The Conservative Cave
Current Events => Breaking News => Topic started by: mamacags on June 25, 2008, 02:39:30 PM
-
Opponent of Jessica's Law tells what he wants to do to 6 year olds...
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,371344,00.html
A Massachusetts politician and defense attorney has touched off a firestorm with his shocking public vow to torment and "rip apart" child rape victims who take the witness stand if the state legislature passed stiff mandatory sentences for child sex offenders.
Rep. James Fagan, a Democrat, made the comments during debate last month on the state House floor.
"I'm gonna rip them apart," Fagan said of young victims during his testimony on the bill. "I'm going to make sure that the rest of their life is ruined, that when they’re 8 years old, they throw up; when they’re 12 years old, they won’t sleep; when they’re 19 years old, they’ll have nightmares and they’ll never have a relationship with anybody.†:bird:
Fagan said as a defense attorney it would be his duty to do that in order to keep his clients free from a "mandatory sentence of those draconian proportions." Those comments drew the ire of local activists as well as colleagues.
“I thought his comments were over the top and unnecessary,†Massachusetts House Minority Leader Bradley Jones told FOXNews.com on Wednesday.
“I appreciate that he’s a defense attorney, and felt he had a point to make, but I think it was unnecessary,†said Jones, who supported an original version of the bill. “It was excessive.â€
Jessica Lunsford's Father: My Daughter Might Be Alive if Investigation Wasn't Botched Jessica Lunsford's Parents Will Sue Over Handling of Case Judge Sentences John Couey to Death for Murdering Jessica Lunsford The father of the Florida girl for whom Jessica's Law is named also blasted Fagan after hearing the comments.
Mark Lunsford, whose 9-year-old daughter was abducted and buried alive in a trash bag by a sex offender in 2005, told the Boston Herald on Tuesday that Fagan should take the rights of victimized children seriously.
“Why doesn’t he figure out a way to defend that child and put these kind of people away instead of trying to figure ways for defense attorneys to get around Jessica’s Law?†Lunsford told the paper. “These are very serious crimes that nobody wants to take serious. What about the rights of these children?â€
Links to discuss your ideas with Fagan
Reader Information: State Rep. James Fagan is a Democrat representing the Third Bristol District, which includes the city of Taunton. Fagan, a 1973 graduate of Suffolk Law School, has been representing the district since 1993, and serves as chair of the House ethics committee. He can be reached by e-mailing or calling:
State House: 617-722-2040
District office: 508-824-7000
E-mail: Rep.JamesFagan@hou.state.ma.us
-
There is a special place in Hell for the evil people who rape and harm children....and the lawyers who defend them at all costs.
-
I heard that sub-human say that. Prick
-
Is this for real?
He couldn't have really said this. Couldn't have. Not unless he's tired of being an elected official and this was some sort of deliberate career suicide. This has to be from the Onion or something.
Lemme get this straight... it's evil to eat chicken and burgers, spy on terrorists, drill for our own oil, or execute serial killers... but he'll rip CHILD RAPE VICTIMS apart for ******* with his agenda?
I don't normaly pray for spontaneous human combustion, but...
-
Is this for real?
He couldn't have really said this. Couldn't have. Not unless he's tired of being an elected official and this was some sort of deliberate career suicide. This has to be from the Onion or something.
Lemme get this straight... it's evil to eat chicken and burgers, spy on terrorists, drill for our own oil, or execute serial killers... but he'll rip CHILD RAPE VICTIMS apart for ******* with his agenda?
I don't normaly pray for spontaneous human combustion, but...
He did say it, I heard him say it. :censored:
-
I saw the clip on the news last night. This mother ****er needs to crawl back under the rock he came from. NOW. :bird:
-
I sent that piece of :censored: an e-mail. There has got to be some way to get him out of office sooner rather than later.
-
Anyone who debates with you or tries to tell you extreme liberalism is NOT a mental disorder, just throw this asswipe at them and watch them.
Please, anyone on the left. I DARE you to defend this kind of behavior or act.
Oh, and Mr. Attorney? As defense counsel, you should know that your client is entitled to a "vigorous defense". That does NOT include ripping apart little children on the stands.
-
I sent that piece of :censored: an e-mail. There has got to be some way to get him out of office sooner rather than later.
The fact that this is out in the public should do wonders for his career. After all, who the **** wants an attorney who is publicly on record in affirmation of crucifying child victims of rape on the stand. All that needs to happen is for one mother little girl's daddy on the jury to make the connection, and the mother****er's case is done right then and there. These words will hang like an albatross around the bastards neck. His next client could have been falsely accused of jaywalking, with "27 8x10 color glossy pictures" proving his innocence conclusively, and he'll be lucky to get out of that courtroom with only 3-5 years in lockup, just 'cause the jury members have daughters too.
-
Someone needs to cap this motherf'er. :censored:
Why does it not surprise me that it's in Massachusetts? WHAT THE ****! Are the South and the Midwest the ONLY places that are ****ing sane these days? Good God Almighty! :censored:
-
Line forms here.
What a disgusting piece of shit he is.
I wonder if he has children?
-
I s'pose it's possible he practices "rip[ping little girls] apart" on his daughter at the dinnertable.
What a man. :loser:
-
He has six sons.
One died recently in a freak accident.
I wonder if any of those sons are grown and married with kids? I wonder if he has little granddaughters?
I cannot fathom a parent saying such vile things about a child rape victim. I just can't.
-
If that were my dad I think I would still kick him in the balls. What the **** kind of moron thinks that way much less lets it escape his fat mouth!??!
-
He needs to be kicked. Hard!
-
This sounds like a hoax to me, but it is not. What a sick****. :censored: Anyways, people who rape and kill children and the people who defend them should all be impaled alive and have objects thrown at them in scorn.
-
This sounds like a hoax to me, but it is not. What a sick****. :censored: Anyways, people who rape and kill children and the people who defend them should all be impaled alive and have objects thrown at them in scorn.
One seriously has to wonder where the f**k his box of Common Sense Flakes was this morning. To be an elected official and say something like that. Even Reverand Wright said "Damn, can't believe dat n***a said dat shit!"
-
http://terryfrank.net/?p=3421
Check out vid at bottom of link. This guy should be shot. :redbird:
-
I don't have the link but this is definitely a duplicate
-
different sources, but the same story. it's a dup of a BN thread from this afternoon.
on edit : merged into the BN thread.
-
He has six sons.
One died recently in a freak accident.
I wonder if any of those sons are grown and married with kids? I wonder if he has little granddaughters?
I cannot fathom a parent saying such vile things about a child rape victim. I just can't.
Little boys are kidnapped and raped as well. I wonder how he would feel his one of his sons or grandsons was kidnapped by John Couey, who was captured in Augusta, BTW, raped and killed. Gee, wonder if he'd want to rip a child apart then?
This sumbitch should step no where near a court of law. This shit should be a reason for disbarment.
-
http://terryfrank.net/?p=3421
Check out vid at bottom of link. This guy should be shot. :redbird:
You're too generous. We should bring back Vlad the Impaler or Park Chung-hee to deal with scum like him. They did it in an extremely brutal and gruesome manner, like impaling, boiling them alive, and mutilation. Park had lefties brutally tortured and crippled them severely. Vlad the Impaler is considered heroes for fighting off the Ottoman Empire. Park made South Korea a prosperous, stable, and peaceful nation.
-
Well, it is from the state of Massive-2-shits.
-
A North Carolinian radio station published the good man's office number!
(508) 824-7018
-
There is a special place in Hell for the evil lawyers
Fixt. I think that would include all lawyers. :evillaugh: :uhsure:
-
I'm well aware that this is going to make me massively unpopular here, but...
For every poor child who was and will be brutalized by some sick f**k, there's some little brat who accuses a guy of rape because said brat doesn't get enough allowance from daddy/step-daddy or straight-A's from teacher.
In our culture, if not in our legal system, there is an assumption of guilt for men accused of such crimes. Partly this is due to the sheer heinousness of those crimes, and to that degree such an assumption is understandable, even though it is still wrong. But it is also in large part due to the feminist myth that no woman would lie about being raped (which has been proven false time and again) and the conferrence of that myth upon children. We only need to look at the McMartin case to see where that leads us.
So while I, like any sane person, have a serious problem with the way this lawyer said what he did, I really don't take issue with the message behind the acid in his words - his job is to defend his clinets, and in order to do that he needs to be able to cross-examine those accusing his clients of horrible acts.
I also have to say though that I initially read those words in a different light than most here seem to have. While the prevailing opinion seems to be that the lawyer in question is almost gloating that he will perform these actions, I read his words as being a pre-admission of guilt, as saying "Yes, I will do these horrible things, because that is my job, that is the price of justice."
Commence with the bitchslapping, I guess.
-
I'm well aware that this is going to make me massively unpopular here, but...
For every poor child who was and will be brutalized by some sick f**k, there's some little brat who accuses a guy of rape because said brat doesn't get enough allowance from daddy/step-daddy or straight-A's from teacher.
In our culture, if not in our legal system, there is an assumption of guilt for men accused of such crimes. Partly this is due to the sheer heinousness of those crimes, and to that degree such an assumption is understandable, even though it is still wrong. But it is also in large part due to the feminist myth that no woman would lie about being raped (which has been proven false time and again) and the conferrence of that myth upon children. We only need to look at the McMartin case to see where that leads us.
So while I, like any sane person, have a serious problem with the way this lawyer said what he did, I really don't take issue with the message behind the acid in his words - his job is to defend his clinets, and in order to do that he needs to be able to cross-examine those accusing his clients of horrible acts.
I also have to say though that I initially read those words in a different light than most here seem to have. While the prevailing opinion seems to be that the lawyer in question is almost gloating that he will perform these actions, I read his words as being a pre-admission of guilt, as saying "Yes, I will do these horrible things, because that is my job, that is the price of justice."
Commence with the bitchslapping, I guess.
He can't expect to use phrases like "ripping apart" a potential child rape victim and then expect everyone to say, "Oh, he was just saying he was going to do his job really, really well!"
His comments were completely distasteful, even for a lawyer and a politician. He did not demonstrate any tact at all and when discussing child molestation, even if there is a possibility of false accusations, he could still be more sensitive.
Anyone who says they don't see anything wrong with his choice of words frightens the hell out of me.
-
He can't expect to use phrases like "ripping apart" a potential child rape victim and then expect everyone to say, "Oh, he was just saying he was going to do his job really, really well!"
His comments were completely distasteful, even for a lawyer and a politician. He did not demonstrate any tact at all and when discussing child molestation, even if there is a possibility of false accusations, he could still be more sensitive.
Anyone who says they don't see anything wrong with his choice of words frightens the hell out of me.
Agreed 100%. This guy goes beyond doing his job to some sort of sick fantasy land where it is ok to brutalize a child.
-
Someone needs to cap this motherf'er. :censored:
Why does it not surprise me that it's in Massachusetts? WHAT THE ****! Are the South and the Midwest the ONLY places that are ****ing sane these days? Good God Almighty! :censored:
I'm surprised he isn't a NYS legislator, myself. But, I'm damned glad he isn't. Noo Yawkers have some standards.
-
He can't expect to use phrases like "ripping apart" a potential child rape victim and then expect everyone to say, "Oh, he was just saying he was going to do his job really, really well!"
His comments were completely distasteful, even for a lawyer and a politician. He did not demonstrate any tact at all and when discussing child molestation, even if there is a possibility of false accusations, he could still be more sensitive.
Anyone who says they don't see anything wrong with his choice of words frightens the hell out of me.
Agreed 100%. This guy goes beyond doing his job to some sort of sick fantasy land where it is ok to brutalize a child.
It's almost as if Fagan is saying that he will rape the child again on the witness stand. Also, as if the child won't have problems enough adjusting to life, he wants to traumatize the child so badly that he or she will never have a normal relationship with anyone? That is just sick, IMO.
-
I'm well aware that this is going to make me massively unpopular here, but...
For every poor child who was and will be brutalized by some sick f**k, there's some little brat who accuses a guy of rape because said brat doesn't get enough allowance from daddy/step-daddy or straight-A's from teacher.
In our culture, if not in our legal system, there is an assumption of guilt for men accused of such crimes. Partly this is due to the sheer heinousness of those crimes, and to that degree such an assumption is understandable, even though it is still wrong. But it is also in large part due to the feminist myth that no woman would lie about being raped (which has been proven false time and again) and the conferrence of that myth upon children. We only need to look at the McMartin case to see where that leads us.
So while I, like any sane person, have a serious problem with the way this lawyer said what he did, I really don't take issue with the message behind the acid in his words - his job is to defend his clinets, and in order to do that he needs to be able to cross-examine those accusing his clients of horrible acts.
I also have to say though that I initially read those words in a different light than most here seem to have. While the prevailing opinion seems to be that the lawyer in question is almost gloating that he will perform these actions, I read his words as being a pre-admission of guilt, as saying "Yes, I will do these horrible things, because that is my job, that is the price of justice."
Commence with the bitchslapping, I guess.
There are parts of your statement I agree with. There are some misbegotten assholes who WILL destroy an innocent persons life whether directly or manipulating a third party to do so.
But to me, there IS a difference between being a zealous defender and a sick ****.
This guy is a sick ****.
*Red*
-
Looks like the story is getting legs--O'Reilly did something on it Friday, and he's already trying to spin his way out of this one.
Sort of.
LINK (http://www.bostonherald.com/news/regional/general/view.bg?articleid=1103320)
“It was not my intent to demean or offend any victims,†state Rep. James H. Fagan (D-Taunton) told the Herald. “I understand it was strong language, but it was meant to be a demonstration of what a bad place court can be.â€
Fagan, a defense attorney, infuriated victims’ rights groups with his fiery speech on the House floor against Jessica’s Law, which would set a mandatory 20-year sentence for child rapists. Fagan said his point was to show lawmakers that if the law was passed, defense attorneys would take every case to trial, rather than cut plea bargains, which would lead to more victims being traumatized in court.
No, dicknose, your perversion of the justice system is what makes this kind of shit necessary. Your liberal experiment at rehabilitation and "fixing" people who are just sick psychopathic ****s that need capped hasn't, isn't, and won't work. Society abhors those who harm children, nearly as much as they abhor those who justify harming children.
-
Holy smokes--a Masshole who gets it right. If only there were a few more of him there:
From the comments on the Boston.com story:
Why is anyone surprised? This is Massachusetts, we are battered spouses! We elect these jerks, then re-elect them, again, & again & again. We must enjoy this abuse or we'd terminate the arrangement we currently have with Beacon Hill; our votes, their out of touch elitism. We are the problem not this one of many morons we have chosen.
Hammer. Nail. Head.
-
“It was not my intent to demean or offend any victims,†state Rep. James H. Fagan (D-Taunton) told the Herald. “I understand it was strong language, but it was meant to be a demonstration of what a bad place court can be.â€
Fagan, a defense attorney, infuriated victims’ rights groups with his fiery speech on the House floor against Jessica’s Law, which would set a mandatory 20-year sentence for child rapists. Fagan said his point was to show lawmakers that if the law was passed, defense attorneys would take every case to trial, rather than cut plea bargains, which would lead to more victims being traumatized in court.
That's what these asshole's want, they want the predators released, and they want the excuse to be "it would be too traumatic for the victim to have to appear in court" Fine! let's let him walk so there will be more victims "we don't want to traumatize in court"
-
If he somehow manages to do this in court , who is he going to be less safe from? Mom or Dad? If it was me I'd do my best to make what Saddam did pale in comparison to that ****er.
-
"A demonstration of what a bad place court can be??" Hey asshat, don't you think these rape victims have already been to a "bad place"? Foribily by your hypothetical client no less?? What a scumbag.
-
“It was not my intent to demean or offend any victims,†state Rep. James H. Fagan (D-Taunton) told the Herald. “I understand it was strong language, but it was meant to be a demonstration of what a bad place court can be.â€
Yes, I imagine court can be an awful shitty place for the guilty party. But while a trial is quite an ordeal for the victim thanks to lawyers trying to rip them apart, court is a great place for the victim when the guilty verdict is read. It's called "Justice" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justice), for those of you confused by this concept (Mr. Fagan, I'm looking in your general direction). I haven't passed a Bar exam or endured a trial myself, but I'm guessing this "justice" thingy is the point.