Twenty Years In Prison For Having Sex With His Wife

http://www.eagleforum.org/column/2006/feb06/06-02-08.html ^ | 2 8 06 | Phyllis Schlafly

[Hoodlum91]

It's not testimony, it a sworn statement. I know, semantics, but the expert never testified in court.

[Publius6961]

So, do you live alone or are you still living with your parents?

I don't live with my parents; and I agree with his statement...

[The Red Zone]

One of the "cracks" something like this could fall into is that the man legally wasn't indigent because his assets were in limbo rather than gone. I would dare to bet if this situation hit the Supreme Court they would follow earlier precedent on right to access to effective counsel. I wonder if he was represented by a traffic court lawyer.

[Publius6961]

It is not possible to prove a negative.
Every adult knows that. Or should.

[Senator Bedfellow]

When a Judge imposes a sentence outside the standard or recommended range, he or she must comply with the rule announced in Blakely vs. Washington (2003)

Blakely is, so far, not retroactive, and how is a judge imposing sentence in 1986 supposed to comply with a ruling made in 2003?

[Wallace T.]

Based on the information on the National Coalition of Free Men Web site, it appears that Hetherington's advocates used the Phil Donahue show in the early 1990s to try to point out the injustices in the case. It may be a good idea to try to interest O'Reilly, or for that matter Limbaugh, Hannity, Savage, Dr. Laura, etc. However, it appears the Michigan courts and bureaucracy are entrenched, and, unless his advocates are successful in finding a basis for appeal to Federal courts, Hetherington will not receive justice on this earth.

[Hemingway's Ghost]

A friend's boyfriend is in jail for child rape. His ex-girlfriends exhusband is suing for custody to avoid child support. One year after the fact, the child claimed that her boyfriend at the time (my friend's current boyfriend) raped her at the age of 8. Thus the mother was not a good mother by putting her in that situation, and the child needed to be sent to live with the father (and of course child support paid by the mother). After a medical examination, they found the child's hymen was still intact and no evidence or scarring of any kind. Furthermore, he passed a lie detector. But on the one time testimony of a (I believe) coerced child to a child pychologist, this man is serving 10 years. And getting beat up daily (as all child molesters should be) but I believe he is innocent. As the victim of sexual abuse as a child, I tend to have a sixth sense about these things.

You need to draw a diagram in order for that story to make any sort of sense.

[ClaireSolt]

Most court proceedings are not transcribed until someone orders a transcript and then that is expensive.

[RockinRight]

I looked at the links too.

When I first saw the headline, I thought "feminism strikes again" but the article fails to mention half of what really happened.

Gotta love that MSM!

[lesser_satan]

I think you owe Iceland a big apology for that comment.

[Hemingway's Ghost]

Goodness YES. Think Rush Limbaugh, Tom Delay, Scooter Libby.

Wonderful, but this guy's a nobody.

[Hemingway's Ghost]

According to the habeas petition and the judge's denial of same, this part of the article is absolutely false - the wife was cross-examined by the defense attorney.

Another thing: the story said the rape (criminal) and divorce (civil) trials occurred at the same time. I'm assuming in separate courts---or perhaps my assumption is correct. Is this even possible?

[mosquitobite]

My brother, M, is 28. He has full custody of his 7YO daughter thanks to her mother's NINE false allegations of sexual abuse.

My brother, B (26), has full custody of his 7YO son thanks to his mother's drug abuse (meth). CPS fought like heck to keep my nephew in state care instead of giving him to his father. B also has joint custody with his 2YO daughter from a subsequent relationship.

The biases against men have improved, but they still have a far way to go. Follow the money. That's the way it works.

Sounds like this poor guy was in the wrong time & place to get true justice. In the 80's, unfortunately, many a woman's word was gospel.

[Hemingway's Ghost]

It is not possible to prove a negative.

As in how does one prove he did not rape a woman? Sure there is: a complete lack of physical evidence and a dearth of circumstantial evidence would prove that no rape occurred. That's what's so perplexing to me about this story: if, as the story claims, there was absolutely no physical evidence whatsoever that a rape took place, why (1) did the cops believe the woman's story, and (2) the prosecutor agree to take on the case?

[AmericanDave]

Thanks for posting the other side.

As a divorced father you lowered my blood pressure considerably!

[painter]

Bump for later.

[mosquitobite]

Sorry, imo that could also be a brain washed child who has grown up to believe the lies her mother told. Are we really to believe the child WATCHED the mother being raped, but still goes to visit her father in jail?

[pabianice]

This one case turns at least 12,000,000 more Americans against feminist lunacy.

[IronJack]

As in how does one prove he did not rape a woman?

More accurately, why does he HAVE to? Our criminal justice system is founded on the doctrine of presumptive INNOCENCE; the burden of proof is on the prosecution.

In other words, the defendant doesn't have to prove he DIDN'T commit the crime; the prosecution has to prove he DID.

[ClaireSolt]

Law enforcement people get on tears about some things, and as they spend all of their time dealing with crooks, they tend to assume that everyone is a crook. It is best to stay away from them.