Posted on 06/13/2022 7:53:40 AM PDT by grundle
An Alabama man who planted flowers on the gravesite of his fiancee and was arrested at the direction of the woman’s disapproving father was found guilty of littering this week.
About a month after Winston “Winchester” Hagans got engaged, his fiancee, Hannah Ford, was killed in a three-car crash in January 2021 that shattered what was supposed to be the happiest time of their lives. To honor the 27-year-old, Hagans placed a planter box full of fresh flowers and photos of the two of them on her grave in Auburn, Ala.
But earlier this year, Hagans was arrested on a charge of criminal littering. City officials had reassured him that he could put the planter at Ford’s gravesite unless there was a complaint. Then he discovered that a complaint had been filed — by the Rev. Tom Ford, his fiancee’s father.
“The police don’t enforce the law unless the owner of the plot tries to do something about it,” Hagans told The Washington Post earlier this year, adding that his late fiancee’s father did not approve of their relationship.
Hagans was convicted Thursday on one count of criminal littering and ordered to pay about $300 in fines and court costs, the Opelika-Auburn News reported. The 32-year-old man was also given a suspended jail sentence of 30 days that will remain suspended as long as Hagans does not place any more flowers or planter boxes on his fiancee’s grave.
(Excerpt) Read more at webcache.googleusercontent.com ...
AS YOU WELL KNOW, He was told repeatedly he he was committing a crime and could get arrested. So he absolutely understand that it was a crime. There's your "mens rea". Once again you conveniently ignore facts. That's being disingenuous.
I just don't consider this a "crime" in the normal meaning of the word.
Well the law doesn't care what your feelings or definitions (litter) or considerations are.
“You have to be of a mind to do evil before it’s really a crime.”
Nope. Mens rea is about intent and the individual’s frame of mind when a crime is committed. Unintentional criminal acts fall into two basic categories, “mistake in fact,” and “mistake in law.” A mistake in fact applies to a person whose act technically fits the definition of a crime, but the person is unaware of a critical factor necessary for intent.
But neither apply in this case as Winston was informed of the law, said he would continue and did continue violating the law.
I guess the fact that i'm not a "Reverend" just whizzed past yours.
What *I* would do really has nothing to do with what a "Reverend" should do.
I don't claim the sort of piety that a "Reverend" should exhibit.
The "Reverend" should have acted like a Christian. He should have followed the religion he preaches.
:)
“Have you ever visited an Alabama cemetery on Decoration Day?
I can show you a rural Alabama cemetery where five generations of my family are buried that can get pretty tacky on the third Sunday in May which has been our Decoration Day for the past one hundred years.”
How does it look a week after?
“You have to be of a mind to do evil before it’s really a crime. “
Ignorance of the law is not an excuse. You don’t know that? What you are talking about is if I pick up the wrong umbrella leaving a restaurant. It would not be a crime (theft) if I truly thought it was mine and someone else’s looked like mine. I did not have “criminal intent”.
A Yankee soldier stationed at Fort Moultrie in South Carolina fell in love with a beautiful southern girl from a wealthy Charleston family. They met in secret. The father forbid her seeing him She snuck out at night to meet him. The father found out and had her locked in her room with the windows boarded. She refused food left outside and wouldn’t respond to any of the servants at the door. The father said leave her alone she will come around. Finally after weeks of no response the father entered the room. The girl had died from yellow fever, bitten by a mosquito that had made it through the cracks in the boarded up window. The wealthy father had three graves dug in the local church graveyard. She was buried late at night with the other two graves just filled with dirt and unoccupied. No headstone or marking was placed so the soldier would never know which she was buried in. He found out and left flowers on all three. To this day one of the graves has an underground spring which pushes trickles of water above ground That is said to be the real grave with the tears of the soldier and his love still flowing. The soldier was Edgar Alan Poe. And that is one of the versions of the story of Annabel Lee.
Annabel Lee
BY EDGAR ALLAN POE
It was many and many a year ago,
In a kingdom by the sea,
That a maiden there lived whom you may know
By the name of Annabel Lee;
And this maiden she lived with no other thought
Than to love and be loved by me.
I was a child and she was a child,
In this kingdom by the sea,
But we loved with a love that was more than love—
I and my Annabel Lee—
With a love that the wingèd seraphs of Heaven
Coveted her and me.
And this was the reason that, long ago,
In this kingdom by the sea,
A wind blew out of a cloud, chilling
My beautiful Annabel Lee;
So that her highborn kinsmen came
And bore her away from me,
To shut her up in a sepulchre
In this kingdom by the sea.
The angels, not half so happy in Heaven,
Went envying her and me—
Yes!—that was the reason (as all men know,
In this kingdom by the sea)
That the wind came out of the cloud by night,
Chilling and killing my Annabel Lee.
But our love it was stronger by far than the love
Of those who were older than we—
Of many far wiser than we—
And neither the angels in Heaven above
Nor the demons down under the sea
Can ever dissever my soul from the soul
Of the beautiful Annabel Lee;
For the moon never beams, without bringing me dreams
Of the beautiful Annabel Lee;
And the stars never rise, but I feel the bright eyes
Of the beautiful Annabel Lee;
And so, all the night-tide, I lie down by the side
Of my darling—my darling—my life and my bride,
In her sepulchre there by the sea—
In her tomb by the sounding sea.
Just because people tell me stuff, doesn't mean I believe them. If you told me what he did was a "crime", I would think you were batty.
So he absolutely understand that it was a crime.
That's not how "understand" works. Telling someone something does not make them "understand" it.
People tell me stuff all the time that isn't true.
Well the law doesn't care what your feelings or definitions (litter) or considerations are.
The "LAW" didn't care about people's opinions on hiding Jews or escaped slaves either, but fortunately they didn't go along with immoral laws.
“I guess the fact that i’m not a “Reverend” just whizzed past yours.
What *I* would do really has nothing to do with what a “Reverend” should do.”
I guess you forgot you referred to what “Christians”. should do. That is, turn the other cheek. I surmise that you are not a Christian willing to turn the other cheek
Like litter. They need to *ARREST*! all those people because *THE LAW*!!!!!
“That’s not how “understand” works. Telling someone something does not make them “understand” it.”
He understood. He told them to shove the laws.
You neectonget me out of your head!
I'm guessing you drink and post...all day long.
Sure it is! Just ask Hillary, who wiped her server. "Like with a cloth?"
Seriously, that is bad logic and bad philosophy.
"THE LAW" is so complex not even the experts understand it, and to think the rank and file public can grasp it is just ridiculous.
What you have there is a pithy little saying by another arrogant judge who didn't want to explain why he was being a horse's @$$.
I did not have “criminal intent”.
Neither did the man putting flowers on the grave of the woman who was to be his wife.
“Like litter.”
No. It may look like litter but legally it is not.
Besides, it is all cleaned up.
“Neither did the man putting flowers on the grave of the woman who was to be his wife.”
It wasn’t flowers that caused the problem. It was the rotting planters and photos.
“What you have there is a pithy little saying by another arrogant judge who didn’t want to explain why he was being a horse’s @$$.”
Who followed the law instead of acting as counselor as you desire.
The Reverend should know very well how a Christian should behave, and he ought not require advice from me in order to be informed on the matter.
“Telling someone something does not make them “understand” it.”
We are not talking about some low IQ mentally handicapped person who could not “understand” plain language. He was not judged mentally unfit to stand trial. You have to use absurd examples to make your point. That means you are flailing.
Once again, what you think about the law matters not.
“”THE LAW” is so complex not even the experts understand it, and to think the rank and file public can grasp it is just ridiculous.”
Even little kids know the basics of property rights.
I don't know what he told them, but if you have a transcript, please post it. It would be interesting reading.
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.