Reply With Quote
wait...what? are you saying she was 17 but told the guy she was 14?
Judge Dennis Wiley is a district judge in Berrien County, Michigan.
At press time, I'm still looking for name of prosecutor who chose to bring this case to him.
19 year old Zach Anderson of North Indiana used the ap Hot or Not to meet a 17 year old young women from just across the state line in Michigan. Problem is, she lied about her being age 14. Don't know how but it ended up in court in front of Judge Prick. Both the girl’s mother and the girl herself appeared in court, to say they didn’t believe Zach belonged on the sex offender registry. The girl admitted lying and outside of court, she handed the Anderson family a letter. She wrote in part, “I’m sorry I didn’t tell you my age. It kills me every day, knowing you are going through and I’m not. I want to be in trouble and not you.”
Zack Anderson got rung up for 90 days in jail and has to register as a *sex offender* for 25 years.
More details here:
http://ktla.com/2015/08/04/dating-app-hookup-lands-19-year-old-indiana-man-on-sex-offender-registry-forces-him-out-of-home/
wait...what? are you saying she was 17 but told the guy she was 14?
ah...I just read the article. You worded it weird.
Buyer beware IMO. Don't trust es in this situation. Unfortunately, it's to a point where a young man will need to card a would be date.
Oh yeah i worded it that way on purpose. The chick represented herself as 17.
As to the kuuunt judge, hardly the 1st time he has pulled chit like this.
The Cruel, Petty Sentencing Practices of Judge Dennis Wiley
http://reason.com/blog/2015/07/24/the-cruel-petty-sentencing-practices-of
During Anderson’s sentencing hearing, Wiley told him: “You went online…trolling for women to meet and have sex with. That seems to be part of our culture now: meet, hook up, have sex, sayonara. Totally inappropriate behavior. There is no excuse for this, whatsoever.”
The Anderson case was not Wiley’s first foray into scolding online daters. Wiley recently put another Indiana 19-year-old, Darian Yoder, on the sex offender registry for having consensual sex with a 13-year-old who also claimed to be of age. They met via the same “Hot or Not” app that Anderson used.
Yes, these teenagers went online to meet women. People do that in 2015. Wiley chose to make an example out of Anderson and Yoder because of his own moral qualms with modernity.
Unfortunately, these are just the most recent examples in a long line of cases where Wiley exercised his discretion in a manner that was especially harsh toward low-level offenders.
In April 2014, Wiley was censured for misconduct after he had LaRue Ford charged with contempt. Ford spent 10 nights in jail—including Christmas—after not paying $5,000 in bond. Her crime? Muttering “ this ” while in the courthouse dealing with a traffic ticket. The courthouse staff that overheard Ford mentioned it to Wiley, who then took matters into his own hands.
Curtis Pedzinski, a 21-year-old native of St. Joseph, Michiga, was sentenced by Wiley to between 14 months and 2 years in prison for “unlawful use of a motor vehicle,” or joyriding. Years earlier, Pedzinski had been convicted of breaking and entering. Wiley’s sentence was significantly more severe than what state guidelines called; Wiley justified it by claiming that proper weight had not been given to Pedzinski’s past.
more on the link.
oh well. Judges can certainly be pricks. All the more reason to make sure you're not on the wrong side of the law. But I don't have any sympathy for a 19 year old who has sex with a 13 year old.
Except that's not the way it reads, dip
Ya.
Well there is hope.
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/show...ghlight=Trolls
The way you worded it, She is 17 and said she was 14.
Fabbs, people like you are what's wrong with this site, not the trolls. Just admit that you used ty syntax, and move on. Instead, you just had to double-down on it. That's pride in' wit ya
The Grammar correction police got
That's one of the troll types mentioned in the article.
and?
You mean like she was 17 and lied and said she was 14?
Ok well the links to the articles are there but if it will help i can edit.
Misleading thread. I also read it as 19 guys have sex with 17 year old.
LOL at equating this with grammar police. Your up changed the entire gist of the story. I seriously thought I was going to read an article about a 19 year old who wanted to have sex with a 14 year old. And was going to be prosecuted for his intent rather than the action (which was sex with a 17 year old).The Grammar correction police got
That's one of the troll types mentioned in the article.
Judge in another state ruled against a guy who did card the chick. She had fake i.d.
WTH was he supposed to do?
Plus the confusion of three judges. Jude Ahole was mentioned in the le never to be seen again. Meanwhile, there is a Judge Prick and a Judge Wiley...both seeming to have some kind of jurisdiction.
You added the "s".
That's the whole point.
I led it that way on purpose so you could see it from the guys perspective.
Spend a little time, you'll get it.
I don't know. Can you link the article? With your history, I can't be sure what you're trying to say.
No link.
Read it in newpaper quite a while ago.
ah. so now I have to fill in the blanks for your memory as well as your poor diction.
warning...warning
Potential for Convulsion is reaching maximum levels
Aww.
Is Trolly not *winning*?
How about keeping his out of a complete stranger? Maybe if his brain wasn't ruled by his he would have been thinking a bit more clearly about the consequences of hooking up with someone he doesn't really know anything about. He took the risk and lost. Boohoo.
This argument doesn't make any sense. Her brain was being ruled by her vagina just like his was by his , one. Two, he attempted to ascertain relevant information about her. It's not his fault she lied.
He broke the law, indisputably. But to not assign her fair share of the blame is ridiculous. She's not an innocent little angel when she's premeditating using a fake ID to get ed.
she's not innocent but a 13 year old deserves more protection than a 19 year old. We don't have the capability to screen every single person to come up with an exact maturity level reading. So a 13 year is always going to get the benefit of the doubt.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
