Touch a minor while lecturing them, become a sex offender?

[Art Eatman]

Sorry, folks. I gottas go along with DirtyBrad.

"Fitzroy Barnaby said he had to swerve to avoid hitting the 14-year-old Des Plaines girl who walked in front of his car."

Ever have that happen? I have. It scares the (bleep) out of you. A parental reaction is to give a stern lecture. In order to do that, you tend to do what's needed to command attention. It just doesn't work if the dumb kid can ignore you and wander off--which seems to be typical in this day and age.

So maybe the grabbing of an arm wasn't exactly the right thing to do, but it was a natural reaction in the situation as described in the article.

When laws take no account of one's motivation, or the official people take no account of one's motivation, the only recourse is to fall back on FederalistWeasel's non-involvement strategy.

But you carry that strategy far enough in one's self-defense against an outrageous world and you wind up with more Kitty Genoveses...

It's a sad state of affairs when a guy's effort to educate a kid about what amounts to Condition Yellow results in folks saying he "got what he deserved"...

Art

 

[peacefuljeffrey]

But Cook County state's attorney spokesman Tom Stanton said Barnaby should have to register "because of the proclivity of offenders who restrain children to also commit sex acts or other crimes against them."

In the criminal case against him, Cook County Judge Patrick Morse said that "it's more likely than not" Barnaby planned only "to chastise the girl" when he grabbed her, but "I can't read his mind."

This "proclivity" thing is just so much b#lls#!t. For one thing, where is it proven that some wicked majority of people who would grab the arm of a minor are bound to eventually also molest minors?! This is settled fact?! WHEN? WHERE?

So now when a judge cannot read your mind that you WOULDN'T do something, he is allowed to sentence you as though you WOULD?

"Duhh, gee, uhhh, I can't know that you WEREN'T going to rob a bank with the gun you were carrying, so I'll just sentence you for bank robbery."

And Joab, your views on this case are absurd to the point of offensiveness. You say that the guy better be tough if he's gonna be stupid? Well, how about the fact that the guy probably never in a million years would have considered that grabbing a girl's arm should or would bring about a sex offender status?! How about the fact that an innocent guy who did not have molestation in his heart does not often stop to consider that a sex offender registration mandate will result from his actions in the present?

You are saying, absurdly, that he should have foreseen utterly incongruous ramifications to otherwise innocent behavior, behavior that I imagine was even intended to be helpful! ("Little girl, you really need to be more careful near the street!")

-Jeffrey

 

[2nd Amendment]

WT, YOU bear close watching.

That anybody can actually concoct a reason to bash the guy, rather than the idiot child or the idiot court, is depressing and disgusting. Sadly, it is NOT suprising.

 

[peacefuljeffrey]

The state attorney and the judge make me think of a hilarious Chris Rock routine about Marion Barry, where he said, "Somebody just need to kill 'em!"

People like these are destroying all sense, reason, logic and freedom that we previously enjoyed in civil society.

I do think that something needs to be done.

-Jeffrey

 

[peacefuljeffrey]

I'm surprised that ...people like WT haven't stopped to consider that recidivist offenders who rob or kill and are released from prison are not treated as though they have a "proclivity" to do the same things again.

I mean, we constantly read of felons with long rap sheets for prior crimes. They are not wearing ankle bracelets for the rest of their lives, WT. What the hell is wrong with you that you think a guy who has not molested a minor -- but some jerkoff court says he has a "proclivity" for it -- deserves an ankle bracelet and a sex offender stigma for life but not someone who sticks a gun in your ribs at an ATM and robs you?

Stupid stupid stupid.

-Jeffrey

 

[Sindawe]

Ever have that happen? I have.

Same here. And when I was about six or seven, I did that to some poor dude and his family. Almost got my self squashed on the road, scared the bejebbus out of all of us.

Point is, kids don't think. Like the fetching 16 y/o who tried to walk into my home unbidden last spring, thinking it was her friends place.

 

[WT]

I would not want this guy around my daughters.

He ASSAULTED a female child. The jury who heard the evidence didn't buy his story and convicted him. The trial judge didn't buy his story either as the judge could have overturned the jury's guilty decision. The appellate court didn't buy his story for they could have overturned the ASSAULT decision or returned it for re-sentencing.

This guy is bad news.

Yes, we don't give ankle bracelets to bank robbers, car thieves or muggers. But assaulting a child is a whole different story. Heinous!

We will hear about this guy again.

 

[2nd Amendment]

I would not want this guy around my daughters.

Thou doth protest too damn much.

He ASSAULTED a female child.

Well, that's one (weird) way of looking at it.

The jury who heard the evidence didn't buy his story and convicted him.

You should try actually reading the material before commenting.

The trial judge didn't buy his story either as the judge could have overturned the jury's guilty decision.

Based on the quotes I'd suggest, again, that you read the material before commenting.

The appellate court didn't buy his story for they could have overturned the ASSAULT decision or returned it for re-sentencing.

Let me check again...yup, you still haven't read the material.

This guy is bad news.

Well, that's one (weird) assumption.

Yes, we don't give ankle bracelets to bank robbers, car thieves or muggers. But assaulting a child is a whole different story. Heinous!

Yep, grabbing an inattentive teen's arm for doing something dangerously stupid is worse than robbing and killing and beating.

We will hear about this guy again.

Probably from someone like you. :banghead:

 

[torpid]

Owning a gun is often a precursor to shooting someone.
Driving a car is often a precursor to road rage.
Having pets is often a precursor to neglect or abuse.

I think these are more appropriate for this situation

Showing total disregard for gun safety and common sense is often a precursor to shooting someone

Driving a car in an aggressive, careless manner is often a precurser for road rage

Having pets that you do not have the means to train and care for is often a precursor for neglect or abuse

I think these are even more appropriate for this situation:

Showing total disregard for gun safety and common sense results in negligent discharge. As a result, guilty party must register as a sex offender.

Driving a car in an aggressive, careless manner results in a road rage collision.
As a result, guilty party must register as a sex offender.

Having pets that you do not have the means to train and care results in the neglected animal attacking a child. As a result, guilty party must register as a sex offender.



.

 

[wasrjoe]

I would not want this guy around my daughters.

He ASSAULTED a female child. The jury who heard the evidence didn't buy his story and convicted him. The trial judge didn't buy his story either as the judge could have overturned the jury's guilty decision. The appellate court didn't buy his story for they could have overturned the ASSAULT decision or returned it for re-sentencing.

This guy is bad news.

Yes, we don't give ankle bracelets to bank robbers, car thieves or muggers. But assaulting a child is a whole different story. Heinous!

We will hear about this guy again.

You really should read the article.

 

[torpid]

Recognizing the stigma that comes with being labeled as a sex offender, the appellate court said "it is [Barnaby's] actions which have caused him to be stigmatized, not the courts."

And whe-

...must...take...high...road...
:banghead:

.

 

[waterhouse]

I can't count on all my fingers and toes the times that someone other than my parents grabbed me by the arm and gave me a lecture growing up. Athletic coaches, neighbors, teachers, babysitters, random folks who saw us being a general nuisance to the neighborhood, etc. And every single time I'm absolutely positive (in hindsight) that I deserve to be grabbed by the arm and lectured.

It saddens me that what seems like an adult concerned for the safety of a child too dumb to look both ways has now gotten in trouble for his actions. I realize that it is probably improper to put your hands on someone else’s child, even if it is just to hold them still while you give them a stern talking too. Perhaps he should have gotten a slap on the wrist or something, but a registered sex offender? Come on.

 

[SteveS]

I wonder if this guy hired the worst lawyer in the entire state or maybe we aren't getting the whole story...not that the media ever gets it wrong.

 

[Vernal45]

So many laws out there, we are all, or at some point, will be a criminal. This one has "its for the children" written all over it. If you are under 18, you are no longer required to be responsible for your actions.

 

[joab]

Again
Why is every body so quick to blame the girl.

How do we know that he wasn't the inattentive one.

If you think calling the act of grabbing a childs arm and restraining her against her will to the point that she has to "break free" when you have no right or authority to do so an assault is a wierd way of looking at things,
then you have a very weak understanding of the law and the rights of others


Defending this guy's action simply because he got screwed on the sentancing is a wierd way of looking at things

Showing total disregard for gun safety and common sense results in negligent discharge. As a result, guilty party must register as a sex offender.

Now that is just plain damn ridiculous. Where in that scenario is there any hint of inappropriate action toward a young girl.

Keep your apples and oranges in seperate baskets

you are no longer required to be responsible for your actions.

Well, many here don't seem to want this guy to be held responsible for his actions

 

[JohnKSa]

If he'd run over her and killed her, the chances are very good he wouldn't have been prosecuted at all. Tragic accident, kid's parents should have taught her better and all that jazz...

Not saying he should have--just an interesting observation.

 

[torpid]

joab-

Well, many here don't seem to want this guy to be held responsible for his actions

No, many here are aghast that he is being given the lifetime stigma of sexual predator when the court knows damn well that it really had nothing to do with sexual conduct, but shrug it off onto his shoulders anyway with the "responsible for his actions" excuse instead of actually trying to see that some measure of justice actually is applied to his sentencing.



To put your own words to even better use:

Now that is just plain damn ridiculous.

.

 

[peacefuljeffrey]

Yes, we don't give ankle bracelets to bank robbers, car thieves or muggers. But assaulting a child is a whole different story. Heinous!

Okay, tell us that when your daughter, mother, wife gets mugged and slashed with a razor on her face by some piece of garbage criminal who never showed a "proclivity" toward molestation and therefore never had to wear an ankle bracelet.

Come around here then and tell us how robbers, muggers, robbers, murderers pale in comparison to someone who grabs a girl by the arm, never says anything sexual to her, never touches her sexual parts.

You just seem really out of touch with reality, man... I can't figure it.

And yeah, you seem to protest too much, like someone who wants to reallllly make it understood that he doesn't like the idea of molesting young girls...



-Jeffrey

 

[SMMAssociates]

IANAL, but I am an old rent-a-cop. I've got some legal experience from that, and some general knowledge about things like this. I'd feel better about commenting if I'd stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night, but failing that, I'll continue....

I don't think I'd have made the arrest, given the facts shown in the article (a bit slim, I'm afraid, but the Judge's comment makes me think). He probably shouldn't have touched her, but as crimes go, this isn't one....

Going past that, the idea that he might commit a sex offense at some future time, so he should be punished now, is just plain nuts. Reminds me of GATTACA.... Ex Pre Facto? This is the same sort of thinking that justifies gun bans because the naughty thing might jump off the table and spray bullets around the house.

IOW, sheer nonsense.

I would even give on the assault charge.... There may be circumstances that we don't know about. Wherever that goes is wherever that goes. However, IMHO, the only thing that would justify the sex offender label would be a prior sex crime.

Anybody mention that? I think not....

'Course, it's awfully close to Chicago....

 

[2nd Amendment]

If it was just the assault charge I'd probably let it go, too. Still stinks to high heaven but, well, there could be more here than we know, obviously. But the sex offender angle is so over the top it damages any credibility the court otherwise would have had even on the basic charge.

 

[thorn726]

The guy got what he deserved. He should be wearing an ankle bracelet for the rest of his life.

wow some of you guys are straight nuts.

GOT to LOVE a JUDGE constrained by the statute. i guess he never heard of setting a precedent?

this is ridiculous. MAYBE the guy deserves an assault type charge, but i doubt it .
i wonder if the guy was black and the girl white??? regardless, insanity.

PS= hope you guys who are all for locking this guy down never bend any rules, ever.
everything you do is totally legal all the time 100% right?

sure, grabbing the girl was out of line, but given the judge's statement, the guy had no bad intentions really.
he made a mistake, trying to do the right thing.

now he spends the rest of his life labeled. not even close to fair.

agian, i hope you guys that are all for throwing away the key on this guy never ever get in trouble for ANYTHING cuz the book is coming at ya!

 

[joab]

No, many here are aghast that he is being given the lifetime stigma of sexual predator when the court knows damn well that it really had nothing to do with sexual conduct, but shrug it off onto his shoulders anyway with the "responsible for his actions" excuse instead of actually trying to see that some measure of justice actually is applied to his sentencing.

I am in the group, as I think most if not all of us are, that thinks this guy got screwed and I agree the sentence was inappropriate.

I am talking about the group that puts the blame on the girl for her carelessness, when the only evidence we have is Fitzroy's word.

How many of us have witnessed a traffic accident or near accident where each party swears the other was at fault.

This is not about whether she did or did not cause a near accident. This about an adult male exiting his vehicle to physically restrain a teenage girl who at the time posed no threat to him or herself when he had no legal authority to do so

The incident was over, he chose to escalate a minor incident into a physical altercation.

Due to the fact that his victim was an underage female I could see a couple of years probation at the most and some anger management ( not because it works but because it really pisses angry people off).
But I agree for the manyeth time that the sentence, and the stigma, attached was a gross miscarriage especially with the anti perv sentiments going on right now.

This man's life is destroyed because of a mistake, but it was a mistake of his own making, so my sympathy lies in the overzealous sentencing not in the conviction of the crime that he did commit

 

[crucible]

So now one can be convicted based soley on the "proclivity" of others?

Madness.

 

[peacefuljeffrey]

but given the judge's statement, the guy had no bad intentions really.

No... the judge said that he had to be treated as though he might do the worst imaginable thing simply because the judge can't read his mind and find, there, the assurance that he would not do the worst imaginable thing.

-Jeffrey

 

[thorn726]

I can't count on all my fingers and toes the times that someone other than my parents grabbed me by the arm and gave me a lecture growing up. Athletic coaches, neighbors, teachers, babysitters, random folks who saw us being a general nuisance to the neighborhood, etc. And every single time I'm absolutely positive (in hindsight) that I deserve to be grabbed by the arm and lectured.

excellent point- anyone here NOT had this happen at one time or another??

when i was like 15 some little 10 yr old steals my skateboard. i see him with it. i grab him by the arm and start hassling him.
who gets in BIG trouble?? of course, me.