Man gets 90 years for soliciting a girl who never existed

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

Butterscotch

War Child
Joined
Nov 1, 2006
Messages
716
In the story below, an elderly man was given a 90 year jail sentence for soliciting a 13 year old online who turned out to be an undercover cop. While this is not a good thing to do, does it really deserve NINETY YEARS?! People get much less for actual murders and rapes. What I find disturbing is that there actually never was a girl, so technically he never committed a crime. He spoke to a grown man pretending to be a 13 year old girl, and never made any contact with a real girl. For 90 years, he might as well have actually met her, raped her, killed her, chopped her up and put her body in a dumpster. His advanced age does not take away from the fact that the sentence is too long. You also need to consider that a lot of people run their mouths/type things online they would never actually follow through with. My question is, isn't this sentence severe for something that never really happened?

Man, 82, gets 90-year prison term in sex case in Louisa
By Reed Williams | TIMES-DISPATCH STAFF WRITER


A Louisa County judge today sentenced an 82-year-old former pastor to 90 years in prison for three counts of soliciting sex with a minor.

A jury in August found Irvin "Pete" Baldwin of Mechanicsville guilty of the three charges and recommended the 90-year prison term -- 30 years for each count.

That is the maximum allowed under the law for each solicitation charge.

Authorities say the three crimes occurred in 2009 -- on Nov. 23, Nov. 30 and Dec. 4.

Authorities say Baldwin communicated over the Internet with someone he thought was a 13-year-old girl but who actually was a Louisa investigator.

Baldwin was arrested last December after traveling to Louisa to meet the girl.

Louisa Deputy Commonwealth's Attorney Rusty McGuire has said he argued for a substantial sentence in part because of Baldwin's history as a pastor and a Sunday school teacher.
 
I think the fact that he was arrested after "travelling to Louisa to meet the girl" kind of torpedoes your theory of running his mouth and never following through. What if the police had a real 13 year old correspond with the guy? would that have made any difference whatsoever? The fact the it was a police officer is irrelevant. It's like saying any sting operation isn't fair because a real crime was never going to take place. Throw him in jail
 
Based upon the information I have been able to find so far.

I think he should spend the rest of his life behind bars.

Former minister, 81, gets 90-year sentence

Man was convicted of using a computer to solicit sex from a minor.

Date published: 11/22/2010

A judge upheld a jury's recommendation of 90 years in prison for a former minister convicted of three counts of using a computer to solicit sex from a minor.

Irvin “Pete” Baldwin, 81, of Mechanicsville, was sentenced in Louisa County Circuit Court today to 90 years in prison, the second-longest sentence in Virginia history for this offense, according to Louisa Deputy Commonwealth Attorney Rusty McGuire.

Baldwin was arrested in December in Louisa, where he thought he would meet a young girl for sex.

The investigation started last November, when a man contacted Louisa sheriff's detective Patrick Siewert online. The detective was posing as a 13-year-old girl.

After several online chats on Nov. 23, Nov. 30 and Dec. 4 of 2009, the man started discussing sexual acts, Siewert said. He later proposed to come to Louisa to perform those acts.

When Baldwin drove from his home in Hanover County to Louisa, he was arrested by detectives.

During the trial in August, McGuire argued that Baldwin’s graphic sexual conversations, his instructions to the minor to erase the records of their conversations and his drive to Louisa at his requested meeting place and time established his intent.

McGuire argued for a substantial sentence due to the defendant’s past history as a pastor, Sunday school teacher, business owner and lack of criminal record. :yawn:

Baldwin’s attorney argued that these were positives, but McGuire argued that Baldwin "was living the American Dream and if anybody knew better, it was an 81-year-old with his background. Instead he chose to steal the innocence of what he thought was a 13-year-old child.”
 
It is not 'entrapment' unless the fake 13 year old girl contacted him first and led him to do something he would not have done.


Would you prefer a real 13 year old year girl meet this guy and get all molested up?
 
IF a REAL 13 year old girl met up with him, it would be different. That didn't happen. True, he did have that intent, but nothing actually happened. I am not saying he should walk free, but a couple of years is enough, let the time suit the crime. There was no girl. NOTHING HAPPENED TO A GIRL.
 
IF a REAL 13 year old girl met up with him, it would be different. That didn't happen. True, he did have that intent, but nothing actually happened. I am not saying he should walk free, but a couple of years is enough, let the time suit the crime. There was no girl. NOTHING HAPPENED TO A GIRL.

This reasoning boggles my mind. Would you prefer if they used a real 13 year old as a decoy and let them meet up, then the moment before he molests her, jump out and arrest him?
 
IF a REAL 13 year old girl met up with him, it would be different. That didn't happen. True, he did have that intent, but nothing actually happened. I am not saying he should walk free, but a couple of years is enough, let the time suit the crime. There was no girl. NOTHING HAPPENED TO A GIRL.

So if I read you correctly you are saying because nothing really happened the time should be less.

Even if it was a real 13 year old girl and not a decoy, and nothing happened, he should not get more than a couple of years?
 
yeah, that's not the reasoning that makes me uncomfortable with this method. sure, it's better to have these people of the streets, but i just don't like the way it's done. i don't have any better solutions beyond educate your damn kids, so i can't really complain too much.
 
IF a REAL 13 year old girl met up with him, it would be different. That didn't happen. True, he did have that intent, but nothing actually happened.

He was convicted of soliciting. Nothing has to "happen" physically in order to meet the solicitation standard.
 
If he's 82, isn't his sentences length irrelevant?

Regardless, he deserves nothing less than the rest of his life in a jail cell.
 
As I said in the first post, his age should not matter, it could have been a young guy too.

Don't you think that 90 years is a sentence for a murder or at least a rape and torture? Do we really need a system that persecutes for things that MIGHT have happened? This is scary, if you think about it.
 
Do we really need a system that persecutes for things that MIGHT have happened? This is scary, if you think about it.

It's not "might" have happened, its "would" have happened.
 
Look, there are lower sentences for ATTEMPTED MURDER than real murder, and ATTEMPTED ROBBERY rather than real robbery. Those people intended to do something, but they didn't, or couldn't, so they didn't get the entire sentence. Shouldn't it be the same with this? There are also degrees of murder and manslaughter. 90 years is a sentence for a brutal murder that actually occurred. An attempted murder or a second degree murder or an involuntary manslaughter would get much, much less. So why not an attempted meet up with a young girl? See my point?
 
As I said in the first post, his age should not matter, it could have been a young guy too.

Don't you think that 90 years is a sentence for a murder or at least a rape and torture? Do we really need a system that persecutes for things that MIGHT have happened? This is scary, if you think about it.
It's not a might happen situation. That's why they make them drive somewhere in these stings. They make sure intent is there, and something would have gone down if not for police intervention.

Why should I be scared of this? That's how stings work.
 
Like Peef said, if it weren't for it being a sting operation, it would have happened. Throw him in jail.
 
Look, there are lower sentences for ATTEMPTED MURDER than real murder,

Going back to the OP, he was guilty of 3 separate charges that each carried a maximum of 30 years.

It said the judge opted to give him the max because of his history. In a position of trust with easy access to children, it's likely he didn't become a pedo at 82.
 
That's another factor, he had no previous record, and he had character witnesses standing up for him that he wasn't that type of guy. Anyway, I guess I am alone on this, but to me 90 years should be reserved for murders that actually occur and not hypothetical molestations that might/if/maybe.
 
He absolutely should serve time in prison. Anyone doubting that must have butterscotch for brains. :wink:

What I'm wondering is what the precedence is for a 90 year sentence in this instance. Never heard of such a thing, but he could pass any day at his age, so I suppose the actual length of the sentence is irrelevant. If it were a 20 year-old who committed this crime (and yes, it very much is a crime), however, I'm not sure I would feel the same way.
 
Do you not understand what solicitation means?

As I'm sure you're aware, there's a broader argument about whether prosecutions based on 'stings' are good law or not, which I assume is the point Butterscotch is making. I'd guess that a prosecution of this type would never be attempted under UK or Irish law, for example, as it would stand little or no chance of succeeding. Indeed, in the hypothetical scenario whereby such a case ever went to court here, the sentence under UK/Irish law would be zero months in jail, as the judge would immediately find the defendant not guilty given that the prosecution had been based on entrapment, and the defendant would probably have very good grounds to sue the police.
 
While I agree with what everyone else is saying, I do see what Butterscotch's main argument is well - why does this get 90 years (age of the guy is irrelevant), when murderers and rapists who have actually been found guilty of rape and/or murder, can get a much less sentence (i.e., 30 to life, like the guy in the Chandra Levy case is facing)?

anitram, as a lawyer, can you tell me why the sentences seem to be so disproportionate? I know every case is different, but 90 years in this case seems to be a bit odd.

And yeah, it's a minor, and the sentence should be very harsh, but people convicted of ACTUALLY molesting/assualting/raping minors don't seem to get these kinds of sentences, do they? Please correct me if I'm wrong.
 
While I agree with what everyone else is saying, I do see what Butterscotch's main argument is well - why does this get 90 years (age of the guy is irrelevant), when murderers and rapists who have actually been found guilty of rape and/or murder, can get a much less sentence (i.e., 30 to life, like the guy in the Chandra Levy case is facing)?

anitram, as a lawyer, can you tell me why the sentences seem to be so disproportionate? I know every case is different, but 90 years in this case seems to be a bit odd.

And yeah, it's a minor, and the sentence should be very harsh, but people convicted of ACTUALLY molesting/assualting/raping minors don't seem to get these kinds of sentences, do they? Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Going back to the OP, he was guilty of 3 separate charges that each carried a maximum of 30 years.

It said the judge opted to give him the max because of his history. In a position of trust with easy access to children, it's likely he didn't become a pedo at 82.
.


I have a bit of a personal issue with people like this because I worked with someone who had been convicted of molesting a child. The son of a bitch wasn't rehabilitated in the slightest when he was let out. He was always awkward around the kids in the store. Too friendly. And he was very open about what he did, and he didn't regret it one fucking bit, except that he went to jail. He had the nerve to suggest that the kid was asking for it. I'm just so embittered by the whole thing I have that (slightly) irrational view that people like this shouldn't be released..like...ever.
 
As I'm sure you're aware, there's a broader argument about whether prosecutions based on 'stings' are good law or not, which I assume is the point Butterscotch is making.

I thought the point that Butterscotch is making is that this is an inappropriately long sentence.

Which may be so - to be honest I don't know much about the principles of sentencing as it isn't remotely related to the field of law that I practice nor did I study it in school.

My point about solicitation is still the fact that you do not need to commit the criminal act in question to be found guilty of it.
 
Ohhh, I missed Ali's post that mentioned the three separate charges with the 30-year sentences.

Thanks, Ashley.
 
anitram, as a lawyer, can you tell me why the sentences seem to be so disproportionate? I know every case is different, but 90 years in this case seems to be a bit odd.

Like I said, I really don't know much about principles of sentencing but for any crime that doesn't carry a mandatory sentence (which may be unconstitutional anyway), you will have a range up to a maximum. And then that range will depend on things like past record, the judge in question, the people involved, and any number of factors.
 
Back
Top Bottom