Posted on 11/01/2015 11:02:25 AM PST by Kevin in California
Because you can say anything and it doesn’t make it true. Unless they can connect what you say to physical evidence of some kind it’s meaningless.
My parish priest often tells us, when you yield to your body, your body only wants more.
I understand that, but in four years, they couldn't get any physical proof?
Easily. If he’s talking about stuff he did last month, last year, in a foreign country, there’s no evidence to be had, it’s gone, inaccessible or meaningless. Usually what you need is for them to talk about the future in enough detail you can set surveillance and a sting, or they give away where evidence (like the videos they found) are stored. Sometimes you get enough of a detectable pattern from them talking about the past you can predict the future (if every time he goes to city X he talks about what’s available at a location they can narrow down then they’ve got him). But most of what recording people is about is waiting for that piece of information that let’s them get physical evidence, and then the tape is really only useful to get a warrant and help establish an ownership chain.
#7 - in truth, it’s very short, however the facts also support that it will be a death sentence for fogler. By “snu-snu” and not the fun variety.
This has happened over and over again with the FBI, mostly with protecting informants.
A recent incident I seem to recall might have been involved with the Whitey Bulger case, and there were 2 men convicted of a crime (the FBI knowing they didn’t do it), and IIRC, one of the men died in prison, the other was released after it came out that the FBI was protecting the real murderer, and helped set this guy up, after more than 30 years in prison.
Mark
This is dangerous territory. Fogle was never charged with actual physical contact with minors. What the author here is evidently relying upon is that his Internet presence is that of a fruit loop; thus, nobody would bother to sue for defamation. But on the elements of that tort, Fogle may very well have a case, if he so chose.
I have to correct myself, so the yoke’s on me I guess.
I thought the guy was charged with possession of child porn, but he was actually charged with child porn plus some sort of conspiracy-related charge regarding the production of child porn by another criminal; plus he was additionally charged with at least one instance of sex with a minor in the PLaza hotel in New York City (the girl was 17); plus there was also talk from prosecutors of Fogle using his Subway-related business trips for sex with more minors, but I’m not sure these later instances made it into the indictment.
But in any case, I was wrong.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.