I can't believe what I just saw.

[yellowumbrella]

May 23, 2012 10:43:56 GMT -5 @habbsies said:

So the boy scouts are safe but yeah, his crime and the details of it still makes me think he shouldn't be working at a ballpark.

So...where should a rapist work? I can't think of one place where there aren't other adults that he could spontaneously attack.

[gpw]

May 23, 2012 10:42:46 GMT -5 emptygee said:

May 23, 2012 10:38:53 GMT -5 gpw said:

so, it seems like a date rape issue. It in no way makes it OK...and it doesn't matter that she was involved in a thong contest at all....but we're not talking about a pedophile.

I agree, not a pedophile, but I disagree with your characterization of this as a "date rape" issue. Did you read the account of what actually happened? This was not a date situation.

I said that before I looked at the link, sorry!

I don't know that I agree with the judge that her participation in the contest did not fall under rape shield, though. I think that was shitty.

[emptygee]

May 23, 2012 10:48:11 GMT -5 gpw said:

May 23, 2012 10:42:46 GMT -5 emptygee said:

I agree, not a pedophile, but I disagree with your characterization of this as a "date rape" issue. Did you read the account of what actually happened? This was not a date situation.

I said that before I looked at the link, sorry!

I don't know that I agree with the judge that her participation in the contest did not fall under rape shield, though. I think that was shitty.

I agree.

[Deleted]

uhmm maybe at a place where you couldn't push someone into a bathroom unnoticed after posing as an employee.

and I'm laughing at the served his time bit. He only ended up with the sentence he did because the prosecution couldn't keep him from blaming the victim at trial.

Also, he posed as an employee, lied to his victim, then forced her into the bathroom where he raped her. Yeah, I don't get why his current coworkers don't want to work with him. Completely blows my mind.

[redheadbaker]

emptygee, I was just coming to post that same link.

Now off-topic, but if I had an 8-year-old at a major league baseball stadium, he would not be out of my sight, except to go into the men's room, and I'd be standing outside waiting for him (if his father or another male family member or friend was not there to go in with him). Citizens Bank Park is enormous and I'd be worried he'd get lost.

[emptygee]

May 23, 2012 11:03:37 GMT -5 @majorwife said:

And again, all of this wouldn't have come to light if this had been May next year. Yes, the news article would still be online, but do you google all of your coworkers or people that supervise the concession stand at the ballpark?

I think the fact that in 9 years dude didn't commit any other crime shows that he is not the sex offender predator Fox was making him out to be.

And really, let's face it here - if it weren't for the fact that dude was working at a ballpark the original story of the attack would have every well been "she was asking for it, with the thong and all" and not "OH NOEZ THE CHILDREN!!"

I understand what you're saying, but really, what would actually be different after he's not required to register his address? If Fox learned about this guy 2 years from now and he wasn't a "registered" sex offender anymore, they could just call him a "sex offender" because really, he is.

Yes, he was convicted 8 years ago, but he will always be a guy who raped someone. That's probably enough for the moms and dads at the ballpark to want him gone. So, he's gone.

[emptygee]

May 23, 2012 11:15:30 GMT -5 @majorwife said:

May 23, 2012 11:11:34 GMT -5 emptygee said:

I understand what you're saying, but really, what would actually be different after he's not required to register his address? If Fox learned about this guy 2 years from now and he wasn't a "registered" sex offender anymore, they could just call him a "sex offender" because really, he is.

Yes, he was convicted 8 years ago, but he will always be a guy who raped someone. That's probably enough for the moms and dads at the ballpark to want him gone. So, he's gone.

B/C the list makes it easier to track him for the purpose of a sensational story and nothing more.

Next year, it would be harder to find out what he did, unless you just google everyone you meet ever to see if there is any news story about them.

so the hysteria about him being on the registry I think is stupid b/c it won't apply to him next year, means nothing about him being a threat and only serves to make people paranoid and protective of their kids in an over blown way

Yeah, but didn't his coworkers turn him in? We don't know that they found out about the rape from the registry. For all we know, they did google him and that's how they found out. Maybe he told someone at work. I don't think we know.

[MrsAxilla]

May 23, 2012 10:02:58 GMT -5 myst said:

Unless folks think he should be banned from attending the game as a patron, I don't see how it's justifiable to attack him for working there.

This is where I'm at. He'd arguably be more dangerous as a patron no matter what the details of his crime are. I'm more worried about a patron grabbing my son in the bathroom. If I bought a hotdog from him and two seconds later someone told me he was a sex offender, I'd shrug and go about my life. He's got to work somewhere, and a crowded facility with cameras everywhere and no immediate access to children alone is as good a place as any.

[emptygee]

May 23, 2012 11:28:47 GMT -5 nuggetbrain said:

May 23, 2012 11:11:34 GMT -5 emptygee said:

I understand what you're saying, but really, what would actually be different after he's not required to register his address? If Fox learned about this guy 2 years from now and he wasn't a "registered" sex offender anymore, they could just call him a "sex offender" because really, he is.

Yes, he was convicted 8 years ago, but he will always be a guy who raped someone. That's probably enough for the moms and dads at the ballpark to want him gone. So, he's gone.

Okay, and that sucks, but why? His offense wasn't against a child, so...? Should we make sure that people who work at a ballpark have never been convicted of a crime, ever, because god forbid the parents might worry about their negative influence on little Billy in the 2 minutes it took him to buy a hot dog or bag of popcorn? You can't exactly catch the rapist disease.

Yeah, I'm not defending anyone here, I'm just saying it's not surprising that someone would lose their job over this when it comes out in the media. It sucks for the guy, but some crimes just evoke strong emotions from people, and rape is one of them. You can't expect the ball park to come out and tell everyone they need to calm down.

[curmudgeon]

May 23, 2012 10:02:58 GMT -5 myst said:

Unless folks think he should be banned from attending the game as a patron, I don't see how it's justifiable to attack him for working there.

This is where I'm at. Wouldn't it be more difficult find the time to shove someone into a restroom and rape them while on the clock than just watching the game? Also, based on his specific offense, it seems like working in an environment with a hell of a lot of people around is a good option.

[curmudgeon]

May 23, 2012 11:39:33 GMT -5 MrsAxilla said:

May 23, 2012 10:02:58 GMT -5 myst said:

Unless folks think he should be banned from attending the game as a patron, I don't see how it's justifiable to attack him for working there.

This is where I'm at. He'd arguably be more dangerous as a patron no matter what the details of his crime are. I'm more worried about a patron grabbing my son in the bathroom. If I bought a hotdog from him and two seconds later someone told me he was a sex offender, I'd shrug and go about my life. He's got to work somewhere, and a crowded facility with cameras everywhere and no immediate access to children alone is as good a place as any.

Jinx.

[MrsAxilla]

May 23, 2012 11:46:08 GMT -5 curmudgeon said:

May 23, 2012 11:39:33 GMT -5 MrsAxilla said:

This is where I'm at. He'd arguably be more dangerous as a patron no matter what the details of his crime are. I'm more worried about a patron grabbing my son in the bathroom. If I bought a hotdog from him and two seconds later someone told me he was a sex offender, I'd shrug and go about my life. He's got to work somewhere, and a crowded facility with cameras everywhere and no immediate access to children alone is as good a place as any.

Jinx.

GET OUT OF MY HEAD!

[ringstrue]

I ditto TTT's response from the 1st page. If he is still such a threat kids and teens that he can't be trusted to not shove kids into the bathroom and rape them during lunchbreak, he needs to still be behind bars. But he went to counseling, and hasn't had another offense in almost a decade.

Jobs that require a lot of interaction with kids usually do an extra step of background checking and probably stop at any sort of sexual crime.

I think you'd be surprised how many times a person can be in contact with kids for their jobs that aren't actually classified as "working with kids."

[myst]

Damn. If he hasn't committed any crime since the rape, this response is basically a How-To for discouraging criminals to reform. I'm guessing dude was drunk, and if he hasn't gotten into trouble in the years since it seems like the system for once worked and scared him into not putting himself into situations he can't control himself.

And the response is? Media sensation story over him being employed in a job where he's within sight of kids, and him getting canned, even though his crime had nothing to do with kids. How's that for incentive to keep your nose clean? If society is going to brand you as an untrustworthy asshole either way, why not keep acting like one?

I wonder how much his coworker got paid for bringing Fox the news.