Posted on 04/03/2006 4:35:37 PM PDT by wagglebee
EDMONTON, Alberta, April 3, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) – An Alberta judge has ruled that adults can legally have obscene sexual conversations with children, so long as they don’t try to meet the child.
Justice John Agrios acquitted a 32-year-old man of the charge of Internet luring on Friday, saying the explicit sexual chatting he carried on with a 12-year-old Ontario girl in 2003 was not illegal because he did not arrange a meeting with the girl. The accused, Christopher Legare, said he didn’t intend to meet the girl, although he talked to her about having sex and called her parents’ home.
“The conduct, as morally reprehensible as it is, is not caught by the legislation,” said Agrios. “I simply cannot find an indication the accused was luring the child.”
Crown prosecutor Steve Bilodeau, who specializes in Internet crimes, argued Legare’s obscene text conversations with the child were part of a “grooming” process online predators use to encourage children to meet, reported the Star Phoenix Saturday.
Justice Agrios did not agree. He said there must be direct questions about the child’s home situation, suggested meetings, or questions about the child running away before the conversation would constitute luring under the 2002 Internet luring law.
The girl’s father, who contacted police after discovering her conversations with Legare, told the Canadian Press he was sickened by the ruling.
“You’ve got to be kidding me…my stomach is turning,” he said.
To express concerns to Alberta’s Minister of Justice Ron Stevens:
(403) 216-5421
(780) 422-6621
calgary.glenmore@assembly.ab.ca
Nice.
DISCUSSION ABOUT:
"Alberta Judge Rules Explicit Sex Talk to Children is Legal"
Most leftists don't care at all about morality, therefore a ruling of legality makes everything alright in their twisted view.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To be included in or removed from the MORAL ABSOLUTES PINGLIST, please FreepMail wagglebee.
And Alberta is the conservative providence?
Does anybody think this insane ruling makes sense? I read crap like this and think that the nation can't possible continue to thrive.
It's Canada, I wouldn't exactly say they're "thriving."
The judge is blaming the legislators for drafting the law poorly.
WTF? This judged oughta be lynched.
That makes me want to vomit. How sick and twisted to you have to be to try and talk sex with a kid?
Pinging Michael Jackson.
You would really have to read the statute and the legislative history to answer that question. If the legislature goofed up--and they do--it's not up to judges to make something illegal that wasn't illegal in the statute. When dem appointees do that, it's judicial activism.
It may be a perfectly reasonable ruling or you may be right. But neither of us have the data to draw a conclusion.
So improve the law. Isn't that all he is saying, that the law did not forbid it? By all means change the law -- and fast.
Unfreakingbelievable.
Can you believe this? What is the world coming to? Considering the fact that the original Gay Rights Platform called for the elimination of all age of consent laws, and the various groups trying to foist "intergenerational sex" as normal and natural, this is but one step on the way to the total destruction of all sexual restraint and morality.
Combine this with the recent porn threads, and it's easy to see that there are plenty of people who think that sexual morality is worthless and indeed, dangerous. People sling the words "Taliban" and other like insults as soon as someone states that there should be limits to sexual expression.
I am saddened greatly by this. And sickened.
Contrast this with how strictly bans against politically incorrect speech are enforced. If adults say something un-PC among themselves, the Polizei come in storming like troopers to stop it. But an adult trying to exploit a child is protected in his speech.
at the least...another case of "it's legal, but it just ain't right".
And would get a can of Whoop-@ss opened up on the perp did it in Texas and
got caught by his neighbors.
And Heaven help him if the girl's father got a-holt of him.
I was also on one of the recent porn threads, it was unbelievably depressing.
I especially like the comments of "I defend porn but I wouldn't want my daughter in it." It's ok as long as it's somebody else's daughter.
Idiots.
You are exactly right.
I do think the judge may have had no other choice, given the law as written (we just don't know enough), but I certainly agree with you on this point. Canada has become a sex tourist destination. The former Liberal government refused to change the age of consent to 16 from its current 14 (a 14 year old can legally consent to sex with a 50 year old).
There are websites that detail the various ages of consent in each state, country, etc. and Canada's low age has made it a magnet.
What lobby group was behind the former government's refusal to change the law?
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.