Atheist claims harassment by Fla. sheriff

Atheist claims harassment by Fla. sheriff

www.winknews.com

Wachs first tangled with Judd last winter after he uprooted the Polk County jail's basketball hoops and donated them to local churches. Her group claimed that was an unconstitutional use of public property.
Since then Judd's agency has charged her with minor crimes, including illegally posing as a lawyer, possession of marijuana and simulating sex sounds from inside her home within earshot of a neighbor's 10-year-old son.

(visit the link for the full news article)

What I want to know is how is simulating sex sounds a crime? I live in Polk County Fl and since sheriff Judd has been in office he has done alot of controversial things. You guys might remember the author of that pedophile book, well he was arrested by our Sheriff all the way from another state for sending the book to detectives. Our Sheriff, although I think he has done alot of good, he has also done some rather stupid things and thinks he is above the law..our whole county is pretty corrupt....we do live in Imperial Polk County which is part of our motto. Time will tell what happens with this case. Hopefully they can prove harressment...it wouldnt surprise me none if they are found guilty and are forced to pay up.

www.winknews.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

simulating sex sounds from inside her home within earshot of a neighbor's 10-year-old son.

Who does that #? She is obviously a lunatic, and will get no sympathy from me.

Some people just like causing problems so they can then cry about corrupt police.

Oh, and simulating sex sounds within earshot of a 10 year old was probably classified as disturbing the peace, because if someone did that within ear shot of my kid, ass beatings would ensue.

Originally posted by Adyta

simulating sex sounds from inside her home within earshot of a neighbor's 10-year-old son.

Who does that #? She is obviously a lunatic, and will get no sympathy from me.

Some people just like causing problems so they can then cry about corrupt police.

Oh, and simulating sex sounds within earshot of a 10 year old was probably classified as disturbing the peace, because if someone did that within ear shot of my kid, ass beatings would ensue.

You do realize she was IN HER OWN HOUSE right? So if she was making these sounds:



It would hurt a kid how? Ever heard cats mating?

/MD

I have just read a lot abou tthis case, including this:

askanatheist.tv...

This is so Ducked up it is just not funny. Although it is funny, but it's not funny! lol

So we see we are all the same after all. We can all be, and all are prejudiced, one way or the other.

reply to post by lspilot6946


As a FL dweller myself I have a confession to make. I read the title of the thread and said to myself, "I'll bet that's in Polk County."

..and I was right.

Originally posted by Frogs
reply to post by lspilot6946

 

As a FL dweller myself I have a confession to make. I read the title of the thread and said to myself, "I'll bet that's in Polk County."

..and I was right.

LOL...yea you are right. I am ashamed to call Polk County home...lol. I cant wait to get out of this county.

there's nothing wrong with donating basketball hoops from the local JAIL to a church, certainly nothing illegal. seperation of church and state isn't in the constitution, and besides, that notion was presented because the king of england was ALSO the head of the church. that is dangerous, but how does donating basketball hoops show the church wields some terrible political power? it sounds like she was angry about this, but unfairly so. how much government aid goes to public schools that teach evolution? and shes mad over a few basketball hoops? give me a break.

looks like she caused problems for him, and hes returning fire with his arsenal. do i support his actions? i guess it depends on how much trouble she was causing.

in the words of rambo "she drew first blood"

This site did a pretty good job of covering the story:

The Blaze

Its a conservative site so she doesn't get much sympathy but at least they gathered a few news vids about the story. Unfortunately, they're not Youtube vids so I can't embed .

The story behind the sex sounds arrest is that she was mad that her neighbor was playing basketball next door and asked him to stop, which he did. Later his father invited him to go out and shoot some hoops and while they were out there, she made loud moaning sounds from her house. She was arrested for "performing sex acts in the presence of a minor". She says she wasn't having sex but was calling a friend for help instead . She sounds pretty immature IMO, but charging her with the sex act crime is just as immature on the sheriff's part.

reply to post by Bob Sholtz


There is a great deal wrong with donating public property to a private organization. It is called misappropriation of funds when tax payer's money or assets are used for private gain. That is the LAW. This has little to do with separation of church and state, except for in the mind of the woman bringing this up.
As far as the morality of teaching evolution in publicly funded schools goes, well, evolution has been PROVEN according to the scientific method. Religion cannot be taught in SCIENCE class, because it CANNOT be validated by experimentation, documentation and repetition. Conversely, if we were to teach religion in school like you would like, perhaps children would read Deuteronomy 22:28 and 29 and get the idea that God says that it is perfectly acceptable to rape unmarried women.
I'm sorry, I digress. I didn't mean to go off topic, but I had to make that quick rebuttal to your comment about public education somehow being a contribution to a "religion"...

Originally posted by Q:1984A:1776
reply to post by Bob Sholtz

 

There is a great deal wrong with donating public property to a private organization. It is called misappropriation of funds when tax payer's money or assets are used for private gain. That is the LAW. This has little to do with separation of church and state, except for in the mind of the woman bringing this up.
As far as the morality of teaching evolution in publicly funded schools goes, well, evolution has been PROVEN according to the scientific method. Religion cannot be taught in SCIENCE class, because it CANNOT be validated by experimentation, documentation and repetition. Conversely, if we were to teach religion in school like you would like, perhaps children would read Deuteronomy 22:28 and 29 and get the idea that God says that it is perfectly acceptable to rape unmarried women.
I'm sorry, I digress. I didn't mean to go off topic, but I had to make that quick rebuttal to your comment about public education somehow being a contribution to a "religion"...

I totally agree with you. And I would add that the church is meant to be the source of charity, not the recipient of it. Especially when that includes steling recreational equipment from those who you see as morrally unwerthy for your own gain.

Morrally bankrupt. Legally questionable. Good work for a church!

reply to post by MaskedDebater


"In her own house" is not a valid argument... Just because you are in your own home doesn't mean that what you do will not bother the people OUTSIDE your home.

Using your logic, why don't you go to your window naked, face the street, and start masturbating for the world to see.

Saying "it's only sounds, how could it hurt a child??" is EXACTLY THE SAME as if a pedophile were to argue "it was only touching, how could that hurt the child?"...

reply to post by Q:1984A:1776


i would enjoy discussing the evidence for evolution with you in a friendly manner, but not here. as for what is taught in school about our origins? i say take it all out, and leave it up to the parents. it would be unfair to teach one religion over another, and as every pre-human form has been debunked, i wouldn't exactly say science supports evolution. but i digress, this isn't the place for that.

i wouldn't support the police station buying new basketball equipment and giving it to the church, but a few used basketball hoops? not that big of a deal.

you really want to get upset about mis-allocation of public funds? there are much bigger fish to fry. i recently had to write a researched essay with an annotated bibliography on the subject of "what our government should pay for" and i used "wastebook" as one of my sources.

Grateful Dead chose a public institution to archive the band‘s memorabilia ―because the whole idea of it being public and free was important to them,‖ yet taxpayers are paying $615,000 to make the band‘s archives ―free‖ and ―public.‖

(coburn 6). this is one of a hundred different projects. recycling basketball hoops pails in comparison. i'm sure the church would be happy to let everyone use the hoops, so they are, in effect "public".

coburn.senate.gov...

after all, churches regularly volunteer to house people in disaster situations and carry out alot of charity work. giving them these hoops spares them some money for food to the homeless.

reply to post by Bob Sholtz


How is that any different than any museum receiving a federal grant to preserve it's documents?

reply to post by Bob Sholtz


No, HE drew first blood when he gave away property owned by his taxpayers to religious institutions. I bet you'd be screaming holy murder if he'd given them to local _Mosques_ or Synagogues.

reply to post by Adyta


i wasn't trying to be vague, and i did give a link and the page number for you to read at your hearts content, but do you honestly support that much of our tax dollars going towards a private band's memorabilia? (sure, its "free" public access, just like the basketball hoops would be at the church) even forgetting that the band has plenty of money to do it themselves(the top two members are valued at 25 and 30 MILLION respectively), it isn't something money should be put towards in the best of times. yet we're in an economic crisis where every person in america owes around $48,000 (if you include only taxpayers, its around $140,000).

So you can be arrested in the US for having noisy sex in you own home
what a joke,but I'm not really surprised after the Janet Jackson Superbowl wardrobe malfunction fiasco,talk about making a mountain out of a mole hill or a breast for that matter,
I once read the British sent all the prudes to America,perhaps this is true

Originally posted by Adyta

simulating sex sounds from inside her home within earshot of a neighbor's 10-year-old son.

Who does that #? She is obviously a lunatic, and will get no sympathy from me.

Some people just like causing problems so they can then cry about corrupt police.

Oh, and simulating sex sounds within earshot of a 10 year old was probably classified as disturbing the peace, because if someone did that within ear shot of my kid, ass beatings would ensue.

So let me get this straight, If me and my spouse lived next door to you in an apartment, and it just so happens that our bedroom shares a wall with your child's room. That if we happen to wake your child up because "she" is rather loud you would assault me?

You would end up dead.

Originally posted by Adyta
reply to post by MaskedDebater

 

When I was younger I was always jealous my cousins got their own pornography magazines when they were around 8 or 9 years old... until one of them became a child molester before his 18th birthday.

Well then I stand corrected since you are obviously an expert by virtue of having a child molester relative. It is impossible for me to trump that esteemed authority. I hereby retract my prior defense of the lady. Burn the witch!!!!!!!!

Moaning is not illegal. What if someone stubbed their toe and moaned in pain? As far as your whacking in the window example, by your rules the Peeping Tom voyeur should be arrested. It is a slippery slope to define human sound as pornographic. Just my opinion pal.

/MD

reply to post by NuroSlam


I love how you put "she" in quotes. Something you're not telling us?

I wont judge.