Posted on 01/12/2007 2:39:17 PM PST by cgk
No link yet...
I read that Shawns real father has not been in his life since he was a baby. Why doesn't the media spend their time digging up stuff from devlins past.
I will have to replay it but I believe they said he was convicted on the charges.
You are correct.
But images usually get deleted off of a server.
The law right now is still pretty vague on internet stuff. That is why we copyright with the Copyright office all of our images on our web site.
It is cheap to do and it gives a level of protection that is pretty scary when you present a lawyer with an actual copyright certificate.
So, I wonder what they're trying to imply with this info ... that Shawn perhaps *sought out* a sexual relationship with Devlin because his biological father may have been gay?
Maybe they're not trying to imply anything, but I've been rather appalled at some of the media's skepticism about Shawn and his parents and their digging for this kind of info. The Akers certainly seem true blue to me, and Shawn does as well. He seems like a really sweet kid who obviously loves his parents and is glad to be home with them.
I am so disgusted with fox. This is nothing but dirty reporting. Have they no shame? I am sure the parents will put out the correct information within a few days. They need to leave these people alone. They have contributed a huge part of their lives to society and do not deserve this.
Regarding the date of death:
Well, well....the wrong Hornbeck perhaps then?
But it's not just images that are copyrighted. Anything written is copyrighted as well, as well as any created work. By law it is copyrighted the moment it is created, whether it is registered with the Copyright office or not. I really don't see how the owners of archive.org have a leg to stand on.
The problem is if you can get an attorney to take the case. I have run into this before. Then started copyrighting things at the copyright office.
Thanks for the ping. I will write my letter and make my call tomorrow and finish reading up on this. I was out to a bday party tonight so to bed for me. Thanks for your work
But the charge was "attempted".
Just like you can have attempted rape, you can have attempted Sodomy. They were saying it was an attempted sexual offense against a minor.
I'm not saying they didn't say he was convicted. "Alleged" would be the word if he was never convicted. But they also said it was in 2002. He was already dead, apparently.
Talk about a confused mishmash.
see post 2021
oops I mean post 2071
"I am taking it that they may suspect that Shawn was his victim."
That's how I took it too.
From the reporter stuttering... I take it that he did this to a minor in 1994 and I bet his conviction came down in 2000 and then dude died before prison or while he was in prison. - This is my opinion.
I take it that Shawn could have been his victim but right now the reporter or I do not know this but I think they were implying that it could have been Shawn as being his victim.
(poor child he has been through hell if his father did anything to him)
I am going to say this... Devlin is a true blue con artist and a sick bastard. I can only imagine what his defense story will be. I can think of quite a few things that he might pull out of the air. My guess is that this nasty reporter was the one who visited Devlin in prison on Friday and Saturday (as has been reported on STL local news) and the reporter may have got the tip on Shawn's real father from Devlin.
I am not going to post what I think Devlin defense is going to be because I don't want to give his attorneys any ideas. But I bet when it all comes out it will be some story that is way out there with a bunch of BS that will fit in and will be playout to work with some real facts about Devlin's and Shawn's family lives before he snatched Shawn up.
At this point, I'm not going to take from it that they want us to think the victim was Shawn.
BTW, notice the transcript you have starts out saying convicted of sodomy and then changes to "ATTEMPTED sodomy" when the guy repeats himself.
Perhaps it could have been Shawn, but they both said, there are no details available about the victim, at least not in this report. They are the type of tabloid "journos" who would bring this up no matter whether it had to do with Shawn or the kidnapping or not.
One could just as well guess this way...not that the father knew Devlin, but that Shawn was abused by his real dad and therefore was prime to be abused again by Devlin, and that the element of being a repeat victim is the bizarre twist, not that the two men knew each other and somehow cooperated with each other.
This is all so irresponsible by Newscorp. aka NYP and FNC. It is practically nauseating.
There will be a glaring problem with that type of defense. What's the story going to be in the kidnapping of Ben Ownby??
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.