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.
I missed it also. That's more understandable; at least 30 years is in the ballpark of what I assume a rape charge would provoke. I just found 90 based on one charge exorbitant in this case.
 
I was once in a jury selection pool and one of the cases was a setup where our PD had a woman cop pose as a hooker and they arrested dozens of men. Right away they asked who thought that was entrapment and a lot of people did and were immediately excused. I did not think so so I was not excused but I didn't get picked for that jury (got picked for a domestic violence one).

If it meets the standard for solicitation, then that's what it is, entrapment or no.

People go down for attempted murder. Yes, we can prosecute people for thinks that *might* happen.
 
I am not saying he doesn't deserve jail but 90 years for a non incident??!!!
i'd just like to point out it's not for one "non-incedent" but rather three. he didn't get 90 years jail time for soliciting once, it's for three separate occasions, hence the long prison sentence.

as ian said i also have mixed feelings about these things, however the person is definitely willing to have sex with a minor. if they didn't chat with someone who's really a cop, it'd actually be a 13 year old girl, so yeah. my biggest beef is when the crap gets televised, though in this case it wasn't, but i'm just saying nonetheless.
 
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.
oh god, that's horrible. i do hear you though. studies have shown pedophiles pretty much cannot be rehabilitated, all they can do is suppress their urges, be it through medication, counselling, or both. it makes me have mixed feelings, while i don't think life in prison is "fair" to give someone who tries to rape a kid once, but if they can't be rehabilitated...shouldn't they not be released? should a sociopath who's committed five murders be let free knowing they're pretty much guaranteed to kill again?
 
This just happened today

there may be more information tomorrow, but all the information I am seeing does not cause me to think the sentence is too harsh.


Former minister sentenced to 90 years for internet sex crimes


Updated: Nov 22, 2010 2:52 PM PST
By Tara Morgan -

13547867_BG1.jpg


LOUISA, VA (WWBT) - An 81-year-old former minister receives the 2nd longest prison sentence in Virginia history for internet sex crimes.

A judge sentenced Irvin Baldwin to 90 years Monday. In August, Baldwin was convicted of three counts of soliciting sex from a minor.

For more than 20 minutes, Baldwin addressed the court. He did not ask for leniency or fairness. He said he's already served a year for something he did not do.
Baldwin told the court he did play a role and played it well, but it was only role play and nothing else.

The commonwealth says he had an incredibly vulgar chatroom conversation late last year with a detective posing as a 13-year-old girl. Baldwin maintains he knew there wasn't a child on the other end.

Four character witnesses testified on Baldwin's behalf.
Each pleaded for leniency,
citing his age and the voluntary mission work he's done throughout the world ( I'd like to know what countries?)
helping those in need. One witness called Baldwin an extraordinary worker, Christian and man. But the prosecutor pointed out that not one of those witnesses spent a large amount of time with Baldwin.

At one point, Baldwin lashed out at the media for wanting to make this case more salacious by only saying he was a former minister. Baldwin says he was also an airline transport pilot, flight instructor, mechanic, carpenter among other trades. The commonwealth added sexual predator to the list.

Baldwin had little to say as he left Louisa Circuit Court on his way back to prison for good. Baldwin's attorney reserved the right for an appeal and declined comment after the sentencing hearing. The 90 year sentence is what the jury had recommended for Baldwin.

If his defense is that he was only role-playing, why did he drive to another state to meet this 13 year old girl?

The jury got the benefit of reading all of the online chats, they could see who initiated, and where he told her to erase all of their chats
and his plan to drive and meet her.


as for the argument if he had raped a 13 year old girl he would have only got 10 years, I don't know if that is true.
If it is than 10 years is too short. Because this guy was unlucky in choosing his 13 year old victim does not mean he should not be punished.

If the guy was 21 and he got the max 30 years for each of the 3 counts would that be better?

Judges can also issue consecutive life sentences without the possibility of parole. They likely do this for several reasons. First, it's the law. If someone is convicted of murdering several people, they can receive multiple life sentences (even though it may seem redundant or pointless).
 
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.

I'm not sure if this is a case of entrapment. And yes, Dutch law is also against entrapment. But from the information posted here, the guy made first contact with the police officer posing as a 13-year old girl and the guy proposed to drive to 'her'. Based on this information, the police wasn't actively asking the guy to commit the crime, but he proposed it himself. And that's not entrapment.
 
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.

Fuck, he's 82 for crying in the soup...and NOTHING HAPPENED!!! Maybe a couple of months in jail or a fine but Jesus Murphy 90 years! What a bad joke!!
 
I think this is fairly typical of the U.S. "justice" system (and believe me I'n not saying ours is perfect - far from it) outrageous jail sentences for citizens (jail time for possession of marijuana for example) and yet you let the bankers and corporations rape you all blind. I'm afraid it has become hopeless at this point.
 
This teenager was tricked by cops into believing he was being helped by other terrorists to build a bomb to blow up at the Portland Christmas tree lighting. He was arrested, and nothing happend.

Oregon bomb-plot suspect wanted 'spectacular show' - Yahoo! News

So I DO see your point about that, but I also hope you can see that 90 years for talking dirty on the computer is excessive when murderers many times don't get nearly that much time. Besides the reality that if a 13 year old girl really wanted to do it with an 82 year old man she'd hardly be an innocent victim.
 
It's like the Roman Polanski thread all over again, didn't someone make a similar argument in that thread? :|
 
So I DO see your point about that, but I also hope you can see that 90 years for talking dirty on the computer is excessive when murderers many times don't get nearly that much time. Besides the reality that if a 13 year old girl really wanted to do it with an 82 year old man she'd hardly be an innocent victim.

He went to have sex with her.
Besides, why do you think pedophilia is a lesser crime than murder?
As for your last comment, good way to lose all credibility
 
This teenager was tricked by cops into believing he was being helped by other terrorists to build a bomb to blow up at the Portland Christmas tree lighting. He was arrested, and nothing happend.

Oregon bomb-plot suspect wanted 'spectacular show' - Yahoo! News

So I DO see your point about that, but I also hope you can see that 90 years for talking dirty on the computer is excessive when murderers many times don't get nearly that much time. Besides the reality that if a 13 year old girl really wanted to do it with an 82 year old man she'd hardly be an innocent victim.
HE DID NOT GO TO JAIL FOR TALKING DIRTY ON THE COMPUTER.

And everyone else has addressed your last sentence appropriately.

Christ on a fucking bike.
 
Back
Top Bottom