Three men convicted of soliciting sex must wear chicken suit

Forums:
Email this Topic • Print this Page

Quote:

Three men convicted of soliciting sex must wear chicken suit
at 13:51 on July 27, 2007, EST.

PAINESVILLE, Ohio (AP) - A judge known for giving unusual sentences has ordered three men who pleaded guilty to soliciting sex to take turns dressing in a bright yellow chicken costume.

Painesville Municipal Judge Michael Cicconetti agreed to suspend a 30-day jail sentence if they wear the costume between 4 and 7 p.m. Friday outside the court while carrying a sign that reads "No Chicken Ranch in Painesville."

The sign and costume refer to the "World Famous Chicken Ranch," a prostitution house in Nevada where sex-for-money is legal.

Daniel Chapdelaine, 40, of Perry Township; Martin Soto, 44, of Ashtabula; and Fabian Rodriguez-Ramirez, 29, of Painesville, solicited sex from an undercover Painesville police officer earlier this summer.

Cicconetti has used barnyard animals to dispense justice in the past.

He ordered a man who called a policeman a pig to stand next to a live pig in a pen and hold a sign that read "This Is Not a Police Officer." A couple who stole a baby Jesus statue from a manger were sentenced to dress as Mary and Joseph and walk with a donkey.

I'm getting this image......but I'm regretting it, as I can't get it out of my mind!

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 1,637 • Replies: 29

No top replies

This is a clear violation of the Constitutional prohibition against cruel or unusual punishments, even with the choice he gave them.

0 Replies

I thought it was called the mustang ranch in Nevada.
Why chicken ranch?

0 Replies

I never solicit sex without my chicken suit on.

0 Replies

Well yeah, after a while you'd think: why bother taking the suit off.

0 Replies

I only solicit sex from women who are wearing chicken suits.

0 Replies

Brandon9000 wrote:

This is a clear violation of the Constitutional prohibition against cruel or unusual punishments, even with the choice he gave them.

Well, they could have always been given the 30 day jail time with any other choices ;-)

I like that judge Laughing

0 Replies

Sounds more like revenge than punishment to me.

0 Replies

CALLING A POLICE OFFICER A PIG IS ILLEGAL? god damn, i must have a rap sheet miles long then.

0 Replies

I only eat chicken with women who solicit sex suits.

0 Replies

Montana wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:
This is a clear violation of the Constitutional prohibition against cruel or unusual punishments, even with the choice he gave them.

Well, they could have always been given the 30 day jail time with any other choices ;-)

I like that judge

And they should have been. Under our Constitution, a judge doesn't have the right to say that a defendant has a choice between serving ten years in jail, or being tarred and feathered and dragged around behind a car in public, which is the kind of sentence that people once received. You may have no appreciation of the Bill of Rights, but it's there for a reason.

0 Replies

I saw this on the news last night. But it was a full chicken suit - head and all - so you couldn't see the men's faces. What's the point if you can't tell who it is (other than by the end of the day they're going to be sweaty and smell like fake chicken feathers?)

You have to hand it to the judge; he is creative.

0 Replies

Yes, he is. Maybe next year he'll have people flogged in public squares. It's always remarkable to me how many people have no appreciation whatever of the protections we receive from the Constitution.

0 Replies

Brandon9000 wrote:

Yes, he is. Maybe next year he'll have people flogged in public squares. It's always remarkable to me how many people have no appreciation whatever of the protections we receive from the Constitution.

Obviously the men broke the law. A law that is basicallly pretty stupid.
Why fill the jails with people that solicit sex? This deters people from doing it again, yet doesn't put a burden on the penal system.

0 Replies

DEfine cruel and unusual in THIS context?
Has the sentence been carried out yet?

0 Replies

I only sex chickens wearing women suits.

I only suit women wearing sex chicken.

0 Replies

it's only cruel to the pig and the donkey in the previous sentences. what did they ever do to have to be seen with those people in public?

0 Replies

farmerman wrote:

DEfine cruel and unusual in THIS context?
Has the sentence been carried out yet?

Probably a sentence involving being ridiculed in public would qualify.

0 Replies

happycat wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:
Yes, he is. Maybe next year he'll have people flogged in public squares. It's always remarkable to me how many people have no appreciation whatever of the protections we receive from the Constitution.

Obviously the men broke the law. A law that is basicallly pretty stupid.
Why fill the jails with people that solicit sex? This deters people from doing it again, yet doesn't put a burden on the penal system.

Yes, let's just junk the whole Bill of Rights in the interests of efficiency.

0 Replies

Quote:

Probably a sentence involving being ridiculed in public would qualify.

Wow, we make policy and law on A2K now? We have a Constitutional SCholar amidst. Brandon, wre you aware of the tests for the determination of "Cruel and Uniusual"? and I dont mean any of your guesses, or "probablies" please.

0 Replies

Forums
» Three men convicted of soliciting sex must wear chicken suit

Read Discussion
Reply to All

Three men convicted of soliciting sex must wear chicken suit

Quick Links

My Account

able2know