Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 21
  1.    #1  
    Fitzroy Barnaby said he had to swerve to avoid hitting the 14-year-old Des Plaines girl who walked in front of his car.

    She said he yelled, "Come here, little girl," before getting out of his car and grabbing her by the arm.

    He said he simply lectured her.

    She said she broke free and ran, fearful of what he'd do next.

    In a Thursday ruling, the Appellate Court of Illinois said the 28-year-old Evanston man must register as a sex offender.

    While acknowledging it might be "unfair for [Barnaby] to suffer the stigmatization of being labeled a sex offender when his crime was not sexually motivated," the court said his actions are the type that are "often a precursor" to a child being abducted or molested.

    Though Barnaby was acquitted of attempted kidnapping and child abduction charges stemming from the November 2002 incident, he was convicted of unlawful restraint of a minor -- which is a sex offense.

    'Most stupid ruling'

    Now, he will have to tell local police where he lives and won't be able to live near a park or school.

    "This is the most stupid ruling the appellate court has rendered in years," said Barnaby's Chicago attorney, Frederick Cohn. "If you see a 15-year-old beating up your 8-year-old and you grab that kid's hand and are found guilty of unlawful restraint, do you now have to register as a sex offender?"

    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."

    "I don't really see the purpose of registration in this case. I really don't," Morse said. "But I feel that I am constrained by the statute."

    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."

    http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/...-molest01.html
  2. #2  
    Had he ran her over and killed her, he probably would've gotten off with no charges pressed, unless he was DUI or reckless in some way...
    MaxiMunK.com The Forum That Asks, "Are You Not Entertained?"

    Remember: "Anyone that thinks the Treo should just work right out of the box, shouldn't own a Treo..."
  3. #3  
    odd but...

    Why did he grab her arm?
  4. #4  
    Quote Originally Posted by dutchtrumpet
    odd but...

    Why did he grab her arm?
    Cuz he missed her breasticles??
    MaxiMunK.com The Forum That Asks, "Are You Not Entertained?"

    Remember: "Anyone that thinks the Treo should just work right out of the box, shouldn't own a Treo..."
  5. #5  
    Easy solution: don't grab, restrain, and chastise a little girl or boy unless they're yours.
  6.    #6  
    Quote Originally Posted by treosome
    Easy solution: don't grab, restrain, and chastise a little girl or boy unless they're yours.
    In the old days, this would have been called assault.

    I've jumped out of my car and grabbed a kid throwing rocks from the sidewalk. I'm a perv.
  7. #7  
    Quote Originally Posted by treosome
    Easy solution: don't grab, restrain, and chastise a little girl or boy unless they're yours.
    Well, 14 years old isn't exactly little. But okay, if some fourteen year old little puke is kicking the s h i t out of some old lady, I guess I'll be niiiiiiiice, and walk away.



    Hopefully it's your *** he's kicking.
    MaxiMunK.com The Forum That Asks, "Are You Not Entertained?"

    Remember: "Anyone that thinks the Treo should just work right out of the box, shouldn't own a Treo..."
  8. #8  
    Quote Originally Posted by burnout
    In the old days, this would have been called assault.

    I've jumped out of my car and grabbed a kid throwing rocks from the sidewalk. I'm a perv.
    In the older days it would have been called "justified." I come from the time when it was apparently okay for a teacher to grab your hair or lead you down the hall by your ear. And I'm only 35.

    Pamela
    Using my treo 650 for business:
    DesignExtend.com
  9. #9  
    ok, I agree assault would've been more appropriate. Either way, discipline of a minor should always be left up to the guardian. btw, what's up with the attemped kidnapping? I don't care if he was acquitted but what the hell's the story behind that?
  10. #10  
    Have you ever tried to get a 14 year old to tell you who and where his/her parents are so you can tell them they need to punish them for something? It ain't going to happen. And, you can't always just sit back and say "Oh, those darn kids. Kids will be kids I guess."
  11. #11  
    Quote Originally Posted by treosome
    ok, I agree assault would've been more appropriate. Either way, discipline of a minor should always be left up to the guardian. btw, what's up with the attemped kidnapping? I don't care if he was acquitted but what the hell's the story behind that?
    It should but at the same time, Im not gonna let some kid beat the crap out of my little girl. If they want to charge me with assault, fine. My defense would be self-defense (defense of others.)

    When it looked like this was going to go to trial, Im surprised that the attorney didnt consider a plea.
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  12. #12  
    you all are missing the bigger problem here. this man should be innocent (sp?) until proven guilty. but insted the court did it the other way around. if the court does not know what your intentions were because they can't read your mind, I think you have a right to be free.
    visor deluxe->clie n760->treo 300->treo 600->treo 650 -> treo 700p -> treo 755p
    _________________________________________
    I may not know, but I'll bet my phone does!
  13. #13  
    Quote Originally Posted by mrgarza
    you all are missing the bigger problem here. this man should be innocent (sp?) until proven guilty. but insted the court did it the other way around. if the court does not know what your intentions were because they can't read your mind, I think you have a right to be free.
    How does that make sense. ..work this all the way through.

    If the court (judge or jury) cant read your mind, then you are innocent? If thats the case, no one would ever be convicted (unless you were caught in the act I guess.) Why? Because no one can read someone elses mind.

    The court looks at your level of intent by usually examining your actions. Your attorney would say "He was grabbing her arm to warn her not to play in the street" and the other attorney would say "He was grabbing her arm just like anyone else who assaults and batters someone. A Judge or jury looks at the testimony of what occurred and then they decide whether you intended to do what you did (allegedly of course ).
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  14. #14  
    what is revealed by the absurdity of that case is the disproportionate and unfair punishments meted out when demagogic legislators handcuff judges and require fixed penalties. These statutes dictate penalties irrespective of circumstances. Fixed penalty statutes preclude almost any judicial introspection.

    That is how in NY state some relatively minor first 1st time drug defendants received 25 yrs to life. That is why some california convicts with 2 misdemeanors and 1 modest felony have been sentenced to life in prison. Good conservative and liberal judges have both protested the evident unjustness of this.

    Ironically, cases like this one make it difficult to support “2-3 strikes and you’re out” for genuinely despicable sex offenders like the beast recently caught in Idaho.

    A national DNA data base for sex criminals (and only sex criminals) seems to be required. And I would want a rational legal mechanism that could be applied with intelligence and discretion to repeat sex criminals (NOT people like the arm grabber). There must be LENGTHY incarceration after the 2nd or 3rd SERIOUS sex offence.

    (The problem will always be that demagogic politicians are tempted to play to their dumbest constituent, and pretty soon BJs between consenting adults will be criminalized again ...)
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  15. #15  
    Barye: I agreed all the way until you got to the last sentence. (I don't think it will get that bad.)
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  16. #16  
    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    Barye: I agreed all the way until you got to the last sentence. (I don't think it will get that bad.)

    remember it was unelected "liberal" judges who decrimialized BJs -- most especially not southern legislatures ...
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  17. #17  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE
    remember it was unelected "liberal" judges who decrimialized BJs -- most especially not southern legislatures ...
    Are you referring to Lawrence v. Texas or the overturning of Bowers v. Hardwick or another case?
    Palm III-->Palm IIIxe-->Palm 505-->Samsung i300-->Treo 600-->PPC 6600-->Treo 650-->Treo 700wx-->BB Pearl--> BB Curve

  18. #18  
    Quote Originally Posted by t2gungho
    Are you referring to Lawrence v. Texas or the overturning of Bowers v. Hardwick or another case?

    I only have a casual knowledge of those cases. They both were about consensual BJs -- in the first case (Bowers v. Hardwick), the "liberal" supremes upheld laws against BJs (sodomy) -- even when the police acted with EXTRAORDINARY contravention of all expectations of freedom and privacy.

    17 years later in Lawrence v. Texas (land where free thinkers and lovers of freedom are raised) the supremes revisited essentially the same issues and decided that --- ahhh --- maybe you Texans are wrong.

    Scalie angrily wrote a dissent to Lawrence where among other things he warned "that the Court's decision means that state criminal laws against fornication, bigamy, adultery, adult incest, bestiality, and obscenity cannot survive."

    (what was that line from An Officer & A Gentleman:
    "only 2 things come from Texas steers and q****s" ???)
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  19. #19  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE
    (what was that line from An Officer & A Gentleman:
    "only 2 things come from Texas steers and q****s" ???)
    Is that why at UT they say Hook'em Horns
    Well behaved women rarely make history
  20. #20  
    Quote Originally Posted by clairegrrl
    Is that why at UT they say Hook'em Horns
    ya, gidy up! ride dem cowboys ! ...

    (BTW -- I personally have no interest in Texas long horns ... )
    Last edited by BARYE; 07/06/2005 at 01:15 AM.
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions