Posted on 01/21/2009 5:25:36 AM PST by stan_sipple
A prosecutor in Kansas has failed to block the suspension of his law license by arguing that his alleged Asperger Syndrome played a part in his decision to show sexually explicit photos of drunken teens at a party to their parents.
The Supreme Court of Kansas on Friday suspended Anderson County Attorney Frederick Campbell, 49, from practice for six months. The court concluded that he violated attorney ethics rules when he attempted to demonstrate to a group of parents the dangers of teenage drinking by presenting them with photos of teens drinking and engaging in sexual intercourse.
(Excerpt) Read more at law.com ...
Suddenly everyone seems to have Aspergers is that the boutique syndrome of the year? Sounds like this guy needs a game changing moment and yes, he can.
Yes, it is the current fad disease, taking over the lead from ADD. Which took over from Chronic Fatigue.
Just the latest scam.
You left out PTSD.
Since 100% of the population has Autism now — which helps explain poor test grades, poor behavior. A new, more exotic disease has to be used to explain adult failings — Aspergers.
The problem is that the norm today is two parents working with little oversight of their children. To help assuage their guilt, it used to be ADHD, then Autism, now Aspergers to explain away the anti-social behaviour. Don’t get me wrong, there are authentic cases of the above, but not in the numbers reported today.
Oh crap, I just got Aspergers.
He should have thought of that before entering his profession, at least in litigating.
Upon reading the newspaper article, C.H.'s mother contacted Campbell and told him that she would not give her permission to show the photos. In response, Campbell told her that he did not need her permission. According to the decision, Campbell sent letters to 12 parents inviting them to see the photographs. Five parents viewed them.
That was just so wrong.
There are many, many, many other abuses by lawyers that should be addressed too, though.
Finally, I'm also surprised that nobody has speculated on the nationality of the exchange student who was accused of the sexual assaults.
I called out today with a case of "24 hour AIDS". You don't suppose my boss will figger out that's a made up malady, do you?
Owl_Eagle
“When the stock market crashed,
Franklin Roosevelt got on the television
and didn’t just talk about
the princes of greed, he said,
‘Look, here’s what happened.’"
-Slow Joe Biden
Hey, schools have shown kids movies of people with their brains splattered all over the road as a result of drunk driving.
I wonder if the parents that saw the photos will have disciplined their kids that were photographed? I am guerssing they will rather sue the lawyer with Asperger Syndrome instead and teach their kids litigation is the best way to get ahead in life...
After reading the article, I agree that the prosecutor acted inappropriately. However, I don’t see what the mother’s objection was to a few adults seeing the pictures, when everyone the person who took them knows has seen them, and everyone those people know has seen them, and so on.
The subject, Miss C.H., should have them blown up to poster size and put on the wall, to remind her not to be such an idiot in the future.
Words fail.
I'm not sure why anyone would, but I think you just did.
Why??? He showed the parents what their kids were doing and why they were facing prosecution or at least involved in a case he was prosecuting.
I don’t want to see pictures of my children doing such things, but on the same token, I am not going to be mad at the person that showed them to me, I’m going to be mad at my children for doing them.
It seems that the knee-jerk that used to be so common around here might be getting dull.
“After reading the article, I agree that the prosecutor acted inappropriately.”
Initially, he showed courage in declining to prosecute, based on the evidence of consent. Many prosecutors wouldn’t take that chance at the lash-back they might receive in the media, and would rubber-stamp a prosecution they understood to be without merit. The Duke rape charges come to mind.
But then he crossed the line by taking on ‘public service’ act (educating the other parents) using, extra-judiciously, evidence collected by the investigation, and revealing it over the objections of the subject’s parents.
If, by doing that, he was trying to assure the other parents that his decision not to prosecute the exchange student was justified, then one can understand his motivation. But — he also understood he needed the consent of the girl (or her parents’ consent) in the photo, and the parents withheld consent, and he went forward anyway.
Excellent points.
Interesting projection.
Same here. What is wrong with this world? Didn’t read the article but how is it the prosecutors got pictures?
“how is it the prosecutors got pictures?”
Those kids love their cell phones.
Are you trying to sharpen it? ;)
Hey, it could work...my boss has yet to figure out that my Anal Blindness is not a real disease.
I don’t want to see pictures of my children doing such things, but on the same token, I am not going to be mad at the person that showed them to me, I’m going to be mad at my children for doing them.
Nothing like misplaced anger to stoke the legal flames.
Whatever you do, DO NOT call out with lycanthropy. All it takes is a simple google search (the tip off is when your boss asks you how to spell it) and the whole thing is called into question. Plus, my understanding is there's a T.V. show coming out that's going to blow the cover off the entire caper.
Owl_Eagle
“When the stock market crashed,
Franklin Roosevelt got on the television
and didn’t just talk about
the princes of greed, he said,
‘Look, here’s what happened.’"
-Slow Joe Biden
I know!
How dare you hold your children responsible for their actions!
This lawyer deserves to be sued. He abused and further victimized a minor girl, who had already been victimized by her so called friends. Frankly, if it was my daughter, he would have a lot more to worry about than just a law suit.
My dog thought that post was really funny (she is reading over my shoulder).
I thought that only afflicted Cyclops?
He didn't show pictures of THEIR children to their parents. He showed pictures of a minor girl having sex who's mother had specifically warned him not to show the pictures to others to the parents of the teens who took the pictures of her. Basically what he did is distribute child pornography to the parents of the very same kids who made the child pornography thereby victimizing the girl yet again. The guy belongs behind bars.
I understand the whole minor thing, but how is the girl a victim? She is the one slutting it around with her friends. You can’t honestly tell me she was raped... Especially in front of her friends?
Bingo, you got it. Place blame where it needs to be, on the kids conducting this lewd and lascivious behavior.
It appears to be a “too little, too late” response from the parent.
Oh, nooooo...it can affect anyone. Especially on the Friday before a three-day weekend
You, sir, have your priorities straight.
It's like the mental retardation of all the people on death row. Some defense lawyer got away with it in some case where the defendant was obviously guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt and now all the other lawyers are scrambling to use in one way or another. If the Twinky defense had worked it would be all the rage in our courts today. There are fads in the courthouse just as there are fads in business administration (see Dilbert for the latest).
Oh, I think even if 95% of the population had seen my daughter naked, I'd still try to shield her from the remaining 5%. Illogical maybe, but instinctual, I believe.
It sounds like the pictures may have showed more "moderate" bad behavior by the other kids, with another person's child having sex right in the middle of it.
A couple of pictures of groups of kids drinking, or engaging in vandalism, ok. But two kids having sex shown to parents of the kid in the background holding a beer? Inappropriate.
Again, their kids were involved, so, he showed the parents what their kids were up to. Embarrassing for the mother perhaps, but her daughter had sex obviously in front of other folks, who obviously had cameras... So she wants to get mad, get mad at her daughter.
If he did distribute “child porn” by his actions, then prosecute him under the law, but don’t do this stupid nonsense pandering to a mother who’s anger is completely misplaced.
Kids do stupid things, like get drunk. It is illegal to take advantage of them even if they do do stupid things. Are you implying that it is ok to have sex with underage girls as long as they are drunk and consensual? Is it ok to distribute child pornography as long as the girl was drunk and consensual at the time it was made?
Age of consent laws were made for precisely this purpose, to protect minors from many of the bad consequences of their immature decision making ability. In this case everyone involved, including the prosecutor, took advantage of her. Yes, she is a victim.
She should have thought about that before 1)getting drunk, 2)engaging in sexual behavior as a minor, 3)doing it in a non-private area, 4)having it filmed.
Also it mentioned in the article he blanked out any nudity and covered the faces to protect the identities of the teens. No child pornography laws would be violated as he was not distributing these photographs to child pedophiles but as a deterrent to the parents of said teens so they could better parent their own kids to prevent them from becoming future pimps and hookers.
“It appears to be a “too little, too late” response from the parent.”
Agree, and there are some unstated facts here that everyone should consider.
First, the girl in the pictures consented to the sexual activity(that info is apparently clear from the picture and from the story from the other kids). If that’s the case, then that same girl potentially committed a crime by bringing a knowingly false accusation of rape against the exchange student.
That is a very ‘evil’ crime, since its so hard and painful to defend oneself against — see again, the Duke Lacrosse case.
And the girl waited 4 days before coming forward with her accusation — which makes me wonder if the interaction between her and her parents is in play here.
So — her parents are upset because the prosecutor didn’t buy their story - while they could have been grateful that the prosecutor didn’t charge them with filing a false claim.
The the prosecutor wants those same parents to cooperate in ‘educating’ the other parents about their children’s behavior — and the parents of the ‘really bad’ girl object to the use of the photograph.
I suppose the prosecutor was trying to bring the other parents to see that his decision to not prosecute was well grounded. But — once he got the ‘red-light’ from the bad girl’s parents, he needed to stop and recalculate. He didn’t.
Oh, I imagine she is plenty mad at her daughter, but that doesn't mean she can't also be mad it the monster who continued to show pictures of her underage daughter having sex to the parents of her friends even after she warned him not to.
If you think it's appropriate to distribute child pornography as a deterrent for underage drinking, there is something wrong with your head, just as there is obviously something wrong with with the prosecutor who did this. He lost his license for six months, but that is just the beginning of what is is about to lose. The next few years are going to be tough on him and rightly so.
Undoubtedly, but as she was a minor, she is protected by law by the age of consent laws. That is to say it is still illegal to have sex with or photograph or distribute photos of a minor whither she thought about the consequences of her actions or not.
If the mother wants to be mad at anyone she should turn her wrath at her own daughter and perhaps the guy that took her daughters virginity, or the guy's parents for creating such a monster that wanted to defile her daughter.
Explain how she is protected by said laws? Those same laws could prosecute her for engaging in sex with an underage male. And correct it is still illegal to have sex with a minor which is precisely why the mother or daughter even should be thanking their lucky stars they aren't being prosecuted. He wasn't distributing photos he was showing "A" photo and it concealed the identity of the teens and censored the nudity. That is NOT child pornography. Stop making excuses for the bad behavior of these teens.
Yes, in the context of the accusation of sexual assault, the prosecutor’s actions make a certain amount of sense. He didn’t use good judgment, but one can understand his reasoning.
lol, sure like they wouldn't know who it was otherwise. Her showed pictures of her having sex to her friends parents. You don't think they knew exactly who and what was going on in the photos anyway?
Further, since she was the only one doing anything seriously embarrassing, it is obvious he didn't do it to educate the other kids parents about the dangers of underage drinking, although that was his excuse. No, the real reason he did it was to punish the girl for accusing the foreign exchange student of statutory rape.
By talking about it in the paper he wanted to send a message to underage girls that if they mess up and do something stupid, they are on their own. That not only will he not protect their rights in court, but he will embarrass them publicly and distribute nude photos of them to the parents of their friends.
Perhaps it isn't a bad idea to make girls more aware of the consequences of stupid decisions, but age of consent laws were designed to protect minors so it is clear the majority of society doesn't feel the same way about this as this prosecutor. That he has lost his law license should tell you that you are arguing on the wrong side on this issue.
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.