posted on Aug, 24 2010 @ 11:32 AM
reply to post by Blanca Rose
I still think that such a sentence is harsh, especially seeing how the real anthrax perp/s are walking free. Regardless of this guy's past, he should
be punished according to the crime he is being accused of, not what he might do or what he might have done in the past.
As far as him being a sex offender, I read somewhere that of all the people falsely accused, the biggest proportion of falsely convicted people are
for sex crimes, due to the way society percieves these crimes. Some people even estimate that as high as 60% of all registered sex offenders could
really be innocent. Think about it... When someone is accused of a "sex crime", they are automatically convicted in the eyes of most, due to the
heinous nature of the accusations. Furthermore, a "sex offender" could be someone who took a leak in public (and got caught) or whistled at a lady
on the sidewalk and faced an activist judge for it. I take this whole "Sex-offender" issue with a
, no bundle of salt.
Now whether this guy really did molest a child or not, I have no idea and I'm certainly not speaking to his innocense on that matter, however he
should have been convicted for that crime.
I just don't see how activists lestters, even if they are threatening, should land such a harsh prison sentence, especially seeing how many people
make a very compelling argument for the government, or elements therein, sending the real anthrax.