Posted on 06/04/2005 2:22:39 PM PDT by NRA2BFree
A man who confessed to raping and beating another man he met on an Internet chat room was sentenced to nine years behind bars.
Donald Livingston, 29, told a judge that he and his boyfriend, Charlie Johnson, posed as a 12-year-old girl on the chat room. He said in court Friday that they did that to lure the victim to a park at night.
Livingston said they lured the victim, a 23-year-old Aztec man, to a public park, where the two disguised themselves in black and attacked the man.
Judge Thomas Hynes sentenced Livingston to nine years behind bars for the violent nature of the crime and the lack of remorse.
Johnson, whom authorities say also admitted to the crime, will be sentenced later this month.
I always wondered who Ned Beatty's stunt double was.
The only evidence in this article that the raped man was intending to meet a 12-year-old is the word of the convicted felon who raped him. The convicted rapist may have been hoping that this claim would make his own crime seem less heinous to the sentencing judge. It is dismaying to me that when certain subjects come up (child molestation being one) many FReepers get themselves all worked up into an indignant lather, and let rationality and healthy scepticism go out the window. Let's try to be smarter here folks!
Ping to my reply #42
Ping to my reply #42.
Ping to my reply #42.
Ping to my reply #42.
"I'd rather live next door to a gay man than a pedophile."
I totally agree, but these gays also raped the guy. They did to the pedophile what he was trying to do to the girl, but they are also violent sexual predator all the same.
the child predator is the sickest. a child predator hurts innocent children. If the only people that the homosexuals physically hurt are child predators, then I really dont care about the homosexuals.
Ping to my reply #42.
Ping to my reply #42.
Ping to my reply #42.
Ping to my reply #42.
There was no girl. And how do you know the man raped was a pedophile? Because a rapist said so? Think!
Ping to my reply #42.
It all came out in the police report at trial. The pedophile admitted that's why he was in the park at that time of the morning. He would have had sex with the girl had there been one. Btw, there were 2 homosexuals that raped the man.
"There was no girl. And how do you know the man raped was a pedophile? Because a rapist said so? Think!
"
The report said the The gay men had lured the pedophile to the park by acting as a 12 year old girl. Now, YOU THINK, and ask what was that first man there for? A 12 year old girl.
I agree. Anyone who would hurt a child is very sick, not to mention dangerous.
OK, that's possibly some new information, but my point still stands. The discussion on this thread concerned the information available on this thread. I never said the raped man was not a pedophile. Just that FReepers were jumping to conclusions based on suspect information in a way that I find typical for this site sometimes.
Please re-read my reply to you, and also my reply #42.
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.