Hundreds of molesters freed by Supreme Court
 

LINKY



Now there's gonna be thousands of child molesting priests and a ton of other sick bastards running around again.
I can't believe that the Supreme Court would do something this dumb.
Child molesters are scum of the earth and should locked up or better yet strapped into the electric chair and killed.

Not only do I feel this decision is scary, I
simply cannot see the reason behind it.
There is already too much perverse crime happening in today's societies...no need to add more. This is ridiculous! How are parents going to get ANY sleep at all, knowing that there are so many roaming sickos?

I'm with the Supreme Court on this one. The idea that a legislature can arbitrarily decide when to bring some one to trial, as Breyer writes, "risks both arbitrary and potentially vindicate legislation." I'd want to read the whole decision to be sure, but I suspect it only applies to those cases which occured before the law was passed -- that's what ex post facto means.

i feel that there should be no stxtute of limitations on any issue involving children child abuse in any form is not to be tolerated under any circumstances l

I don't care when the law was passed. a molestor is a danger to society, and one of the few cases where even I don't see rehabilitation as possible. I guess the best we can hope for is that they don't get around to un-registering these guys as sex offenders. How could our highest court do something so stupid? Whether or not it's illegal, it's wrong, and these people should not be allowed out.

Exactly. Seperate in your mind the crime, however heinious and what the constitution rightly allows. No Laws should be able to be passed retroactively, talk about your tools for fascism.

Yah these people are scumbags but previous to 1994 they had unfortunelty got away with it.

Do you really want the state to retroactively be able to change laws and penalties? Got any problem with the state deceiding to change the penalty for speeding to $1000 and 6 month licence suspension? This is exactly the issue at stake.

--
"Good citizens - and good friends - oppose bad policies. By telling you the truth, they strive to save you from folly. They may be mistaken, but they are not your enemies. "

i agree w/ the court.

for criminal cases, you cant just prosecute somebody (who committed a crime earlier) under the new laws under no situation.

I'm a little angry.. Notice how BOTH cases of child molesters were PRIESTS!?!?!? WHAT THE FUCK IS THIS? Yeah i'm angry about the reading, but why the fuck can't they drop the fucking priest molesters.... people were molesting children BEFORE THEM. Its happened before, drop the fucking priests. They're not special..... augh! this just pisses me off so much.

I would have to agree with everything you said . People need to drop the priest thing I am so tired of hearing about it. It makes me sick to think that in the country that I live in the Supreme Court passed this law. But I guess I don't have to worry about it because if I ever found out anyone touched either of my kids I would kill them so they wouldn't need to worry about the trial and going to jail.

is there not a criteria for lawmakers to have common sense?

i can see the point on their issue of time. but letting everyone out?

if no one sees a connection between this and the church i feel bad for them. this is evil.


so..................


if there is a time limit, is it too late to go thin the herd?

its a shame we can't take action.

fuckers should die.

The point is that permitting the government to make ex post facto laws is much more dangerous than letting hundreds of molestors go..

It's a horrible reality but the lesser of the two evils IS letting hundreds of molestors go.

No it is NOT.
Child molesters are a special case - It does not matter how long ago the offence took place, if there is enough evidence they should be prosecuted.
I wonder if you would say this was the lesser of the two evils if you, or a member of your family had been the victim of one of these people. I also wonder if you will still agree with the court if next week one of these people who have been released goes and rapes a child.

I wonder if you would still disagree with the court if ex post facto laws were used to eliminate entire political parties, religious groups, ethnic groups, etc. etc.(ala Stalin, Saddam, etc.)

Also, sixate , do you have another link regarding the freeing over hundreds of child molesters? Worldnetdaily is a internet tabloid if IIRC.

I also agree with the court on this one. Let's say they all of a sudden say that a DUI lands you life in prison. They couldn't go out and grab every single person that ever did it and throw them in jail. Drunk driving causes so many innocent deaths, i consider it worse than child molesting (it's close, but drunk driving affects way more people). But I wouldn't agree with them forcing the law on people that did it when a DUI wasn't that much of a biggy. THere's plenty of other examples i could use here too, but this one seemed to show the point better.

Another with the courts. It's unfortunate that some molesters will be set free, but upholding the constitution is far more important.

Another thing: What the hell is with the article describing people yet to stand trial as molesters? People are innocent until proven guilty in court, not in the media.

Just because you don't like the source doesn't mean that it didn't happen.

http://www.presstelegram.com/Stories...483621,00.html

http://www.bayarea.com/mld/mercuryne...al/6194725.htm

http://www.msnbc.com/local/knsd/a1676656.asp

time to lock and load... those bastards make me sick...

If murder was only legal... even for just one type of person this would have to be it... and maybe those who passed a law to let these asses go...

I'm with the court on this as well. You have to get over the emotional issue of hundreds of molestors being let go (for the time being, and under a close eye, I'm sure) and understand what sort of precedent that the ruling eliminates.

No see you got it just backwards. Permitting the government to make ex post facto laws is VERY dangerous. I mean I am not premoting child molestation but just because YOU don't like something doesn't mean we can try people who did it before it was illegal like they did it when it was illegal. Its sad that their were no specfic laws for that then (or they were much softer) but all we can do now is remember this going forward. These people will not be looked at the same way by their family and community again. Even if they were not actully convicted child molesters. Sure we all want to burn the child molesters. Untill someone accuses you of being a child molester and this turns into Salem. In the end what it boils down to is this, while I am not a fan of child molestation I am more so against letting the goverment do whatever the hell it (or special intrest groups want it) to do. If we allow this then we must try everyone who is living and has ever commited a crime (even if it wasn't a crime then) under the new law anytime a law is passed. If they raise the cost of a speeding ticket EVERYONE who has paid a ticket in the area effectec must make up the differnce. ITS THE SAME EXACT THING.

I think it would be prudent to be wary of sensationalist(usually) news coming from the Tabloids, wouldn't you?

Questioning a tabloid as a valid source is perfectly reasonable whether it's over news such as hundreds of molesters being freed by a SC ruling or news regarding Noah's Ark being found on Mt. Everest.

Thanks for the alternate links to more credible newsites.

Maybe they need a law making it a $5 fine for "Assault and Battery of a Child Molester" (this was the same idea I had for flag burners).

Just for those who are interested, this is what the majority opinion writes about the dissent:

One of the problems with "rule of law" is striking a balance between "punishing the bad guys" and "it is better that 100 guilty go free than 1 innocent man be punished." Every so often legislatures push the bounds of legality and the courts rein them in. That's what happened in this case. You may not like it, I definitely don't like it, however, in the long run it's both better and fairer...

Was it that there were no laws about this behavior? Or was it that statute of limitations ran out first? In the first case, I think that would be insane. I'm sure I could find awful things to do to others for which no specific law existed. That really isn't the case here is it? Isn't a matter of the second case, where the statute of limitations ran out?

I am highly in favor of government limited its own power. If it was indeed a matter of a statute of limitations it does make this easier to swallow - unlike some other technicalities people have gotten off for. Ultimately, it is the government's fault for passing these limitations in the first place. I hope these laws will be changed so it doesn't happen again. I also hope that if there are still punishable offenses people come forward so justice can be done.

I would be extremely upset, beyond words, if I were one of the victims.

Y'know what. Yes, this sucks. This sucks big time. But I would rather this happen, than the government have the arbitrary power to decide what is legal or illegal at any given point in time, then go after past offenders. Ex Post Facto, indeed. I wonder, though, why this falls under that catagory. I mean, was it a statute of limitations thing? Or was it that child molestation wasn't illegal 20 years ago? Either way...fucked up. Fix it! And another thing...I'm not Catholic, but even <b>I'm</b> getting a little tired of "priest bashing" Out of the hundreds that had to be freed, you can't tell me that the only two examples they could find were priests. If that were the case, that would have made for much more sensational headlines..."Hundreds of molesting priests freed..."