Posted on 08/17/2007 4:50:32 PM PDT by Private_Sector_Does_It_Better
FARGO, N.D. - A woman has pleaded guilty to having sex in a public place, with a man who allegedly wore a kilt and exposed himself to passing vehicles.
Chandra Schaefer, 20, of Fargo, was accused of having sex with Nathan Blair, 24, of Moorhead, Minn., on a car and then near a pine tree in late July
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
Bravo Sierra! Since when does the DA not have the discretion to charge or not to charge?
He should have plead insanity.
Next thing you know, you will be posting a picture of Helen Thomas nude...
Oh, now I can't get THAT image...I'm ruined.
5.56mm
OMG, I’m poised to hit the abuse button just for putting that phrase into my mind. I have to go run a drill fron ear to ear now. Redneck lobotomy.
What did you think of that movie?
Sorry for the confusion. The apology wasn’t for the charges but for the sentencing. She agreed that, according to all the intervies, psychologists, etc, he shouldn’t be placed on the SO registry but rather that because one of the kids present wasn’t yet 12, there was no choice but to sentence him to it.
There are 3 things that would require someone to register - the likelihood that he would reoffend, victim under the age of 12, or another one (honestly, I can’t remember what that one was, I was pretty upset at that point knowing how things were going to go). He didn’t meet the other 2 but one of the kids wasn’t quite 12 at the time. There were about a half dozen neighboor kids there that night, playing video games, goofing around. They kept telling the girl to quit and she wouldn’t so he thought he would ‘gross her out’ (his words) and she’d stop, so he did it back to her. It was only the age of the one kid - just a few months shy of a 12th b’day - that did it. Prosecution agreed with our lawyer that he shouldn’t be registered but the law requires it because of the age.
What the hell, does a pine tree have to do with anything?
Interviews, not intervies. Sheesh, I need to go to bed.
The charges had already been filed and he’d already been found guilty of indecent exposure by this time. We had to go back 2 more times because our lawyer was really trying to avoid the registry thing. She kept hoping she could find something that would not require that but in the end there was nothing she could do.
Obviously there is “wiggle room” if your son was persecuted, I mean prosecuted, and the girl wasn’t. If you have two people committing the same act under similar circumstances and the State goes after one but not the other that is not equal protection under the law. That is “some animals are more equal then others.”
Even if you pursue it there’s no guarantee. What ever you choose, God bless you and good luck!
GB
I believe I understandify.
Well, the consequences of a the crime may be set in stone, but wouldn’t some discretion come into play as far as whether to even proceed? Obviously there is some, or the girl would be in the same spot?
Now we’re going to have to change the spelling to “probe-ation”.
I was begining to think I was the only one that got that, had to explain it to the wife though after I busted out laughing.
Now that would be over the line.
Series, we have a neighbor that looks just like this guy (with his pants on of course) and this pic came around to me. I had to save it (6-7 months already) for just the right time to post here.
Here's an antodote:
Cheers!
There are limits. No one wants a picture of Helen Thomas nude. In fact, posting one can get you banned from FR for life.
However ...
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.