Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Court ordered Scott Ritter to attend counseling for sex offenders
WTEN.com (Albany, NY) ^ | January 20, 2002

Posted on 01/20/2003 3:25:45 PM PST by HAL9000

Delmar Weapons Inspector in Hot Water

(updated: January 20th, 5:50pm) The spotlight is back on former UN Weapons Inspector and Delmar native, Scott Ritter. But it's not over Iraq instead its over charges he talked with an underage girl on the Internet.

The Daily Gazette broke the story over the weekend. The paper says Ritter was arrested in June of 2001 after having a sexual conversation on the Internet with someone he "thought" was an underage girl. The girl turned out to be an undercover investigator.

Sources tell NEWS10 that Ritter contacted what he thought was a teenage girl on the internet for the purpose of a sexual interlude not once, but twice within a three month period back in 2001. Ritter also underwent court-ordered sex offender counseling from an Albany psychologist.



TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Front Page News; News/Current Events; US: New York
KEYWORDS: burgerking; heybaby; internetpredator; itsjustsex; letschatnow; pedophile; ritter; saddamscabinboy; scottritter; sex; sexchats; traitor; trenchcoattraitor; underage; uninspector; whatruwearing; yobabyyobabyyo
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 241-246 next last
To: TLBSHOW
I'm not up on the William Pitt scam.
161 posted on 01/20/2003 8:17:21 PM PST by Fred Mertz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies]

To: TLBSHOW
WilliamPitt (12862 posts)
Jan-20-03, 11:01 PM (ET)
Reply to post #43

49. That's what I'm doing
I'm mortally sure this is bullshit one one level or another, but the wise thing to do is lay back and let it work itself out. NewsMax posted and then immediately retracted the story, so that is something.
162 posted on 01/20/2003 8:20:54 PM PST by kcvl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies]

To: Fred Mertz
http://www.democraticunderground.com/duforum/DCForumID60/29679.html
163 posted on 01/20/2003 8:21:49 PM PST by kcvl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies]

To: The Great Satan
(the guy offered to show his wiener to a 16-year old temptress in an internet chat room)

Where did you get the information that the baiter portrayed herself as a 16-year old?

164 posted on 01/20/2003 8:24:48 PM PST by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Fred Mertz
He sure is a scammer!
165 posted on 01/20/2003 8:27:05 PM PST by TLBSHOW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies]

To: kcvl
Thanks, I'm putting on my hip waders and will explore that DU link.
166 posted on 01/20/2003 8:27:08 PM PST by Fred Mertz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 163 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
CG huh?

This must be the showdown thread: TLBSHOW VS. Mr. Pediphile.

167 posted on 01/20/2003 8:27:39 PM PST by demlosers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: Fred Mertz
LOL!
168 posted on 01/20/2003 8:29:26 PM PST by kcvl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 166 | View Replies]

To: kcvl
I can read his BS. What is your point?

Here he is too

William Rivers Pitt posted 01-20-2003 08:51 PM
Chef

Thanks. I just threw up on myself. Thanks.


169 posted on 01/20/2003 8:29:55 PM PST by TLBSHOW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies]

To: piasa
In the Abscam case the bribes were actually taken. True, still playacting, and questionable for that. In fact, Abscam may have done a grevious harm to accountability. It gave the FBI a stronger franchise, and weakened the electorate's.

In the Nanny-state, the Nannies hold the power.

170 posted on 01/20/2003 8:31:41 PM PST by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: FreeReign
This was posted earlier. More recent stories say something about an earlier incident where Ritter supposedly solicited a 14 year-old, but was let off with a caution. However, I don't think the dust has really settled on these stories yet, so I would adopt a wait-and-see approach regarding the specifics.
171 posted on 01/20/2003 8:32:52 PM PST by The Great Satan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 164 | View Replies]

To: Fred Mertz
Have fun and be careful not to let it "seep in".
172 posted on 01/20/2003 8:34:40 PM PST by davisdoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 166 | View Replies]

To: The Great Satan
We wouldn't want to leap to conclusions here, now would we?

If you had a sixteen year-old daughter with a beer belly and hairy chested cop physique....blah, blah, blah

173 posted on 01/20/2003 8:37:33 PM PST by Fred Mertz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 171 | View Replies]

To: demlosers
Embarassing, isn't it?
174 posted on 01/20/2003 8:37:47 PM PST by Howlin (I'm Elizabeth Taylor, so now you can tell everybody you know me, too!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
Technically, he's not a child abuser. He's more of a voyeur, according to the reports. He's only- legally speaking- a child abuser if he gets his hands on a real kid.

They have only caught him in the act of something like "intent of indecent exposure in the presence of a minor," certainly not "intent to rape," or "intent to kidnap," or such. That doesn't mean perps don't intend to do something to the victim beyond flashing at them, it just means that the proof is only sufficient for the lesser charge. In one case duct tape and/or rope was found in the guy's car and that was used to open the possibility that he planned something more sinister, but even with that not much was done to him.

The charges are limited unless the perp is very explicit or unless the cops could use a real kid, which of course they can't. In the case of a 16 year old kid, a female cop who was naturally baby-faced could pass for a 16 year old and could enable the sting to go further, making clear to the perp she was 16, worrying theatrically about "being late" and "mom and dad finding out" and so as to raise the bar enough to insure the jury wouldn't think he was mistaken or under the impression she was older. But I don't know if that's the case here and I doubt it got that far.

175 posted on 01/20/2003 8:39:48 PM PST by piasa (Son! I say, son! Bring me that there squirrelly-rifle over yonder!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: Fred Mertz

X Offender

(Harry/Valentine) 

I saw you standing on the corner, you looked so big and fine.
I really wanted to go out with you, so when you smiled
I laid my heart on the line.
You read me my rights and then you said "Let's go" and nothing more.
I thought of my nights, and how they were.
They were filled with
I know you wouldn't go.
You'd watch my heart burst then you'd step in.
I had to know so I asked, you just had to laugh.
We sat in the night with my hands cuffed at my side.
I look at your life and your style
I wanted nothing more.
I know you wouldn't go.
You'd watch my heart burst then you'd step in.
I had to know so I asked, you just had to laugh.
Walking the line, you were a marksman.
Told me that law, like wine, is ageless.
Public defender
You had to admit you wanted the love of a sex offender.
I know you wouldn't go.
You'd watch my heart burst then you'd step in.
I had to know so I asked, you just had to laugh.
My vision in blue, I call you from inside my cell.
And in the trial, you were there with your badge and rubber boots.
I think all the time how I'm going to perpatrate love with you.
And when I get out, there's no doubt I'll be sex offensive to you. 

176 posted on 01/20/2003 8:40:32 PM PST by The Great Satan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 173 | View Replies]

To: kcvl
On the message board Capitol Grilling, a freeper who is known to be close to Ann Coulter is being accused of being behind the Ritter smear.

A slight exaggeration, I'd say. On at least the first fact.

177 posted on 01/20/2003 8:40:40 PM PST by Howlin (I'm Elizabeth Taylor, so now you can tell everybody you know me, too!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 159 | View Replies]

To: TLBSHOW
Who are YOU yelling at??! I only posted to you because you were posting to me.
178 posted on 01/20/2003 8:40:48 PM PST by kcvl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies]

Since this is true, how can it be a smear...
179 posted on 01/20/2003 8:42:30 PM PST by mewzilla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 177 | View Replies]

To: kcvl
No I wasn't. And thanks for the post!
180 posted on 01/20/2003 8:46:25 PM PST by TLBSHOW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 178 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 241-246 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson