Legal loopholes

Reply Wed 13 Jul, 2011 01:50 pm
On the Casey Anthony thread there has been some interesting debate about "Caylee's Law" and how it would/would not close the legal loophole that allowed Casey to get out of jail so quickly.

Today I came across this story from Tacoma, WA:

A strange quirk in the law is allowing an accused child rapist to watch child pornography inside the Pierce County Jail.

Marc Gilbert is accused of sexually assaulting young boys and videotaping the abuse.

Under the law, defense attorneys are allowed to review material tied to the case. And because Gilbert has chosen to act as his own attorney, he has had unlimited access to the pornographic footage.

Therefore, the jail says it has no choice but to allow Gilbert to review the footage times over with no limits. Restricting his access would risk a mistrial.

Investigators seized from Gilbert's possession more than 100 DVDs containing 28 hours of pornographic footage. Some of the material was allegedly shot by the former jet pilot, and feature the young boys he's accused of luring to his home and exploiting.

The prosecutor and the sheriff say the results of the legal loophole are sickening in this case, but say the state Supreme Court has ruled in Gilbert's favor.

"Make no mistake -- I don't like it," said Pierce County Sheriff Paul Pastor. "But it is not my choice whether to do it or not to do it. There's no question that I don't like it. There's no question that this makes me grind my teeth."

"We don't like it. We don't want to do it, but we have to follow the law. The fix here is to change the law," said Pierce County Prosecutor Mark Lindquist.

To make sure no other inmates get a chance to see the pornography, Gilbert is made to review them in a separate room.

Child advocates say allowing the tapes to be viewed further victimizes the victims.

People are clamoring that "something needs to be done".

I'm curious about what changes to the law people might want to see result from this in order to close this loophole.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Question • Score: 1 • Views: 2,190 • Replies: 4

Reply Wed 13 Jul, 2011 03:17 pm
Abolish all trials and let the arresting officer decide if a crime has been committed. Let that same person decide on the penalty. Next case.
0 Replies
Reply Wed 13 Jul, 2011 03:31 pm
As outrageous as this case is, the greater outrage would be the conviction of an innocent man.
Reply Wed 13 Jul, 2011 04:03 pm
I agree. The defense has a right to all evidence in a case.

Another interesting twist in the case is that he has the right to call the children he molested to testify and question them about the abuse.

There does seem to be a parallel to the Casey Anthony "just do something" law makers and I wondered how people feel about that in this case -- what law they would like to see put in place to prevent something like this in the future.
Reply Wed 13 Jul, 2011 04:26 pm
I don't presently see how we can make a law avoiding these situations without handing more power to the state.
We've already handed over way to much IMO.
Besides, there will always be those who get away with it.
If the prosecution never lost a case, what would that mean?

It seems like the only end to that is totalitarian rule.
0 Replies

Related Topics

  1. Forums
  2. » Legal loopholes
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 05/07/2021 at 04:51:16