man arrested after asking teen girls about their feet

Is it?
Rehabilitation/reintegration of inmates into Society be damned?

Ever Think that's associated w/high re-offending rates?
Ever Think? *c*

 

Personaly I think the girls are dumbasses. If I was walking my dog and some creepy ass, middle aged man asked to massage my feet I would run the fuck away. Its really common sense. The girls are stupid shits, if he was looking for models for his products he would search through a modeling agent not drive around looking for people.

 

SEE, this dude is just 14 and makes a HELL of a lot of sense.

 

Yea Libertine, I'm from GA too. Must be a georgia thing.

 

You are still failing to demonstrate where what he did was illegal. The law does not forbid non-sexual touching of minors. Or maybe you can show us where it does. The burden of proof falls on you, since you're the one making a claim that something wrong was done.

Who cares if the guy did it on the pretense of "making someone a star"? People make their own decisions -- or would you prefer ceding all power for personal decisions to the state, and letting the .Gov decide who gets to do what, to save them from themselves?

-Jeffrey

 

Lying to someone is not a crime.

And deriving sexual pleasure from something is not a crime, either.

Some people get sexual pleasure from rubbing up against other people. Now, get onto a crowded subway car and you can't avoid doing that. Should it be illegal for those people who sexually enjoy it to ride a crowded subway car, or in any way rub up against people? (Don't believe it's true? Look up the word "frotteurism," then.)

So, rubbing against other subway passengers should be illegal for those people who enjoy it, and legal for everyone else, huh?

Giving a foot massage to anyone under the age of 18 should be illegal for me, strictly on the grounds that I like feet, right? What if when arrested I were to simply say, "Oh, I don't like feet any more, I was just doing that because I thought she enjoyed it."

You're saying that you think we should criminalize "might bes." That's really asinine. No, wait, maybe you're right, let's send the police out to arrest us all for the things we MIGHT be trying to do! YAYYY! What a GREAT FUCKING IDEA! SPOKEN LIKE A TRUE LITTLE HITLER!!

Used to be we had to wait for a person to commit an actual crime before we tried to throw them in jail! But that's such an antiquated idea. Its time has passed. Let's do the pre-crime thing!

The way people feel is not the basis of what the police do. Go back to fuckin' school, man. Learn a little bit about human and civil rights, and the restrictions on government power that the Consititution used to place on it before idiot PC statists like you started having too much say.


-Jeffrey

 

Clearly it's his intention that matters. If the prosecution can show that he intended to molest those girls, then he's busted. If he can make a decent defence that he was just looking for models (??) then he can get off. What's the problem?

 

My god, what is in your drinking water that is making you people so motherfucking STUPID?!

HE DID NOT COMMIT A CRIME. He may have WANTED to, but HE FUCKING DIDN'T.

I know you people will give me shit because you know I like feet, and you'll say that it's why I'm defending the guy.

Well, I'm NOT defending the guy -- I think what he did was fucking stupid and he shouldn't have done it -- I am defending HIS RIGHTS. You fuckin' hippies are always on about people's rights, but then you're quick to take away those of anybody you disagree with. Why the fuck do you think that conservatives laugh their asses off at you? It's because you're fuckin' HYPOCRITES! You HATE just as bad as any right-winger, but the difference is you spend all the rest of your time trying to convince everyone you're so fuckin' full of LOVE.

To specifically address your point: NO, his intention does NOT matter. Whatever he intended, he did not get to bring it to completion.

What kind of crystal ball do you think that a court can employ to divine whether he intended to molest the girls? If he says, "No I didn't intend to molest anyone," how does the court prove that he did, exactly? Is there a mind-reading machine that will give a legally admissible printout of what he intended?

You are out of your depth, dude, spouting off about "his intentions" and whatnot. That is not what a legal case is made of.

-Jeffrey

 

First, I'm female so you don't need to call me dude or man.

Second, you should get some professional counseling to deal with the anger problem you have (and that other problem too).

Third, intention does matter. Crime itself is more than just something that happened. It requires that there was an intent to do it.

Intent is a crime in itself for child-grooming in many states. You don't have to actually physically molest or abuse a child to be accused of a crime. Abusing a child doesn't have to be sexual either. Using children as a means to derive sexual pleasure is a crime. I'm not saying that guy was guilty of that, but that's one of the things the court will look at. He chose to behave the way he did and now he is going to go through the court system.

Intent is also connected closely with conspiracy. You don't have to actually rob the bank to be convicted of a crime but can be guilty of planning to do so. Conspiracy cases are difficult to prove. Sometimes doing nothing is a crime. If you know that someone plans to blow up a federal building and don't report it, that's a crime.

It's not a matter of criminalizing might-bes but rather determining what someone did and what his intentions were. Regarding Hitler, Bush criminalized might-bes when he invaded Iraq because he thought it might attack the U.S. someday and his detaining people for over three years without charges, trial, or legal counsel.

If you feel what that 42 year old did wasn't a crime or that it's not that big a deal, try doing it in Florida and see what happens to you. They're much stricter than NY when it comes to these matters. You may be found not guilty, but you're probably going to get arrested and go through the court system if you do what that guy did.

 

You're proving my point. That's why intention matters. Doing it accidentally is not a crime. If you do that intentionally on a subway to get sexual gratification you're going to get arrested. If you are a pervert who takes pics of the underside of women without their consent, you're going to get arrested.

Like they do in other cases. They'll look at the evidence and his background and try to find out what his intentions were. They do the same thing for murder cases. Malicious intent is what distinguishes murder from manslaughter. It's not unusual to have psychologists and character witnesses testify in court. I'm sure you love psychologists too.

 

Arresting someone for thinking (intentions) about something and when there is no follow through, is TYRANNY.

The law has gone way beyond its bounds with this kind of Big Brother horseshit.

Whoever came up with this law is apparently a fan of dictatorships and police states.

To be able to say you "intended" to do something with NO evidence is not only a violation of rights, but it is a complete mockery of human rights.

"I wish to be able to have the same right as a sponge. I wish to have the right to THINK."

 

In general I agree with your assertion that arresting a person for their thoughts is tyranny, but that's not what happened in this case. The man removed a girl's shoe and massaged her foot. That is an act, and regardless of his intentions, he crossed the line into what most of society would deem inappropriate behavior. Now whether that constitutes "endangerment" is for the court and a jury to decide.

Frankly it's pretty clear from his actions that his intent was not an innocent request for a model, as that doesn't require any aspect of touching. Not to mention, reputable business folks tend not to troll the streets looking for strangers to approach...there are plenty of resources out there for hiring models. Bearing all that in mind, there's nothing I can think of to justify this man's behavior.

 

Ah...well, perhaps "inappropriate behavior" should be what he is condemned with, but is there any proof he "intended" to molest them?

I am not defending the man in question, no. But, if we EVER begin assuming for each other the other's "intentions" and one can be arrested and thrown in the human zoo for thoughts--well, that's when it is time to wave the Black Flag...I say.

They came for the Jews, but I wasn't a Jew...so I did nothing...er...I hope the United Police State of America doesn't become a reality. Let's just hope Daryl Gates never wins any NATIONAL ELECTION...

 

Indeed. I'll be interested to follow the court case to see what they make of this scenario. Based on the reports that he first approached one girl, and then escalated his behavior with the second to include the fondling of her feet, I think it's not looking too good for him, but then I thought the same thing about Jacko, and we all know how that went.

 

What i don't get is why underage teens are treated like naive children when it comes to sex, but if one commits murder no one thinks twice about trying them as adults.

 

It comes down to this guys particular fetish, because I still meet grown women who don't understand that for us men with a foot fetish, this is an extreme turn on to look at and touch a beautiful pair of feet. Even though kids are more sophisticated about sex in these times, I still think foot fetishes might not be one of the things they are "schooled" about.

 

Certainly they are not schooled about foot fetishes. Just about most or nearly all girls I've ever had foot-fun with have been new to it, and were surprised to find out how much they enjoyed it. It's a good feeling, to be the one who introduces someone to a new and undiscovered source of pleasure in their life.

But just because a person who gives a foot massage actually likes feet -- as opposed to someone giving a foot massage in spite of disliking feet -- that doesn't mean that suddenly foot massaging should be a crime for that specific person! That's just ridiculous. It's like if smelling roses gave a person an orgasm, it should be illegal for him to walk into a florist's shop. Gimme a break.

And yeah, there certainly do seem to be fans of the Police State here. Makes me want to vomit.

Blue skies,
-Jeffrey

 

Oh I dont disagree with that at all! If we're talking about two consenting adults here. But this guy chose underage girls to approach. I realize that in today's scoiety, with how young girls dress and act, it can be very difficult to determine who is the age of legal consent.

However, this man was 42 years old and really should know better...if he really likes younger women, there are plenty of colleges and bars around in our country where he can hang out, and find a young lady 21 or older who would probably happily enjoy the attention he was seeking to provide.

I don't think that in this case there is any sort of fascism or oppression going on. A 42 year old man with an obvious foot fetish attempted to assert himself, even if only in a small way, upon 14 and 15 year old girls. I personally, along with the state in this case, find something truly wrong with that.