Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-25-2017, 10:45 AM
 
4,067 posts, read 2,266,143 times
Reputation: 4384

Advertisements

Just curious, did he know that she was 15?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-25-2017, 10:46 AM
 
Location: Free From The Oppressive State
30,225 posts, read 23,643,056 times
Reputation: 38580
Quote:
Originally Posted by rstevens62 View Post
Yes,sending a nude pic is wrong, but I hope you are joking comparing it to child molestation.

Ive seen PLENTY of cases where actual child molestation happens and they get less prison time than 2 yrs!

Comparing this kind of thing to real abuse of children is absurd, its a slap in the face to victims imo.
And what are your thoughts about people who have pictures and videos of little kids in certain positions? I mean, they didn't actually DO anything to those kids, they're just looking at their naked pictures. You think that's okay because it's not "real abuse"?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-25-2017, 11:02 AM
 
672 posts, read 808,406 times
Reputation: 1225
Quote:
Originally Posted by rstevens62 View Post
So almost 2 yrs in prison and a lifetime 'scarlets letter' for sexting? Geez, thats a bit much! I think there is probably more to this story.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EvilEyeFleegle View Post
Sure there is..he sent pictures of his genitals to a 15 year old girl...he is 53 years old. Enticing an underage girl is a righteous felony..and considered the next thing to child molestation...in most jurisdictions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MyNameIsBellaMia View Post
Seriously? Do you live in a cave? This story is well known and well documented. There's no more to it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rstevens62 View Post
Yes,sending a nude pic is wrong, but I hope you are joking comparing it to child molestation.

Ive seen PLENTY of cases where actual child molestation happens and they get less prison time than 2 yrs!

Comparing this kind of thing to real abuse of children is absurd, its a slap in the face to victims imo.
Yeah, not simply texting are sending pictures of himself.

Quote:
The disgraced ex-congressman broke down crying as he was sentenced to 21 months in prison Monday for convincing a high school student to undress and touch herself via Skype in 2016.
Quote:
“During the latter two Skype sessions, on February 18 and 23, 2016, and in a Shapchat communication on March 9, the defendant used graphic and obscene language to ask the Minor Victim to display her naked body and touch herself, which she did.”
Weiner, 53, also sent the girl an “obscene message” using an app called Confide, in which he described “what he would do to her, if she were 18,” court papers say.
“Part and parcel of these disturbing — and criminal — exchanges, the defendant also sent the Minor Victim adult pornography,” according to the feds.
prosecuting attorney:


Quote:
This is not merely a “sexting” case. The defendant did far more than exchange typed words on a lifeless cellphone screen with a faceless stranger. With full knowledge that he was communicating with a real 15-year-old girl, the defendant asked her to engage in sexually explicit conduct via Skype and Snapchat, where her body was on display, and where she was asked to sexually perform for him. That offense – transmitting obscenity to a minor to induce her to engage in sexually explicit conduct by video chat and photo – is far from mere “sexting.” Weiner’s criminal conduct was very serious, and the sentence imposed should reflect that seriousness.

The defendant claims that he “responded to the victim’s request for sexually explicit messages not because she was a teenager, but in spite of it.” While the Government does not contend that Weiner engaged in inappropriate sexual exchanges with other minors or that he is a pedophile, his professed ambivalence towards the Minor Victim’s age is belied by the defendant’s own statements to the court-appointed evaluator during his evaluation. Moreover, the defendant has acknowledged an interest in legal, adult, teen-themed pornography. In the context of this admitted interest, his insistence that he deserves a lighter sentence because the Minor Victim’s age meant nothing to him rings hollow. Even if the Court were to credit Weiner’s claim of ambivalence to the Minor Victim’s age, that purported ambivalence is part of the problem. That his victim was a minor – and therefore his conduct a serious crime – did not deter Weiner from forging ahead.

The defendant’s submission repeatedly makes note of the 15-year-old Minor Victim’s various motives for communicating with Weiner and her profit from sharing those communications with the media. While careful not to cast blame on the Minor Victim outright or disclaim ultimate responsibility for his crime, he relies, in part, on the circumstances of their communications in arguing for a sentence of probation. That argument should be rejected, and Weiner should be sentenced for what he did – not what motived the Minor Victim. Weiner, a grown man, a father, and a former lawmaker, willfully and knowingly asked a 15-year-old girl to display her body and engage in sexually explicit conduct for him online. Such conduct warrants a meaningful sentence of incarceration.
prosecutor memorandum:


Quote:
In the evening of January 23, 2016, a 15-year-old girl (the “Minor Victim”) initiated contact with the defendant by sending him a direct message on Twitter. Over the next several hours, the Minor Victim and Weiner exchanged a series of messages, ranging from the mundane to the provocative. Early in the exchange, the Minor Victim revealed to Weiner that she was in high school. Despite knowing he was communicating with a high school student, Weiner participated in increasingly suggestive exchanges, telling the Minor Victim, among other things, that he thought she was “kinda sorta gorgeous.” Their communications continued the next morning on Facebook messenger, then moved to Kik, and at some later point, Confide and Snapchat. The latter three all are messaging and photo-sharing applications that delete messages and images once viewed.

As January turned to February, their intermittent exchanges grew more lascivious. This was despite the fact that there could be no reasonable doubt in Weiner’s mind that he was chatting with a minor – in addition to having revealed that she was a high school student, the Minor Victim told Weiner that she was getting her learner’s permit. She explained in Facebook chats that she has “parents that wouldn’t approve of some of the things” she does, and that she likes “older guys,” “[b]ut that’s illegal.” The defendant correctly observed, “You are young,” in one Kik message.

Against that backdrop, between February 17 and 23, 2016, Weiner and the Minor Victim participated in three video chat sessions on Skype.

There is no dispute that the Minor Victim repeatedly suggested that she and the defendant participate in video chats on Skype. Those suggestions were not, however, one-sided. For example, Twitter records reveal that during their first exchanges the night of January 23, 2016, at some point after the Minor Victim had suggested that they Skype, the defendant said “Leave the complex stuff for Skype.” That night as well, after a suggestive exchange, the defendant said “Maybe Skype someday.” Thus, although it was the Minor Victim who initially sought out Weiner, as the Government readily concedes, Weiner immediately responded to the Minor Victim’s overture and willingly participated in the offense conduct thereafter.

It was then that the Minor Victim made clear that she was not just a minor – she was, in fact, only 15 years old. That did not stop Weiner. During the latter two Skype sessions, on February 18 and 23, 2016, and in a Snapchat communication on March 9, 2016, the defendant used graphic and obscene language to ask the Minor Victim to display her naked body and touch herself, which she did. He also sent an obscene message to the Minor Victim on Confide, describing what he would do to her, if she were 18. Part and parcel of these disturbing – and criminal – exchanges, the defendant also sent the Minor Victim adult pornography. In approximately March 2016, after several months of intermittent exchanges, communications between the defendant and Minor Victim largely stopped. The Minor Victim made efforts to re-engage, but was met with limited responsiveness.

The instant conduct was revealed to the public and law enforcement in September 2016, when the Daily Mail published the Minor Victim’s account of her communications with Weiner after she participated in a paid interview.
"March 9, 2016, the defendant used graphic and obscene language to ask the Minor Victim to display her naked body and touch herself, which she did."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-25-2017, 11:05 AM
 
30,030 posts, read 11,623,237 times
Reputation: 18534
Quote:
Originally Posted by SandraMoore66 View Post
Just curious, did he know that she was 15?
Yes he did:

“Anthony Weiner ... asked a girl who he knew to be 15 years old to display her naked body and engage in sexually explicit behavior for him online," acting U.S. Attorney Joon Kim said. "Today, Anthony Weiner received a just sentence that was appropriate for his crime.

He is a sick dude. He deserves 21 months. He actually got off light the feds originally were going to prosecute him for child porn which could have gotten him even more time.

I cannot believe there are people defending him. What if this was your daughter?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-25-2017, 11:09 AM
 
Location: Central Florida
3,658 posts, read 2,551,513 times
Reputation: 12289
After reading all of that, he is exactly where he belongs. Sexual predator=Jail time.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-25-2017, 11:29 AM
 
30,030 posts, read 11,623,237 times
Reputation: 18534
Quote:
Originally Posted by rstevens62 View Post
Not defending him at all, just saying this is NOWHERE even close to child molestation.
So for you child molesting is a crime and this is no big deal. It is very possible that his goal was to meet her in person like guys they used to catch on dateline NBC.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-25-2017, 11:33 AM
 
Location: Central Florida
3,658 posts, read 2,551,513 times
Reputation: 12289
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hellion1999 View Post
The 15-year-old girl is no angel....most 15-year-olds in this country know more about sex and sex texts than the grown-ups.

I'm sure the 15-year-old girl is marked for life for receiving a picture text of a penis when the web is bombarded with porno.
Why don't you have a seat. Chris Hansen will be right with you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-25-2017, 11:34 AM
 
Location: deafened by howls of 'racism!!!'
52,530 posts, read 34,259,842 times
Reputation: 29173
Quote:
Originally Posted by budlight View Post
Why don't you have a seat. Chris Hansen will be right with you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-25-2017, 11:36 AM
 
17,162 posts, read 21,830,506 times
Reputation: 29386
Quote:
Originally Posted by rstevens62 View Post
So almost 2 yrs in prison and a lifetime 'scarlets letter' for sexting? Geez, thats a bit much! I think there is probably more to this story.
He got a 15 yr old girl to send naked video and masturbate, he sent penis pics to her.......he could have gotten 10 years.

Sadly this was not his first "sexting"case.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-25-2017, 11:37 AM
 
Location: Santa Monica
36,856 posts, read 17,304,172 times
Reputation: 14459
Carlos Danger is going to need his mongoose strength in the joint.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:03 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top