South Carolina father helps police arrest man accused of looking at teen in bathroom, reports say

submitted by kesh from (foxnews.com)

all 13 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]FediNetizen 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

All the guy needs now is some estradiol and a new driver's license and he can peep at girls all he wants.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

Why do they even let these people out of prison?

[–]Nemesis_Noire 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

"Government records show that Lane, of Charlotte, N.C., has been a registered sex offender in that state since 2004 because he was convicted of secretly looking into a room with 8- and 9-year-olds inside". if he comes up with $2000 bail he'll be free to keep on peeping.

[–]Catbug 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

He just needs to say he feels like a woman and he’ll be able to call it a hatecrime if you don’t let him peep on little girls.

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

You can pay to commit crimes against children... That's pretty fucked up.

[–]gendercritfem 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

That's not how bail works. Bail doesn't absolve you of the crime, and it doesn't even take any time off of your sentence if you're convicted. Bail is basically a security deposit you put down to make sure you don't run away while you're awaiting your trial.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Yeah, but if he gets acquitted he served absolutely no time, if he doesn't pay bail he'll at least rot in a jail cell for a few days. And you don't get your bail money back anyways, so it doesn't really keep him from paying it and fleeing to Mexico, where pedophilia is legal (the age of consent in most states is 12). Furthermore, the last time he was convicted didn't prevent him from doing it again, so what if he pays bail to buy himself some more time to go commit crimes?

I'm not really a fan of the bail system. I prefer a system similar to parole, where you can't pay to opt-out and your movements will be tracked at all times. Instead of giving a larger sum of money to high-risk individuals, a judge could lock them in a jail cell without class discrimination. That way you don't have rich people fleeing to other countries or going out to commit some more crimes before going behind bars.

[–]gendercritfem 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Yeah, but if he gets acquitted he served absolutely no time, if he doesn't pay bail he'll at least rot in a jail cell for a few days.

I mean if someone gets acquitted, that means the jury thinks they didn't actually do the thing they're being charged with, right? So of course they're not going to go to jail. They just didn't do it in this case.

And you don't get your bail money back anyways

Yes you do? That's how bail works.

Instead of giving a larger sum of money to high-risk individuals, a judge could lock them in a jail cell without class discrimination.

Judges already have the ability to do this, which they use if they think that the defendant is likely to flee the country or do more crimes.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I mean if someone gets acquitted, that means the jury thinks they didn't actually do the thing they're being charged with

The jury system is broken. They'll lock somebody up or let somebody go free regardless of the evidence, because they just get some random people who know nothing about the law, and many of them have prejudices that impact their ability to reason such as all-white juries convicting black men of made-up crimes during the segregation era).

Yes you do? That's how bail works.

You don't always get it back. If you're re-arrested (which they often don't need to justify) they can refuse to refund it. It's not a guarantee.

Judges already have the ability to do this

But they usually just let rich folks out on bond, which is class discrimination. (which you even quoted me saying)

[–]gendercritfem 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

The jury system is broken. They'll lock somebody up or let somebody go free regardless of the evidence, because they just get some random people who know nothing about the law, and many of them have prejudices that impact their ability to reason such as all-white juries convicting black men of made-up crimes during the segregation era).

So you want people to be able to be punished without any sort of trial, when it hasn't been proven that they've even committed any crime?

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That's a strawman argument. I'm not against the need for evidence, but rather against the idea that you should be sentenced or acquitted by twelve entirely-random people who quite likely know nothing about the law. I'm not even against juries in generally, just the fact that anyone can serve on them without any qualifications.

[–]Trajan 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Hollywood and the media at large requires a constant pipeline to bring new talent in to the industry. This arrest will no doubt cause scheduling issues for Netflix among others.

[–]YouBowIPiss 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It is always a white guy,middle aged. Just creepy as hell. It is because white girls deserted them?