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

Skip to comments.

Pedophile Suspect Lured, Beaten By Victim's Family
cbs13 ^ | Aug 18, 2009 6 | staff

Posted on 08/19/2009 7:16:49 AM PDT by tlb

The Sacramento Police Department says that Christopher Guzman went to Garcia Bend Park on Monday night, believing that he was meeting up with a 14-year-old girl he had met on a social networking website.

"This would've been the first physical contact between the suspect and the victim," said Sacramento Police Department Sgt. Norm Leong.

As Guzman waited in his car, police say five or six of the girl's family members walked up and began attacking him and his vehicle. Guzman tried to drive away, but the family members chased him, forced him out of his car and held him for police, who arrested Guzman but did not detain the relatives.

"[Guzman] was bloody from that," Sgt. Leong said. "We'll review it and see if what they did was reasonable given the circumstances in that they were trying to detain him."

Police said that Guzman was planning to videotape the young girl in a sex act.

(Excerpt) Read more at cbs13.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Extended News; US: California
KEYWORDS: ambush; pedophile
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 161-169 next last
To: BuckeyeTexan
"If after reading the mother’s statement, you are willing to say that you’re no longer absolutely certain they broke the law, then I no longer have an issue with your comments."

If indeed that's the mother's statement, sure...there were exigent circumstances which were not at all communicated in the original article.

101 posted on 08/19/2009 8:52:17 AM PDT by Joe 6-pack (Que me amat, amet et canem meum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: Morgana
"In most states it is 16, I have never heard of it being 14."

Now. And even that varies from state to state from 16 to 18. plus there are other factors, such as the age of the other person involved.

Alaska for example reads :

a) An offender commits the crime of sexual abuse of a minor in the second degree if (1) being 16 years of age or older, the offender engages in sexual penetration with a person who is 13, 14, or 15 years of age and at least three years younger than the offender, or aids, induces, causes or encourages a person who is 13, 14, or 15 years of age and at least three years younger than the offender to engage in sexual penetration with another person...

Arkansas

The age of consent is 16, with some close in age exemptions.

Details: The age is minimum 16 for a minor (<18) with a major more than 20 years old. Under 18, the younger must not be less than 14, or if so, there is a defense if the minor is not more 4 years younger if above 12, not more 3 years younger if under 12. Sexual intercourse of a major and a minor under 14 is a rape.

There you go, 14. It all depends how the state laws are written.

You can read them all here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_North_America

102 posted on 08/19/2009 8:53:59 AM PDT by Nathan Zachary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: Nathan Zachary

Yes, Joe has explained how he made his determination that the family acted illegally. Like Joe, I assumed everyone else had the same information I did. I googled information about the case before I posted to Joe just to be sure that this wasn’t a case of vigilante justice. I don’t have anymore issues with Joe. He now knows the mother’s side of the of the story and agrees that if her story is true then the family didn’t seek vigilante justice.


103 posted on 08/19/2009 8:54:03 AM PDT by BuckeyeTexan (Integrity, Character, Leadership, and Loyalty matter - Be an example, no matter the cost.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: AppyPappy

My cat was walking across my keyboard and that’s how that chat got on my computer...


104 posted on 08/19/2009 8:54:23 AM PDT by Norman Conquest (If this plan is so good, why are they using FAKE DOCTORS to sell it?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Norman Conquest

Le chat, c’est Francais.


105 posted on 08/19/2009 8:56:12 AM PDT by Norman Conquest (If this plan is so good, why are they using FAKE DOCTORS to sell it?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan

Ugh!!!!

“When they got there” (not their).

I was typing quickly. I promise I’m literate. How embarrassing.


106 posted on 08/19/2009 8:58:19 AM PDT by BuckeyeTexan (Integrity, Character, Leadership, and Loyalty matter - Be an example, no matter the cost.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan

Read that post again VERY carefully. The sarcastic humor therein is very very dry ... and very funny.


107 posted on 08/19/2009 9:00:59 AM PDT by ctdonath2 (flag@whitehouse.gov may bounce messages but copies may be kept. Informants are still solicited.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Joe 6-pack

I appreciate your very dry humor.
I grieve that it is lost on others.


108 posted on 08/19/2009 9:03:49 AM PDT by ctdonath2 (flag@whitehouse.gov may bounce messages but copies may be kept. Informants are still solicited.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: monday

I didn’t jump to any conclusions. I have a good education and I’m not bone-headed. I also don’t have any trouble with reading comprehension.

Joe has said that he wasn’t being sarcastic. My original issue with Joe’s comment was that he condemned the family’s actions as illegal. He made it clear that he didn’t want to see them prosecuted.

My point is that they didn’t act illegally and there is no need for the prosecutor to overlook their actions. Don’t assume that we’re ignorant or incapable of understanding what we read.


109 posted on 08/19/2009 9:06:54 AM PDT by BuckeyeTexan (Integrity, Character, Leadership, and Loyalty matter - Be an example, no matter the cost.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: Nathan Zachary

Nathan Zackary has raised a good point. Thanks to generations of allowing commies in the public skools to effectively ban the “No Adultry” Commandment, coupled with the “Queer NAtion” advocacy of perversion, it is little wonder that we have produced a generation of nuts & sluts.

If the Lil Darlin’ knew the meeting was for sex and porn, then the parents have their hands full, to say the least.

Sadly, if they were to administer the traditional punishments (paddlin’ her wandering butt, followed by grounding until the next Ice Age), some goober from a gooberment agency would “intervene” and the parents would be in trouble.

The parents dealt with it. Their child, their decision.

PS Big gooberment fans want to regulate sexual behavior. I am amazed at small government advocates who can’t see the reasons for leaving control of such behavior to those best suited to making such detailed, individual decisions.

Historically, such skilled decision makers had a name.

That name was “parent”.

PPS Parents are vastly cheaper than goobers in gooberment agencies, and do a better job. Lastly, parents pay taxes rather than consume large amounts of taxpayers dollars.


110 posted on 08/19/2009 9:07:42 AM PDT by GladesGuru (In a society predicated upon freedom, it is essential to examine principles,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: maine-iac7
“well, Joe, ya see - it's like this.
If you are being sarcastic, the rule is to use the /sarq or /sq”

I am a big believer in using the /sarcasm tag and have taken people to task before when they don't use it. But in this case, to use it would have caused further confusion. i.e. What was he being sarcastic about, that what the family did was wrong, or that he hoped the prosecutor would accidentally lose their file? Using the /sarc tag in this instance was NOT called for.

111 posted on 08/19/2009 9:08:26 AM PDT by monday
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: Morgana
Colorado

The age of consent in Colorado is 17, however there exists in the legislation close in age exceptions which allow those aged 15 and 16 to engage in acts with those less than ten years older and those less than 15 to engage in acts with those less than four years older.

If she was fifteen and in Colorado, she could legally have concentual sex with this 25 year old, as long as he and she are just under 10 years apart in age.

Delaware

The age of consent in Delaware is 18, but it is legal for teenagers aged 16 and 17 to engage in sexual intercourse as long as the older partner is younger than 30.

Nasty.

Florida

The age of consent in Florida is 18, but close in age exemptions exist. By law, the exception permits a person 23 years of age or younger to engage in legal sexual activity with a minor aged 16 or 17.

Iowa

The age of consent in Iowa is 16, with a close in age exemption for those aged 14 and 15, who may engage in sexual acts with partners less than 4 years older.

Kentucky

The age of consent in Kentucky is 16. Section 510.020 of the Kentucky Revised Statutes deems a person unable to consent if he or she is less than 16 years old. It is a defense however if the "victim" is at least 14 and the actor is less than 5 years older {510.130(b)}.

In otherwords, a guy 19 can have sex with a 14 year old.

Maine

The age of consent in Maine is 16. Teenagers aged 14 and 15 may engage in sexual intercourse with partners who are less than 5 years older.

Maryland

The age of consent in Maryland is 16. An exception is made when the actor is less than four years older than the victim. Minnesota

The age of consent in Minnesota is 16.

If the actor is in a position of authority, the age of consent is 18. If the victim is under the age of 13 the actor must be no more than 36 months older. If the victim is 13, 14 or 15 the actor must be no more than 48 months older.

112 posted on 08/19/2009 9:11:16 AM PDT by Nathan Zachary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS

He could have been armed... ;)


113 posted on 08/19/2009 9:14:00 AM PDT by villagerjoel (1. Implement socialist policies 2. ??? 3. Heaven on earth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: villagerjoel

I’m not sure he had a weapon even in his pants. ;)


114 posted on 08/19/2009 9:15:35 AM PDT by RobbyS (ECCE HOMO!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan

If enough family is around 1) The girl was in no danger and 2) the guy was NOT going to get away. My guess is if he was bloody he probably tried to get away.


115 posted on 08/19/2009 9:18:43 AM PDT by RobbyS (ECCE HOMO!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: ctdonath2

Joe has said that he wasn’t being sarcastic. My original issue with Joe’s comment was that he condemned the family’s actions as illegal. He made it clear that he didn’t want to see them prosecuted.

My issue with Joe was that the family didn’t act illegally and there is no need for the prosecutor to overlook their actions. You would be mistaken to assume that I am incapable of detecting dry humor or sarcasm.

How about you go read all of the posts between me and Joe on this thread “VERY carefully” before you chime in again.


116 posted on 08/19/2009 9:19:19 AM PDT by BuckeyeTexan (Integrity, Character, Leadership, and Loyalty matter - Be an example, no matter the cost.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan
“Joe has said that he wasn’t being sarcastic. My original issue with Joe’s comment was that he condemned the family’s actions as illegal.”

I know he wasn't being sarcastic. Just to be clear, vigilante justice IS illegal. What is to be determined is if the family was practicing vigilante justice. If they weren't, great. If they were, I think all of us agree that it would be best if the prosecutor lost the file rather than take them to court.

117 posted on 08/19/2009 9:20:32 AM PDT by monday
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS

Read comment #51.

The family believed their daughter was in imminent danger. The pervert hit the father with his car.


118 posted on 08/19/2009 9:24:58 AM PDT by BuckeyeTexan (Integrity, Character, Leadership, and Loyalty matter - Be an example, no matter the cost.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: monday
"If they were, I think all of us agree that it would be best if the prosecutor lost the file rather than take them to court. "

Which he'll probably do given the laws of age of consent in that state. (he can be no more than 4 years her senior)

The only thing that can go against them is if this felon can prove she deceived him about her age. Then not only does he beat a felony rape charge, he can nail the family for felony assault, unlawful confinement and whatever else he can throw at them.

119 posted on 08/19/2009 9:27:31 AM PDT by Nathan Zachary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: Nathan Zachary

“This girl wasn’t innocent in this either. In better days past, she wouldn’t have dared meet someone in a park thinking they were going to get it on and make porn together.”

She’s 15. She’s got a head full of mush, and a body full of hormones. Of course she’s innocent. She’s no more guilty than an old person would be trusting some scammer with their life savings.

Family did the right thing. Leaving the guy alive may have been a bad move, since now he can lie in court.


120 posted on 08/19/2009 9:29:51 AM PDT by RinaseaofDs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 161-169 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