Korean Job Discussion Forums :: View topic - 30-to-life for traveling for sex with nonexistent victim

Speak Korean Now!

Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!

Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"

FAQ

Memberlist

Usergroups

Profile

30-to-life for traveling for sex with nonexistent victim
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, ... 13, 14, 15 Next

This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.

Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

bacasper

Joined: 26 Mar 2007

Posted: Sat Jul 31, 2010 7:48 am Post subject:

jrwhite82 wrote:

A teacher gives his cellphone number to a student and then proceeds to exchange sexting messages with said student. Sounds like a predator to me.

Teachers: Do not give your number to students. If they get your number somehow, immediately report any messages you receive to administration. And do not under any circumstance reply.

It is exactly this mindset that perpetuates the very child sex abuse witchhunt that is at the root of the problem.

jvalmer

Joined: 06 Jun 2003

Posted: Sat Jul 31, 2010 9:44 am Post subject:

jrwhite82 wrote:

Teachers: Do not give your number to students. If they get your number somehow, immediately report any messages you receive to administration. And do not under any circumstance reply.

This rule just doesn't work in Korea. Other teachers practically hand out phone numbers like it's nothing and phone numbers are easy to obtain since it's practically advertised at school. Homeroom teachers are supposed to give out their phone number to their homeroom class. Students routinely phone and text message teachers all the time about problems or questions very often.

Although I'd never do this back home.

jrwhite82

Joined: 22 May 2010

Posted: Sat Jul 31, 2010 11:43 am Post subject:

bacasper wrote:

jrwhite82 wrote:

It is exactly this mindset that perpetuates the very child sex abuse witchhunt that is at the root of the problem.

How is a teacher who sends sexual messages to a student not a predator exactly?

Steve_Rogers2008

Joined: 22 Mar 2010

Posted: Sat Jul 31, 2010 2:05 pm Post subject: Re: 30-to-life for traveling for sex with nonexistent victim

bacasper wrote:

I posted this on the unjust laws thread, but it deserves on of its own.Never mind traveling internationally. This guy was staying within the states!

30 years minimum? For a victim who didn't even exist? Why are cops creating crimes like this? The world is so crime-free they do it out of boredom? He'd have gotten less time if he committed a real rape. Mad

Yet another boogeyman thought crime! Sad

Why weren't the officers busted for showing sexually explicit photos to the imaginary 11-year-old?

30-to-life for traveling to have sex with imaginary victim

PENSACOLA, FLORIDA - A federal jury yesterday found Douglas E. Leightey (59) of Carey, Ohio, guilty of traveling to Pensacola, Florida to engage in a sexual act with a minor, announced United States Attorney Pamela C. Marsh, Northern District of Florida.

Evidence presented at the two-day jury trial in Pensacola established that between December 3, 2009 and April 22, 2010, Leightey engaged in internet chats with undercover officers posing as the parents of an 11-year-old girl. Over the course of more than 26 chats, Leightey made plans with the undercover officers to travel to Pensacola for the purpose of having sex with the fictitious 11-year-old. As part of his efforts to induce the �child� to have sex with him, on April 12, 2010, Leightey sent the undercover agents images of himself engaged in sexually explicit conduct, with the understanding that these would be shown to the �child.� On April 22, 2010, Leightey traveled to Pensacola, where he met the undercover agents at a local restaurant. On his arrival, Leightey told the agents that he was worried he might be walking into an episode of �To Catch A Predator,� and expressed relief that this was not the case. The agents identified themselves as law enforcement and placed Leightey under arrest.

In addition to the travel charges, Leightey was also convicted of use of a computer to entice a minor to engage in sexual activity, and attempt to transfer obscene material to a minor.

The defendant faces a minimum sentence of 30 years up to a maximum of life in prison in addition to statutory fines and the possibility of a lifetime period of supervised release following the completion of any prison sentence. Sentencing is set October 12, 2010, before Senior United States District Judge Lacey Collier.

The case was prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorneys Lorena Vollrath-Bueno and Tiffany Eggers. It was investigated by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), Pensacola Police Department, and the North Florida Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force.

This case was a brought as part of Project Safe Childhood, a nationwide initiative to combat the growing epidemic of child sexual exploitation and abuse launched in May 2006 by the Department of Justice. Led by U.S. Attorneys� offices and the Criminal Division�s Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section, Project Safe Childhood marshals federal, state and local resources to better locate, apprehend and prosecute individuals who exploit children via the Internet, as well as to identify and rescue victims.

For more information about Project Safe Childhood, please visit www.projectsafechildhood.gov.

*************************************************

The reason the "epidemic" is growing is because of this boondoggle to all these agencies to create these crimes. It took THREE agencies to invent this fiction. I guess that is why the sentence had to be so harsh. They had a lot invested in it. This has got to be one of the WORST uses of my taxes. Outfuckingrageous.

it also makes for great TV! the words that put fear in any pedophile after driving 4 hours to meet to have sex with a 12 year old: "I'm Chris Hanson, NBC News!" Wink

keeping pedophiles off the street ain't so bad... and just think. If this sentence is truly held out, he would be out in time to try to have sex with his fictional prey's own children!

Well, he'll soon get his wish for illicit sex, if the Florida prison system lives up to his rep.... let's hope he's a homosexual pedophile! Very Happy

But please, post on! and I'll give your opinion more merit when I see that PdD in sociology hanging over your desk!

Louis VI

Joined: 05 Jul 2010
Location: In my Kingdom

Posted: Sat Jul 31, 2010 3:51 pm Post subject:

Let's not think like Grotto.

huffdaddy

Joined: 25 Nov 2005

Posted: Sat Jul 31, 2010 6:26 pm Post subject:

bacasper wrote:

Really? You have no problem with police inventing crimes and entrapping people for things they would never have otherwise done?

Please. As long as he initiated contact and proposed the meeting, it's not entrapment.

Quote:

And spending millions to do it? Do you not have enough crime where you are? Even when there was no victim???

At what point do you arrest him? When he's caught contacting a real 11-year old? When he's on the way to meet and have sex with that real 11-year old? While he's actually having sex with that real 11-year old? Or after he's raped and butchered that real 11-year old? Where do you draw the line? Where do you step in and arrest him?

pkang0202

Joined: 09 Mar 2007

Posted: Sat Jul 31, 2010 9:51 pm Post subject:

30 to Life seems excessive. The argument here is, "Yeah, he didn't do it but he was GOING to. So the sentence is fair." If you pointed a gun on someone and yelled "I'm gonna kill you" but never pulled the trigger because the police intervened, should you be sentenced as if you DID shoot? "He didn't shoot but he was GOING to, so we should sentence him as if he did shoot."

Louis VI

Joined: 05 Jul 2010
Location: In my Kingdom

Posted: Sun Aug 01, 2010 12:43 am Post subject:

pkang0202 wrote:

If you pointed a gun on someone and yelled "I'm gonna kill you" but never pulled the trigger because the police intervened,

ATTEMPTED murder, like CONSPIRACY to murder or commit robbery is a felony. Indeed, it's a 3-15 year sentence, not 30 to life.

So we're arguing about whether the guy got too long of a sentence? The op was trolling another line: that somehow the guy is NOT GUILTY of any crime and being prosecuted was somehow not about his attempt or conspiracy but only some whimsical mental thought unacted upon.

bacasper

Joined: 26 Mar 2007

Posted: Sun Aug 01, 2010 3:28 am Post subject:

jrwhite82 wrote:

bacasper wrote:

jrwhite82 wrote:

It is exactly this mindset that perpetuates the very child sex abuse witchhunt that is at the root of the problem.

How is a teacher who sends sexual messages to a student not a predator exactly?

I never said that.

Steve_Rogers2008 wrote:

keeping pedophiles off the street ain't so bad... and just think. If this sentence is truly held out, he would be out in time to try to have sex with his fictional prey's own children!

Quote:

But please, post on! and I'll give your opinion more merit when I see that PdD in sociology hanging over your desk!

Stop by anytime.

bacasper

Joined: 26 Mar 2007

Posted: Sun Aug 01, 2010 3:40 am Post subject:

huffdaddy wrote:

You arrest him after the thought has left his mind and he has actually caused some harm. So you support locking up people who have harmed no one?

This state of affairs is tragic. With attitudes like these so prevalent here, there is no hope to avoid the brave, new world of big brother and future/thought crime of Minority Report.

Stop indulging your paranoid fantasies. The odds of this guy going from chatting with this imaginary girl to raping and butchering a real one are practically nil.

pkang wrote:

30 to Life seems excessive.

The argument here is, "Yeah, he didn't do it but he was GOING to. So the sentence is fair."

If you pointed a gun on someone and yelled "I'm gonna kill you" but never pulled the trigger because the police intervened, should you be sentenced as if you DID shoot?

"He didn't shoot but he was GOING to, so we should sentence him as if he did shoot."

Obviously it is excessive. The thing is if he had actually raped a girl he would not have gotten such a harsh sentence! How can anyone not see that is bizarre.

I mean, he responded to a chat, and now the next thing is he is raping and butchering her! Question

bacasper

Joined: 26 Mar 2007

Posted: Sun Aug 01, 2010 3:45 am Post subject:

Louis VI wrote:

pkang0202 wrote:

If you pointed a gun on someone and yelled "I'm gonna kill you" but never pulled the trigger because the police intervened,

In the example, there was not even an ATTEMPT to commit murder, so even your analogy falls short, i.e. any sentence should be even less thatn 3-15.

And NO, the man committed NO CRIME except the one manufactured by cops. Under our Constitution, in order to be guilty of a crime, the state must produce a harmed party in court. The statute and prosecution are unconstitutional.

Louis VI

Joined: 05 Jul 2010
Location: In my Kingdom

Posted: Sun Aug 01, 2010 5:03 am Post subject:

bacasper wrote:

Under our Constitution, in order to be guilty of a crime, the state must produce a harmed party in court.

False. You are pulling daisies out of a hole.

Leon

Joined: 31 May 2010

Posted: Sun Aug 01, 2010 5:39 am Post subject:

bacasper wrote:

huffdaddy wrote:

pkang wrote:

The thing is I would agree with you if he had stayed at home on his computer and been a nasty pervert at home, but the difference is that he actually showed up. He was going to go through with it.

huffdaddy

Joined: 25 Nov 2005

Posted: Sun Aug 01, 2010 5:45 am Post subject:

bacasper wrote:

huffdaddy wrote:

You arrest him after the thought has left his mind and he has actually caused some harm. So you support locking up people who have harmed no one?

The crime is not in the thought, it's the action. He was acting with intent to rape a child.

Do you wait until he's after he's raped an 11-year old? Are you going to volunteer your daughter to be the "bait"?

Quote:

The odds of this guy going from chatting with this imaginary girl to raping and butchering a real one are practically nil.

One, he wasn't chatting with the imaginary girl.

Second, just what do you think his plans were? They were to rape an 11-year old girl. Would it make you feel better if the undercover cops had a real 11-year old in mind? Maybe they used pictures of a real 11-year old to entice him. Does that make her not so imaginary now?

jrwhite82

Joined: 22 May 2010

Posted: Sun Aug 01, 2010 5:58 am Post subject:

bacasper wrote:

huffdaddy wrote:

pkang wrote:

He did more than respond to a chat. He showed up to meet with the "parents" to commit the act. Did you read the rest of the article or just the first few sentences? Not only that, but he knew what he was doing was wrong and the behavior of a child predator when he went as far as saying he was relieved they were not from "TO CATCH A PREDATOR."

This guy is pure scum. He deserves to be locked up. 30 years might be a bit excessive but he is a sexual predator of children. From his actions, if he was given a real opportunity he would rape a child.

Display posts from previous:

	Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, ... 13, 14, 15 Next
Page 2 of 15

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe