I'll email you a bottle if you insist on reading the thread. 
Posted on 11/08/2007 1:49:18 PM PST by ShadowDancer
I love a happy ending!
I'll email you a bottle if you insist on reading the thread.
No, it’s in Michigan but not even close to Detroit.
750.520e. Fourth degree criminal sexual conduct
Sec. 520e. (1) A person is guilty of criminal sexual conduct in the fourth degree if he or she engages in sexual contact with another person and any of the following circumstances exists:
(a) Force or coercion is used to accomplish the sexual contact. Force or coercion includes but is not limited to any of the circumstances listed in section (1) (f) (I) to (v).
(b) The actor knows or has reason to know that the victim is incapable, mentally incapacitated, or physically helpless.
(c) That other person is under the jurisdiction of the department of corrections, and the actor is an employee or a contractual employee or volunteer with, the department of corrections who has knowledge that the other person is under the jurisdiction of the department of corrections.
(2) Criminal sexual conduct in the fourth degree is a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for not more than 2 years, or by a fine of not more than $500.00 or both.
Thanks. I'm not sure exactly what he did, but the above doesn't look good.
I’m one of these idiots that think the punishment should match the crime. In today’s system some people get off too easily, some people are over-punished.
So what’s the problem here? Arson? Improper disposal of trash? Littering?
Another HildaBeast Doner bites the dust . . ..
Worst case of suicide I ever seen.
THE MICHIGAN PENAL CODE (EXCERPT)
Act 328 of 1931
750.520e Criminal sexual conduct in the fourth degree; misdemeanor.
Sec. 520e.
(1) A person is guilty of criminal sexual conduct in the fourth degree if he or she engages in sexual contact with another person and if any of the following circumstances exist:
(a) That other person is at least 13 years of age but less than 16 years of age, and the actor is 5 or more years older than that other person.
(b) Force or coercion is used to accomplish the sexual contact. Force or coercion includes, but is not limited to, any of the following circumstances:
(i) When the actor overcomes the victim through the actual application of physical force or physical violence.
(ii) When the actor coerces the victim to submit by threatening to use force or violence on the victim, and the victim believes that the actor has the present ability to execute that threat.
(iii) When the actor coerces the victim to submit by threatening to retaliate in the future against the victim, or any other person, and the victim believes that the actor has the ability to execute that threat. As used in this subparagraph, “to retaliate” includes threats of physical punishment, kidnapping, or extortion.
(iv) When the actor engages in the medical treatment or examination of the victim in a manner or for purposes which are medically recognized as unethical or unacceptable.
(v) When the actor achieves the sexual contact through concealment or by the element of surprise.
(c) The actor knows or has reason to know that the victim is mentally incapable, mentally incapacitated, or physically helpless.
(d) That other person is related to the actor by blood or affinity to the third degree and the sexual contact occurs under circumstances not otherwise prohibited by this chapter. It is an affirmative defense to a prosecution under this subdivision that the other person was in a position of authority over the defendant and used this authority to coerce the defendant to violate this subdivision. The defendant has the burden of proving this defense by a preponderance of the evidence. This subdivision does not apply if both persons are lawfully married to each other at the time of the alleged violation.
(e) The actor is a mental health professional and the sexual contact occurs during or within 2 years after the period in which the victim is his or her client or patient and not his or her spouse. The consent of the victim is not a defense to a prosecution under this subdivision. A prosecution under this subsection shall not be used as evidence that the victim is mentally incompetent.
(f) That other person is at least 16 years of age but less than 18 years of age and a student at a public or nonpublic school, and the actor is a teacher, substitute teacher, or administrator of that public or nonpublic school. This subdivision does not apply if the other person is emancipated or if both persons are lawfully married to each other at the time of the alleged violation.
(2) Criminal sexual conduct in the fourth degree is a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for not more than 2 years or a fine of not more than $500.00, or both.
Start drinking then pal!
Second? With all the threads on democrats?
Remember there was a case in New England somewhere (I believe) where a guy who had been convicted of some kind of sexual activity with his girlfriend (and he was only 2 years older or something like that) was killed by someone who went looking for ‘sex offenders’ to kill. Problem being that the guy was not evil or even a deviant. He had merely had sex with his girlfriend while both were teens very close in age.
I don’t know if certain crimes should put the ‘sex offender for life’ status on a person. Some of them seem totally different than what we THINK OF when we say the word sex offender.
Maybe only rape, attempted rape, child rape (not statutory rape) and molestation should be given this designation.
Technically speaking, someone who grabbed someone’s behind at a club could be given sex offender status. That’s ridiculous.
I think the a, b, c means that it merely has to be ONE of those things. Given what a poster after you put out there, it could be that he was 22 and the person was 15.
Wrong and inappropriate, yeah.
But not worth the death penalty.
It’s hard without knowing his particular case.
What I don’t get is why people aren’t more hopped up to kill convicts who have been released after serving 8 years for MURDER.
Those are the people any vigilantes should be targeting.
In the first, a in chicago, a truck was wrecked by a headless driver.
Cool - thanks for the info. Sure wish the news had more info on the conviction.
Don’t you just hate it when your day starts like that!!
Jesse & the Reverend need to get on this immediately. This is an obvious hate crime. Sex offenders are some of the most discriminated against segment of our population.
In more important news, I heard Hillary didn’t leave a tip.
Me. ;-)
She still has his vote.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.