President of Pax River Raiders

[MarieB]

I don't understand why a few here keep saying that they read the case file and it's public, and then go on to tell others to go check it out. Why not just say what is in the file / what you read?

Out of curiosity, I looked at the case on that MD lookup thingie, and it appears as though he first pleaded not guilty.

I too have a hard time believing that a prosecutor would allow a plea to such a lesser charge AND with no registry if they had a good case - change in laws or not.

If the change in laws have made a big difference, then why doesn't someone state what those changes are and how they would pertain to this case - how would it have been different today.

 

[tom88]

I don't understand why a few here keep saying that they read the case file and it's public, and then go on to tell others to go check it out. Why not just say what is in the file / what you read?

Out of curiosity, I looked at the case on that MD lookup thingie, and it appears as though he first pleaded not guilty.

I too have a hard time believing that a prosecutor would allow a plea to such a lesser charge AND with no registry if they had a good case - change in laws or not.

If the change in laws have made a big difference, then why doesn't someone state what those changes are and how they would pertain to this case - how would it have been different today.

If you read my post, I already said what it was, but will say it again. The subject pled guilty to an attempted third degree sex offense. Since that was a common law crime, in 2000, it was not a registerable offense based on the sex offender satute at that time. (Today it would be, based on a change in the law in 2006.) His crime, which he agreed to the statement of facts read at his plea hearing was that he had sexual intercourse with a person under the age of 14 when he was 25.

 

[Hank]

His crime, which he agreed to the statement of facts read at his plea hearing was that he had sexual intercourse with a person under the age of 14 when he was 25.

Sicko

 

[inkah]

IF he was a convicted sex offender then he'd be on the registry, right? So if you know he is one (I don't even know his name honestly ) then contact the state's attorney and get him on the list. And go from there. You can get him removed, banned, blacklisted, whatever, you just have to get started and DO something.

Honestly if any of you think/believe this, then get proactive, instead of hiding behind screen names on the interwebz.

If I knew/believed/thought something like that, then you can bet my bottom dollar I would be proactive and doing something instead of talking smack on a forum.

Since you all aren't doing something then :meh: ;shrug: then it must not be that big of a deal then huh?

Plea bargaining happens ALL the time. Don't let your own ignorance cloud this issue - especially if you don't care. This isn't the only sexual predator who has plead to reduced charges around here - in fact pleading down is the norm. And neither is this the first predator to get a bargain that kept their name off the registry.

EVERY responsible adult should be pissed off about this. And keeping quiet is NEVER the right answer - no matter how many fools ##### and moan about "gossip".

 

[inkah]

What is it that YOU don't understand about the FACT that YOU aren't doing anything about it?

Refusing to keep quiet is a huge step. This is something like the alternate registry and people absolutely should be informed.

 

[migtig]

I think so. She said she was a journalism but show me where anybody accused this guy of being Jerry Sandusky.

I simply revealed the fact that victim's of sex offenses don't often come forward until someone else does.

The answer to the rape question is yes, according to the definition of the law, however he was not convicted of that because he was first charged with a lesser crime and then pled to a crime lesser than that.

You keep saying people need to do something about this, but then balk at the fact that people are spreading the word. This obviously was reported to the county because he used to be a coach and now can now that has been restricted.

You seem to excuse his behavior by citing relationships close to you. The difference being the ages of your parents are not illegal now and weren't then.

Working for an internet blog is not exactly journalism sweety.

None of Jerry Sandusky's victims said he forced them that I know of. Nobody knew that there were multiple victims until the first victim came out. Victims don't want to come out because people put the blame on them since they were were 10/11/12/13 but made the choice to do this with a guy at least twice their age.

Why would a guy, convicted of a crime like this want to put himself in a spot where he is around young kids?

You are a special. I said you were implying he was Jerry Sandusky and you did.

I told you if your implication is true then you need to do something about it, and if you can't prove it, you should stop B&M about it.

So out of that, your decision is to attempt to attack me, not do something about it.

That right there, says to me, that you are the one with some kind of personal agenda. :shrug:

I'm sure I, and everyone else, will believe everything you say.

 

[migtig]

Plea bargaining happens ALL the time. Don't let your own ignorance cloud this issue - especially if you don't care. This isn't the only sexual predator who has plead to reduced charges around here - in fact pleading down is the norm. And neither is this the first predator to get a bargain that kept their name off the registry.

EVERY responsible adult should be pissed off about this. And keeping quiet is NEVER the right answer - no matter how many fools ##### and moan about "gossip".

I agree with that. As long as you all are giving some facts, not a bunch of innuendos and rumors. Start sharing the facts. If this is a public record - share it - publically. If he has done this since, come forward. If it bothers you, contact Sen Dyson, the county commissioners (do you know you can go to a meeting and present anything to them), write letters to the editor. But this all involves coming out from behind a screen name and actually providing some facts to everyone.

But if all you have is rumors...

Example, I can call a friend of my named Maria and say "Maria I heard and I want you to send somebody out here if possible to cover this". Maria will say to me "Wow that's shocking. Do you have any proof of these allegations?" and I would reply back "No, but I read it on the internet posted by a bunch of people I don't know. But it must be true, because it's on the internet". And Maria would reply, "Good thing you are not in DC anymore....I got a phone call on another line...talk to you later, stay in touch..."

:shrug:

 

[itsrequired]

You are a special. I said you were implying he was Jerry Sandusky and you did.

I told you if your implication is true then you need to do something about it, and if you can't prove it, you should stop B&M about it.

So out of that, your decision is to attempt to attack me, not do something about it.

That right there, says to me, that you are the one with some kind of personal agenda. :shrug:

I'm sure I, and everyone else, will believe everything you say.

What I have said about this person is in the record of fact. Not opinion such as you, the journalist have done.

You were vigorously trying to minimize what this guy did, while admittedly not knowing that facts. Wouldn't you say that is not a characteristic of a good journalist? Most people would. Pointing out your credentials is hardly attacking you. It was just obvious to me that you have an agenda.

It may have nothing to do with this guy, it may be you oppose the sex offender registry, or you feel people are unjustly accused of crimes such as this. I don't know what it is, but I merely gave you my opinion, so I hardly feel that is "attacking" you.

My agenda is this. In my past life I used to investigate people like this. This was long before the sex offender registry became what it is today, and many of these people were able to manipulate people into believing the crime was something other than what it really was. Today we have much more information, but I still seems many want to keep blinders out with people who commit these crimes.

I brought up Jerry Sandusky because his case was such that it went undetected because people didn’t want to believe the allegations when they were first revealed. I don’t know if this guy has committed other crimes against children but I do know this. He committed this one, then put himself in a position to be with children who were not his own.

 

[migtig]

What I have said about this person is in the record of fact. Not opinion such as you, the journalist have done.

You were vigorously trying to minimize what this guy did, while admittedly not knowing that facts. Wouldn't you say that is not a characteristic of a good journalist? Most people would. Pointing out your credentials is hardly attacking you. It was just obvious to me that you have an agenda.

It may have nothing to do with this guy, it may be you oppose the sex offender registry, or you feel people are unjustly accused of crimes such as this. I don't know what it is, but I merely gave you my opinion, so I hardly feel that is "attacking" you.

My agenda is this. In my past life I used to investigate people like this. This was long before the sex offender registry became what it is today, and many of these people were able to manipulate people into believing the crime was something other than what it really was. Today we have much more information, but I still seems many want to keep blinders out with people who commit these crimes.

I brought up Jerry Sandusky because his case was such that it went undetected because people didn’t want to believe the allegations when they were first revealed. I don’t know if this guy has committed other crimes against children but I do know this. He committed this one, then put himself in a position to be with children who were not his own.

I NEVER Said I was a "journalist" at this momnent. I said I used to work in the journalism industry....

I have NEVER vigorously minimized what he did (or didn't do). I've been trying to get some darn facts out of you folks.

I've stated several times, I would support and help out anyone that wanted to come forward.

Read it. Comprehend.

And NOW you are implying that I'm against the sex registry and have an "agenda".

I think you are a hateful person who chooses to personally attack people that don't agree with you. :shrug:

Good luck with that.

 

[sockgirl77]

I NEVER Said I was a "journalist" at this momnent. I said I used to work in the journalism industry....

I have NEVER vigorously minimized what he did (or didn't do). I've been trying to get some darn facts out of you folks.

I've stated several times, I would support and help out anyone that wanted to come forward.

Read it. Comprehend.

And NOW you are implying that I'm against the sex registry and have an "agenda".

I think you are a hateful person who chooses to personally attack people that don't agree with you. :shrug:

Good luck with that.

I'm not sure why he/she/it thinks that you're against the registry. I didn't get that at all from your posts.

The facts have been posted. He was 25 and she was 14 at the time of the charges. According to the court docs, she was 13 when it began. While there are no other instances with other girls on record, there were more. However, those were in his late teens and early 20s.

 

[meatfist]

Here is a FACT. He admitted to this crime in the County Times article written on 8/16. The article is pretty inaccurate (author must have been a friend of his) as it's been proven he did in fact coach and should have been under the same scrutiny as all other coaches. It has also been proven he has been and is still on the field with the kids in a coaching capacity.

If anyone thinks that county officials and newspapers haven't been contacted you'd be mistaken. For some reason no one wants to touch this. I guess once your hands have been dirty with it for this long its kind of hard to do anything about it without outing yourself.

 

[itsrequired]

I NEVER Said I was a "journalist" at this momnent. I said I used to work in the journalism industry....

I have NEVER vigorously minimized what he did (or didn't do). I've been trying to get some darn facts out of you folks.

I've stated several times, I would support and help out anyone that wanted to come forward.

Read it. Comprehend.

And NOW you are implying that I'm against the sex registry and have an "agenda".

I think you are a hateful person who chooses to personally attack people that don't agree with you. :shrug:

Good luck with that.

Well what did you mean by this?

If he didn't rape her, if they were in a relationship - regardless as to whether or not you think he was too old, and he hasn't been "busted" with a minor since, I think this is a moot issue and is just being raised to stir crap up.

If he raped her, has been busted with other teenagers, then by all means- burn him at the stake.

My dad was 25, my mom was 16. I have a co-worker, her mom was 14 and her dad was 26.

Do you think your co-worker's parents should be arrested? Have you turned them in? It does seem that you are defending their relationship. You think putting this factual information about a guy who was convicted of a crime is "being raised to stir crap". That isn't minimizing? That isn't defending?

So you put a statement out like this;

I used to be in journalism, I'm a little more cautious without proof or evidence.

Are you seriously trying to say that you weren't attempting to make people believe you were a journalist? If not, why would working for an internet blog be important to mention. I know you, and you know me. I am not attacking you, I'm attacking the idiocy that you are spouting. One thing you should have learned while being in "journalism" is that once you put your opinion out there, the contrary views will come back. If you try to fluff your resume, that will come back to bite you.

 

[migtig]

Well what did you mean by this?



Do you think your co-worker's parents should be arrested? Have you turned them in? It does seem that you are defending their relationship. You think putting this factual information about a guy who was convicted of a crime is "being raised to stir crap". That isn't minimizing? That isn't defending?

So you put a statement out like this;



Are you seriously trying to say that you weren't attempting to make people believe you were a journalist? If not, why would working for an internet blog be important to mention. I know you, and you know me. I am not attacking you, I'm attacking the idiocy that you are spouting. One thing you should have learned while being in "journalism" is that once you put your opinion out there, the contrary views will come back. If you try to fluff your resume, that will come back to bite you.

1) When I made the statement - I had read the whole tread and nobody had said exactly what his crime was. And I asked - was he in a relationship? How old was he? How old was she? Because a few generations back, this was acceptable - see case examples. Again, you took it out of context.

2) I said I used to work in journalism, never said anything more. Many of the "oldtimers" know this and even know where I used to work and what I did. My resume has never been fluffed and I have never worked for an internet blog.

3) The idiocy being spouted is yours. And I have no need to further defend myself from you. I have done nothing wrong. Regardless of your implications.

 

[migtig]

I'm not sure why he/she/it thinks that you're against the registry. I didn't get that at all from your posts.

The facts have been posted. He was 25 and she was 14 at the time of the charges. According to the court docs, she was 13 when it began. While there are no other instances with other girls on record, there were more. However, those were in his late teens and early 20s.

Thanks Socki. I'd suggest using your internet contacts to allow you to do an op-ed piece. If there were more instances with females underage, then this needs to be publicized. Maybe more victims would be willing to come forward. I'd contact the person who says he ran the background check and also the local PD to find out who their Special Victims person is so that people could contact them. Do you think they could set-up a page with an online petition to get him removed as well?

 

[Merlin99]

Well what did you mean by this?



Do you think your co-worker's parents should be arrested? Have you turned them in? It does seem that you are defending their relationship. You think putting this factual information about a guy who was convicted of a crime is "being raised to stir crap". That isn't minimizing? That isn't defending?

So you put a statement out like this;



Are you seriously trying to say that you weren't attempting to make people believe you were a journalist? If not, why would working for an internet blog be important to mention. I know you, and you know me. I am not attacking you, I'm attacking the idiocy that you are spouting. One thing you should have learned while being in "journalism" is that once you put your opinion out there, the contrary views will come back. If you try to fluff your resume, that will come back to bite you.

I used to work as a broadcast engineer for CNN so I can also truthfully say I worked in journalism. It doesn't matter at which level you work, it's beaten into you "check your sources".

 

[jetmonkey]

Just clam down everybody; he told maxima87 the truth

 

[sockgirl77]

Just clam down everybody; he told maxima87 the truth

Just like he told the County Times the truth?

 

[Baja28]

Just clam down everybody; he told maxima87 the truth

And the word of a convicted sex offender trumps all!

 

[sockgirl77]

And the word of a convicted sex offender trumps all!

I wonder if she'll like your post too.

 

[maxima87]

I wonder if she'll like your post too.

Yup.