SCOTT RITTER appearing on CNN's 10pm show

cnn ^ | 1-22-3 | self

[Squantos]

Brawwwwwhahahahahww !~~~ hold the pickle ~~~ Now that's funny !!

[Mo1]

Donna Rice from the Gary Hart days is really big in trying to stop this kind of stuff and have parents put filters on their kids computer to keep them away from these types of sites and preverts like Scott Ritter

[Bonaparte]

I forgot to add that the perfect example of "sealed" records being "unsealed" would be Linda Tripp.

[The Great Satan]

So it appears that his "probation" was essentially nothing but a warning from the police.

So it wasn't probation. You can't be put on probation if you're not even charged. It's probably pretty straightforward. Ritter got snagged in a sting. Very likely, this was a generic sex chatroom, and the "14 year-old bit" was thrown in at the last minute to facilitate an entrapment. But, given the entrapment -- which likely would have been a mitigating factor to a jury -- it wasn't particularly prosecutable, so the cops let him off with a talking to. When he did it again, they pressed charges. But the case still wasn't that serious -- 16 years old, entrapment, no intercourse even proposed, no actual act, no criminal record -- so Ritter's lawyer managed to plea bargain it, taking six months counseling in exchange for expunging the record. Now that it's in the public eye, the grandstanding DA knows he's going to get some heat -- even though the disposition of the case was probably nothing unusual -- so he fires his ADA. I suspect that's about the size of it.

[HAL9000]

You're right. If the judge had intended to keep the cops, prosecutors and Ritter from talking about the case, he would have issued a protective order. Dismissing the case and sealing the case file doesn't prevent anyone from talking about the facts of the case.

Perhaps someone will send the case file to www.TheSmokingGun.com. They know how to handle these types of documents and protect their sources.

[Mo1]

[He clearly was guilty of solicitation of sex with a minor, and yet he was only charged with class B child endangerment -- and this was his second offense. Don't know about you, GS, but this doesn't pass my smell test.]

I agree ..

He was given a "warning" the first time .. he does it again, gets arrested and somehow get off with just a slap on the hand???

[HAL9000]

Donna Rice from the Gary Hart days...

...has a credibility problem too.

[PeaceBeWithYou]

As promised:

[Mo1]

I see your point but she seems to have cleaned her act up from those days

Besides she is not giving marital advice, she is trying to protect children

[Howlin]

LOL........as seen by himself, of course!

You're great at that!

[Bonaparte]

You could be right, GS. In New York, absolutely nothing would surprise me, even winking at solicitation of minors. But even in a state like NY, it's hard to understand why the police would devote manpower to internet stings like this if the resulting case cannot be won by the DA. When there are murderers at large, why would they even bother?

[Mo1]

*L* .. very good

Howlin you know this will NOT shut Ritter up .. he doesn't think he did anything wrong. Plus he sounds like a control freak

[HAL9000]

Protecting children is a nobel and worthy cause, but is Donna Rice the best person to be it's chief spokesman? No.

[Mo1]

but is Donna Rice the best person to be it's chief spokesman? No.

Like I said, I see you point

[jetdogy]

To find out all about Aaron join the best online NewsNight club, The NewsNighters.

---

Georgette (club owner)


http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aaronbrown/

[Bonaparte]

Somehow I don't think we've heard the end of this.

[Monty22]

Aaron Brown was more outraged with Scott Ritter than he was on 9/11.. And that's no joke.

[Monty22]

What an a-hole kook!!!!!!! Gawd oh mighty, he makes will pitt from du sound humble.

[Catspaw]

I'm obligated, both ethically and legally, not to talk about that case.

Lie. 

He's not bound any any code of ethics.  As Brown pointed out, he can talk about the case all he wants.  He's the DEFENDANT.  The judge in the case, the prosecutor and his defense attorney ARE bound by a code of ethics not to talk about the case.  But Scott can talk about it--and he could request that the case be unsealed.  He's not going to do that.

And we should never forget that, when a case is dismissed, what the law says is that, by dismissing the case, it brings with it the presumption of innocence. And by sealing the file, it's designed to prevent the stigma attached with any unsubstantiated allegations from arising. So, as far as I'm concerned, as far as everyone should be concerned, this is a dead issue.

Lie.

The case was dismissed because Ritter complied with the terms of the agreement, including court-ordered counseling and he didn't reoffend during the time the case was open.  It wasn't dismissed because of a "presumption of innocence" or if the allegations were "unsubstantiated"    (and without the court files, how are we to judge whether he's innocent or guilty or if the allegations are indeed unsubstantiated).  I'd like to see the cops on TV talking about the case, but unless Scott okays the release of the case file, it's never going to happen.

This is not an extrajudicial proceeding, Aaron.

Interesting choice of words.  "Extrajudicial proceeding" are lawyer words.  Ritter isn't a lawyer.

Well, Aaron, you know I'm not a lawyer. And have I sought legal counsel on this. And I'm strictly abiding by legal counsel.

The same lawyer that cut the sweetheart deal for Scottie boy? 

the rule of law must apply here

OMG, the creep thinks he's a cross between Ken Starr and Katherine Harris. 

I was supposed to be on an airplane yesterday flying to Baghdad on a personal initiative that could have had great ramifications in regards to issues of war and peace.

You mean William Scott Ritter Jr. was going to Iraq to solve the crisis?  And he and he alone could negotiate peace?  Wow, that's grandiose thinking at its best.

If I went to Baghdad and tried to talk responsibly about issues of war and peace, this issue would have come up. And it would have been a distraction and it would have actually been a disservice. There are people in Baghdad right now pursuing the initiative that I started. And I want to give them every chance of success. I don't want to provide any distractions.

In other words, Ritter's usefulness to Saddam is over.  He's not going to be the darling of the ultra-left.  His income from speaking engagements is going to dry up--he's looking at no income & I don't think Burger King would hire him.

BROWN: Well, one way or another, I hope all this stuff gets cleared up and you can get back to talking about the issues you care about. But, again, I'm not quite sure how that's going to happen.

Ain't that the truth.

 

 

[Petronski]

Thanks for the help with the transcript link. At the time you had posted that assistance, I had already retired to bed.