rob a liquor store, he gets a few years. If he does it with a gun he gets ten or twenty. If he kills someone in the commission he gets even more. A murderer can get anywhere from twenty to life or even the death penalty.

These days, someone charged with a crime of a sexual nature- whether minors were involved or not, whether actual sex was involved or not- is not only given a prison sentence, but has to spend the rest of their life (or at least a few decades) checking in with the local PD, notifying the local PD if they are going on vacation, they spend the rest of their life on a registry, and can never again live within x000 ft of a school or any area where "children may gather". This has led to a huge homeless population in Miami who are homeless only due to the fact that they cannot legally live anywhere. Not all these people were offenders against children- not all these people committed a sexual offense at all. A guy might have had to relieve himself while on a road trip but between rest stops and is charged with Indecent Exposure- bam, registry.

The definition of child pornography has been stretched to such an extent that no actual children need to have been involved- Bart Simpson getting it on with Wendy from South Park nowadays constitutes. Creepy? Yes. Disgusting? Definitely. Should it be illegal? Perhaps. Should it have the same penalty as actually making two children undress and perform sexual acts on each other? I don't think so.

[Αριστοκλής]

And here's the fun of the American legal system- one can be guilty of "attempting" a physical act against two purely fictional and imaginary beings.  

That's kinda disturbing. I do not think he did anything deserving actual jail time.

You would have preferred his victims to have been REAL children?

Somehow the law enforcers can't win. Derided for showing up after a crime has been committed they also criticized for doing what is their best purpose: preventing a crime. Go figure.

Well, can we really call this "attempted rape"? How can one attempt the rape of someone that doesn't exist? "Attempted Solicitation" more fits the bill, and with the Sex Crime laws we have in this country ensures that anyone is punished for the rest of their lives no matter how much jail time is spent.

Honestly, though, I'm just laughing at the legal fictions of our wondrous land. I wonder if it is possible for an imaginary being to charge a corporation (legally a person) with attempted rape.

The guilty plea in this case belies your argument.

Not quite. There are plenty of innocent people that have either plead guilty or no contest to crimes they never committed.

Thank God FormerReformer is here for much needed sanity.

Perhaps there are "plenty of people" etc, etc - that is probably true, but in this case that does not mean this priest was/is one of them. IMO, his plea is exactly what it is  - an admission of guilt. Got proof it is not?

Ever hear of a plea bargain? Just because there is an admission of guilt from the suspect does not inherently conclude that the suspect is actually guilty of the crime. However in the priest's case, what FR was arguing over is the terminology used against the suspect "attempted rape". No such "attempted rape" ever occured, the priest didn't attempt rape on anybody. That is why an attempted solicitation with intent is much better suited for this case.

So that being said, we might as well say he wasn't guilty of attempting rape on anybody.

Please do not patronize me lest I get really testy. You get to much of your life views from the movies. In my experience (not conjecture) when a case concludes so quickly the case against the accused was very strong. He likely would have gotten a heavier sentence at trial. (I won't bore you with how often I have seen the state offer the lesser plea to save time, money, and just get the case closed.)
By your logic the FBI and Homeland Security has been erring in their successful stings of terrorist cells.

[Kerdy]

Simple question:

Is a 41 year old who actually engages in sexual intercourse with a 12 year old a crime?

Yes or No

Since no one wants to answer, I'll do the rest on my own.

Yes, the would be rape (of a child, a person under 16/14/12, etc., depending on how the law is written).

With this knowledge, what if he attempted, but could not?  Attempted rape.  Are there any other questions?

[FormerReformer]

Simple question:

Is a 41 year old who actually engages in sexual intercourse with a 12 year old a crime?

Yes or No

Since no one wants to answer, I'll do the rest on my own.

Yes, the would be rape (of a child, a person under 16/14/12, etc., depending on how the law is written).

With this knowledge, what if he attempted, but could not?  Attempted rape.  Are there any other questions?

If I plot the assassination of Josiah Bartlett, going so far as to get the gun, plan his route as learned from last episode of West Wing and place myself on the rooftop at the time his car should be rolling down the road, am I guilty of attempted treason?

[Kerdy]

Simple question:

Is a 41 year old who actually engages in sexual intercourse with a 12 year old a crime?

Yes or No

Since no one wants to answer, I'll do the rest on my own.

Yes, the would be rape (of a child, a person under 16/14/12, etc., depending on how the law is written).

With this knowledge, what if he attempted, but could not?  Attempted rape.  Are there any other questions?

If I plot the assassination of Josiah Bartlett, going so far as to get the gun, plan his route as learned from last episode of West Wing and place myself on the rooftop at the time his car should be rolling down the road, am I guilty of attempted treason?

A TV character?

[FormerReformer]

Simple question:

Is a 41 year old who actually engages in sexual intercourse with a 12 year old a crime?

Yes or No

Since no one wants to answer, I'll do the rest on my own.

Yes, the would be rape (of a child, a person under 16/14/12, etc., depending on how the law is written).

With this knowledge, what if he attempted, but could not?  Attempted rape.  Are there any other questions?

If I plot the assassination of Josiah Bartlett, going so far as to get the gun, plan his route as learned from last episode of West Wing and place myself on the rooftop at the time his car should be rolling down the road, am I guilty of attempted treason?

You are guilty of attempted murder.

I'd be guilty of being off my rocker.

[Kerdy]

Simple question:

Is a 41 year old who actually engages in sexual intercourse with a 12 year old a crime?

Yes or No

Since no one wants to answer, I'll do the rest on my own.

Yes, the would be rape (of a child, a person under 16/14/12, etc., depending on how the law is written).

With this knowledge, what if he attempted, but could not?  Attempted rape.  Are there any other questions?

If I plot the assassination of Josiah Bartlett, going so far as to get the gun, plan his route as learned from last episode of West Wing and place myself on the rooftop at the time his car should be rolling down the road, am I guilty of attempted treason?

You are guilty of attempted murder.

I'd be guilty of being off my rocker.

I altered my previous post.  But thanks for keeping important info out of the details.  That always helps.  Not to mention they are not even remotely similar.  You are wrong.

[Kerdy]

If someone thinks Mike is a cop, but Mike is really a construction worker and they only know each other from the Internet and the other person hates cops and attempts to find and kill Mike, arrives at his door and realizes he is not a cop and leaves, is he still guilty of attempted murder?  Yep.

You can play all the word games you want, but you are still wrong as evidenced in written law.

[FormerReformer]

If someone thinks Mike is a cop, but Mike is really a construction worker and they only know each other from the Internet and the other person hates cops and attempts to find and kill Mike, arrives at his door and realizes he is not a cop and leaves, is he still guilty of attempted murder?  Yep.

You can play all the word games you want, but you are still wrong as evidenced in written law.

Actually, in this example with the information you've provided for this hypothetical I doubt the DA would even be able to get battery to stick.

[Kerdy]

If someone thinks Mike is a cop, but Mike is really a construction worker and they only know each other from the Internet and the other person hates cops and attempts to find and kill Mike, arrives at his door and realizes he is not a cop and leaves, is he still guilty of attempted murder?  Yep.

You can play all the word games you want, but you are still wrong as evidenced in written law.

Actually, in this example with the information you've provided for this hypothetical I doubt the DA would even be able to get battery to stick.

You would be wrong, again.

Of course, it depends on several variables.

[orthonorm]

And here's the fun of the American legal system- one can be guilty of "attempting" a physical act against two purely fictional and imaginary beings. 

Do I have a story to tell you . . . When To Catch a Predator came on (or whatever it was called) I realized how far out from the world I lived that nearly everyone thought such tactics to be reasonable and effective.

Disgusting.

[Shiny]

And here's the fun of the American legal system- one can be guilty of "attempting" a physical act against two purely fictional and imaginary beings. 

Do I have a story to tell you . . . When To Catch a Predator came on (or whatever it was called) I realized how far out from the world I lived that nearly everyone thought such tactics to be reasonable and effective.

Disgusting.

Oh man, don't even get me started on that show.

[podkarpatska]

Many of you are parsing legal terms and are hung up on defining victims and perpetrators. So...for all of you armchair attorneys out there who apparently can't see a criminal charge being justified by only the intent of a would be predator, coupled with some act in furtherence of the would be crime ...Why bother with crime prevention at all? .... Rather than entrap would be predators through use of the same technology which the predators use to obtain flesh and blood victims, it would be better to what - wait until a child is actually raped?

By that illogical construct, why not wait until blood is shed before preemptively using a handgun to stop a crime - not yet fully in progress? After all the would be shooter might be just that - a would be shooter.  Self defense is morally OK one on one, but not as a preemptive tool to prevent a criminal from engaging in heinous activity?

Sin is an easier concept as oftentimes no overt act in furtherance of sinful thoughts is required for a person to have sinned. From a moral theology point of view - in both the western and the eastern church - sins of thought and sins of intent are often offenses to God..If a man fantasizes having sex with a child is that not a sin? If he plans it out and takes steps to effectuate such an act, is that not sinful conduct?

A charge of attempted rape isn't really any different in the secular sense, it is equivalent to sinful thoughts coupled with preliminary actions - even if one fails to follow through with the actual act. That is a mitigation, but it doesn't wipe the conduct away either in the law or in the eyes of the Church.

[orthonorm]

Many of you are parsing legal terms and are hung up on defining victims and perpetrators. So...for all of you armchair attorneys out there who apparently can't see a criminal charge being justified by only the intent of a would be predator, coupled with some act in furtherence of the would be crime ..

I'll get back to you as you are missing a key element here in a one time act of myopia on your part.

[Kerdy]

And here's the fun of the American legal system- one can be guilty of "attempting" a physical act against two purely fictional and imaginary beings. 

Do I have a story to tell you . . . When To Catch a Predator came on (or whatever it was called) I realized how far out from the world I lived that nearly everyone thought such tactics to be reasonable and effective.

Disgusting.

Oh man, don't even get me started on that show.

Compared to being retroactive and having children victimized?

[HabteSelassie]

Greetings in that Divine and Most Precious Name of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!

...

stay blessed,
habte selassie

[Basil 320]

The action of the Holy Eparchial Synod of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America to unfrock Fr. Nicholas having been forwarded to the Ecumenical Patriarchate, its Holy and Sacred Synod acted to unfrock him during the current session of the Synod this week.