Nevada Judge: "Natural" for Men to be attracted to 1 year olds

[Sherry Darling]

You cannot make this shit up. This guy should never sit on a bench again.

http://feministing.com/archives/006813.html#comments

Thoughts?

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

He should not be a judge. That is just beyond words.

 

[LarryMullen's POPAngel]

You have got to be fucking kidding me.

He should have been removed from the bench the moment those words left his mouth and investigated immediately himself to see if there are any images of "sexy" one year olds in his home or computer.

This part of the article I found really rich, as well:

He said child pornography could be considered malum prohibitum because in some countries and cultures it is acceptable to engage in sexual conduct with young girls.

"As an example, having sex with a girl between 12 and 16 is prohibited because we say it's prohibited. It's because we decided as a civilized society you do not want adults engaging in sexual conduct with children below 16 years of age, which flies in the face of our, I guess for lack of a better description, our normal impulses," he said.

In some countries and cultures, but in the US, it is not. It's as simple as that, bud.

Also, in some countries young boys perform oral sex on older men because it is believed that the semen makes the boys strong. I wonder if this judge would have been as nonchalant about this had it been a case involving a young boy and an older man.

 

[Axver]

Fucking sickening. Do they just not have standards for selecting judges or something? Because I can't fathom how such a moron could ever end up on that side of the bench.

 

[indra]

While his comments weren't great, he did actually sentence the guy to 18 years in jail.

 

[LarryMullen's POPAngel]

While his comments weren't great, he did actually sentence the guy to 18 years in jail.

Yeah, that's great and all, but the comment he made almost completely negates that fact.

 

[joyfulgirl]

Perhaps the judge was subconsciously revealing something about himself, like "If I say in a court of law with the authority granted me that it's perfectly normal, then I must be normal."

 

[BVS]

It's all a result of extreme feminism



The guy's a grade A asshole.

 

[Vincent Vega]

If you consider being seriously mentally sick as natural, then it's natural.

It's no malum prohibitum at all, because it is evil and disgusting in itself.

 

[yolland]

Given the rambling and (almost) comically poorly-spoken quality of just about everything he said in the sentencing transcript appended to the article, I think he may not have meant "women from the time they're 1 all the way up until they're 100" wholly literally. Although referring to sex with 7-year-olds or animals as mere 'impulse control' issues is just bizarre. Perhaps this is his warped idea of not demonizing the accused or something.

I can't help wondering if even the defendant wished the guy would just shut up and get to the point...

 

[Kiki]

This part of the article I found really rich, as well:



In some countries and cultures, but in the US, it is not. It's as simple as that, bud.

exactly---this is the United States....we do things differently than other "countries and cultures". That's just wrong on so many levels, everything he said. He seriously sounded like he was trying to find someway to defend the jack ass that was on trial. People like that make me sick.

 

[Kiki]

ah....an idea just hit me. He's probably saying that shit because he wants his 5 minutes in the spot light---however he can get it. Just like that idiot judge that supposedly "broke down crying" when closing the Anna Nicole Smith autopsy case.

Give me a break! You're a judge to bring JUSTICE to victims and those who are WRONGLY accused and peace to communities! Do you job and stop worrying about being the next big judge to get a TV show.

 

[diamond]

the judge should be removed.

 

[indra]

Yeah, that's great and all, but the comment he made almost completely negates that fact.

No it doesn't. I'm much more interested in the actual sentence than the judge's remarks during sentencing. He could have said all the right things and given the guy less time.

 

[deep]

Hi Darling, Sherry


that site you posted, is very interesting

and somewhat distracting

I have always said one absolute I have no problem with,
is being 100 % against anyone that would harm children

here is an article? for better context

http://www.nevadaappeal.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070328/NEWS/103280098&template=printart

Carson District judge calls offense 'natural impulse'




by F.T. Norton
Appeal Staff Writer,



March 28, 2007

A Carson City man was sentenced to up to 18 years in prison on Tuesday for possessing more than 800 images of child pornography.

Jason Excell, 36, pleaded guilty to 10 counts of possession of child pornography. In exchange for the plea, additional charges were dismissed.

"These kinds of offenses are problems with impulse control," said Carson City District Judge Bill Maddox prior to sentencing. "When I say that, it's my understanding that most men are sexually attracted to young women. When I say young women I don't just mean women that ... you should be attracted to. I mean women from the time they're 1 all the way up until they're 100."

Maddox noted the legal terms malum in se, a Latin phrase meaning an act that is "inherently evil," and malum prohibitum, which means acts that are not necessarily inherently immoral or hurtful, only wrong by statute.

He said child pornography could be considered malum prohibitum because in some countries and cultures it is acceptable to engage in sexual conduct with young girls.

"As an example, having sex with a girl between 12 and 16 is prohibited because we say it's prohibited. It's because we decided as a civilized society you do not want adults engaging in sexual conduct with children below 16 years of age, which flies in the face of our, I guess for lack of a better description, our normal impulses," he said.

"I guess we could just ignore them, say it's just like a traffic ticket, it's malum prohibitum, it's only against the law because it's prohibited. Or we could say that because we're trying to control what's an otherwise natural impulse there has to be consequences.

"The bottom line on it all is the way we're going to control it in my opinion is to ensure that everybody understands what the consequences are if you engage in ... a lack of impulse control. It's likely that most people would find young girls sexually attractive. But we're civilized to the point that we're taught to control our impulses. When you don't, there has to be consequences."

In sentencing Excell, Maddox said he wanted to send a message to others in the community who might possess images of child porn.





"I want it to be clear to anybody out there that is thinking of downloading them or getting them on CD or ordering them through the mail or whatever, if you get caught possessing them you're going to go to prison in Carson City," he said.



Excell was arrested March 3, 2006, after his wife turned over photographs she found on his computer.

According to Deputy District Attorney Kristin Luis, the images are of children "easily under the age of 10," being sexually violated by adults or engaging in sex with other children.

She said at least 88 of the photographs were of children who have been identified by federal authorities through other child pornography cases nationwide.

Maddox could have sentenced Excell to between 10 and 60 years. Parole and probation suggested a sentence of two to 12 years. Maddox opted for an additional six years on Excell's sentence so that if he were paroled, he'd be under state supervision longer.

Excell is eligible for parole in two years. He was given credit for serving 391 days in jail.

I think this Judge should choose his words more carefully .

I'd like to see more of his sentences.


At age 50, I think my grandpa gene has kicked in, I do have an more of an affection/ attraction for babies and children than an aversion (which I did in my younger years) , it is not any kind of a physical thing


As for being attracted to women up to 100? I will admit I find adult women of all ages attractive, there are women in there 70s and even 80s that are still alluring, in my opinion.

 

[deep]

Also, in some countries young boys perform oral sex on older men because it is believed that the semen makes the boys strong.

Are you sure about this?

My "buff" girlfriend told me
she has been working out three times a week.

 

[U2Girl1978]

WTF is wrong with this guy? A natural impulse to be attracted to a 1 year old???? This judge is clearly out of his mind.

 

[redhotswami]

wow he really said that? I haven't known any man to be sexually attracted to a 99 year old woman. I find that just as whack.

 

[maycocksean]

It sounds to me like this judge didn't think much before he spoke. He can't seriously believe that anyone who could remotely be considered "normal" is sexually attracted to infants.

I think we'd all like to think he believes that because it makes him an easy target. Too easy really. . .

I'm guessing he was overstating his point and it got taken literally. I suspect. . .I hope. . . that what he ACTUALLY meant was that most men find young women who are sexually mature (i.e. past puberty) but have not yet reached the legal age of consent attractive. And he's right that the age of consent has varied by time and place. However, I don't know of any culture in the world that approves the sexualization of children who haven't reached puberty.

Kids are not sexual beings yet, and anyone who sees them as such IS sick and definitely not normal. However, once people hit puberty things get a lot more fuzzy, and this is where the "impulse control" the judge talked about has to come into play.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

I suspect. . .I hope. . . that what he ACTUALLY meant was that most men find young women who are sexually mature (i.e. past puberty) but have not yet reached the legal age of consent attractive. And he's right that the age of consent has varied by time and place. However, I don't know of any culture in the world that approves the sexualization of children who haven't reached puberty.

Well with puberty happening earlier and earlier these days, don't some girls pass that at age 12 or something? So I don't think that's a proper guideline to use. When I think "men" I am thinking 20's and beyond (although mentally and maturity wise that might be another issue for all male age groups ), so I would never condone that age group and older being attracted to/having sexual thoughts about girls that young. Men need to confine those thoughts to over the age of consent, otherwise that is in an extremely problematic area

 

[verte76]

This judge should be removed.

 

[kimby]

wow he really said that? I haven't known any man to be sexually attracted to a 99 year old woman. I find that just as whack.

Obviously you know nothing of what goes on in nursing homes...