Posted on 06/30/2014 8:23:42 PM PDT by Cheerio
While the national media is busy convincing the American electorate that the Supreme Court ruled that no one can ever touch a birth control pill ever again because the GOP hates women, let me present to you a story that would be a national outrage emblematic of half the country’s values…if it involved a Republican.
Credit to the Richmond Times-Dispatch for at least getting the “D” in the lede.
HENRICO — A special grand jury today issued five indictments against Del. Joseph D. Morrissey, D-Henrico, adding to a long political and legal career marked by controversy, sanctions and, now, allegations of illicit sex.
The charges by the grand jury meeting in Henrico include felony counts of indecent liberties with a minor, possession of pornographic images of an underage female and of solicitation to obtain the images.
“He had sex with her twice in his law office and texted someone about it,” special prosecutor William Neely said.
Morrissey also was indicted on a felony charge of distribution of child pornography and a misdemeanor charge of contributing to the delinquency of a minor.
Morrissey has been in the Virginia House of Delegates since 2008 despite a couple other odd incidents in his history. This indictment comes after months of interviews. The father of a 17-year-old secretary to Morrissey triggered the investigation when he reported being concerned about her relationship with the politician:
The young woman, Morrissey and his team of lawyers later argued, was a secretary in Morrissey’s law office who falsely had claimed she was 22 years old. Anthony Troy, a former state attorney general and Morrissey’s lawyer, told reporters that Morrissey and the young woman had an appropriate, professional relationship and that when she met with Morrissey at his home in late August wanted to talk about personal problems within her family.
Well, there’s Hillary’s running mate.
At least he was diddling a female....
On second thought, that probably offends more of the Donk base than if he’d been doing a teen male.
I don’t know about that one. The girl worked in his office and got the job by lying and saying she was 22. It turns out she was 17.
I don’t know about you, but “back in the day” I wasn’t checking the driver’s licenses of the girls I would “take out” ... :-) ...
The media will call it “Youth Outreach.”
I agree. If she was working in his office, and claimed to be of age, no one would have any reason not to believe her. This might almost be a set-up. I’m no fan of any Democrat, but... this one’s a little hinky.
The DemocRAT Party. Where every day is “hump” day!
Oh wait, he’s 56. Hm. Shouldn’t be going after a 22 year old, really. Sigh. Oh well, he’s on his own.
When I saw the molested minor was a female I figured the perp couldn’t really be a democrat.
That doesn’t make too much difference “socially” these days ... and I know it doesn’t make a bit of difference “legally”.
If this part of the article is accurate, then he was likely framed.
Here’s the quote(sentence numbers in brackets added by me):
[1.] “The young woman, Morrissey and his team of lawyers later argued, was a secretary in Morrissey’s law office who falsely had claimed she was 22 years old. [2a.] Anthony Troy, a former state attorney general and Morrissey’s lawyer, told reporters that Morrissey and the young woman had an appropriate, professional relationship and that [2b.] when she met with Morrissey at his home in late August wanted to talk about personal problems within her family.”
1. The “Sweet Thang” lied about her age, falsely claiming she was not a minor.
2. The relationship was proper/professional until “Sweet Thang” apparently changed it “when she met with Morrissey at his home in late August”.
3. Supposedly she “wanted to talk about personal problems within her family.”
One wonders why she went to the Democrats home for a discussion. Was this her idea, or his.
Given that both the Democrat and probably the alleged “victim” may be reasonably be assumed to be real Democrats - I suspect both, but Sweet Thang’s story seems to be a crude attempt to place blame on the lawyer for the sexual relationship which she well may have lied her way into.
I find it disconcerting to be raising the aforementioned issues on behalf of a Democrat, a politician, and a lawyer. None are desirable life forms in my opinion, but this just reeks of a daughter caught by Daddy in an affair and trying to set the blame on the male.
““He had sex with her twice in his law office and texted someone about it,” special prosecutor William Neely said.”
Why do Democrats have these urges to incriminate themselves through electronic means? I know they’re pompous idiots who believe themselves above the law, but does self-preservation mean nothing to them??
I know, but... it’s yucky. I swear, a lot of men just lose their minds when they reach their mid-40s. It’s like the sex-drive shifts into “mindlessly desperate and shamelessly creepy.”
What would he be doing to incriminate himself? It’s not illegal to have sex with a 22-year old girl ...
Oh wait, he’s 56. Hm. Shouldn’t be going after a 22 year old, really. Sigh. Oh well, he’s on his own.
There is an adage, “There’s no fool like an old fool”.
Knowing the Dems they will take it as an indicator of a trend in lifestyle choices.
Perhaps the next executive order will be to lower the age of consent...
56 divided by half plus seven equals 35.
The gay adage equals your age, minus 40.
56 - 22 = 34
34 +7 = 41
41 divided by 2 = 20.5
He’s good to go.
Now, if it was half your age MINUS 7, well. He'd be golden.
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.