Beyond Insanity: Justice in Delaware

Spree Shooter Radee Labeeb Prince was a One-Man Crime Who Got a Free Ride from the Delaware Criminal Justice System. (nicholasstixuncensored, 10/26/2017)

Anonymous reader opines: “(T)his animal enjoyed almost 20 years of “affirmative action justice” for innumerable felonious assaults….From a reading of this article, it appears that he was never convicted of anything that resulted in a Jail sentence: Astonishing.” (“Mass shooting suspect: many prior arrests, few convictions” (Wilmington News Journal, Oct. 18, 2017)

N.S.: He repeatedly skipped out on court dates, but instead of hunting him down additionally, prosecutors would reward him by dropping the previous charges, and declining to charge him for being a fugitive. In other words, the more crimes he committed, the more prosecutors rewarded him.

In Baltimore, Freddie Gray’s arrest record contained all sorts of charges without dispositions. In Atlanta, Shamal Thompson committed one felony after another, without ever being punished, as judges and prosecutors kept issuing him black-man-gets-out-of-jail-free cards, until he murdered Eugenia Jeanne Calle. Meanwhile, in New York, Daryl Thomas committed one First-Degree Rape after another, but the NYPD kept giving him freebies, writing up his forcible rapes as “trespassing.”

Almost 20 years of violent and other mala in se felonies and 42 arrests and he was free to shoot 5 people, killing 3 of them! Not a day in prison or even jail, apparently?

I wonder how many women, teachers and others, are now in prison in Delaware for allowing biological men under age 16 or even 18 to penetrate them in factually consensual relationships. And over the last 20 years, the same period in which Prince committed violent felony after violent felony and was arrested 42 times but was never sentenced to prison or even jail, apparently,how many women, teachers and others, were sentenced to prison or jail for engaging in acts of coitus and/or fellatio with underage pubescent teenage males?

Or for even a single act of “sexual contacts” in a fleeting tryst like the women in Nevada who was sentenced to life in prison in 2010 for allegedly “forcing” a young man of 13 to touch her breast.


The Distinctly Odious Barton Deiters


, , , , ,

As noted in previous articles/blog-posts: when covering the arrest, prosecution, trial, conviction, sentencing, imprisonment, and appeals in this case, Barton Dieters has often been less a reporter than a myrmidon of and cheerleader for the prosecution, and later for the judge who upheld, twice apparently, Abigail’s 8-25 year prison sentence and life-sentence of electronic parole monitoring with an ankle-tether, ludicrously defined as a “bracelet.”

For example, a reporter who uses the phrase “ex-tutor guilty of raping her student” is not a true journalist, objective and neutral, but an advocate, ideologue, propagandist, and CSA victimologist, who is using language not to describe but rather to distort and pervert objective reality for ideological reasons. Not having penises, women can’t commit rape in the pure and literal sense of the word. And Abigail wasn’t guilty of “rape” even if defined as synonymous with violent sexual assault. If anyone was a victim of rape in this liaison, it was Abigail if she’s telling the truth about her de jure “victim” forcing himself on her.

And his tendentiousness was blatant in using words and phrases like “dispatched” and “shot down” in covering the judge’s decisions and arguments at her re-sentencing. “Dispatch” means “to kill with quick efficiency; to dispose of something rapidly or efficiently”; to “defeat.” “Shoot down” means to “kill, defeat, discredit.” And a synonym of “shoot down” is “skewer,” which means to “criticize or ridicule sharply and effectively.” So, according to Dieters, the judge killed Tieber’s arguments, metaphorically, with rapidity and efficiency. He defeated, discredited, and skewered them.

Writing that the judge “rejected” Tieber’s arguments would have been true journalism, neutral and objective, an exemplar of simply reporting the facts rather than siding with the judge, indeed hailing the judge’s decision by using words and phrases like “dispatched” and “shot down,” and against Tieber.

His use of such words not only implies but asserts that Tieber was wrong in claiming that Abigail was not a threat to “re-offend” and in arguing that a life-sentence of electronic parole monitoring with a ankle-tether was “cruel and unusual punishment,” and that the judge was right in upholding her 8-25 year prison sentence and life-sentence of electronica parole monitoring.

The use of words and phrases like “dispatched” and “shot down” not only asserts that Tieber’s arguments were wrong, contrary to facts and logic and reason, but also ridiculous, irrational, delusional.

Imagine the outrage and hysteria if he had sided with Tieber and against the judge by asserting that Tieber was right and the judge was wrong and used words and phrases to praise Tieber and belittle the judge.

As a CSA victimologist, he obviously thinks of her as a “rapist” and “child molester,” perhaps even a “pedophile,” and the biological man who assented to or initiated sex with her as a “child” and “victim” of “rape” and CSA who’ll be “traumatized” and “scarred for life,” whatever the facts and circumstances, even if he did rape her, as with the “victim” of Cassandra Sorenson-Grohall,

And he obviously believes she deserves to be enslaved and abused and degraded in prison for at least 8-years if not longer and then subjected to a lifetime of draconian/Orwellian persecution, for a “crime” in which the “victim” enjoys the sex more than the woman who “raped” and “molested” him and is often if not usually the aggressor and initiator of his phantasmal and theoretical “victimization.

To those of us who aren’t MRAs and/or CSA victimologists, or brainwashed and vitiated by same, precisely the opposite is palpably true: the judge was wrong and Tieber was right. The judge’s arguments -what he now believes or affects to believe given his “reeducation” by and/or fear of  MRAs and CSA victimologists-  were ridiculous, irrational, based on lies and delusions.

To those of us who are honest, realistic, objective, and rational on this matter, Tieber was right in arguing that Abigail is not a “threat to society” or to anyone nor even a danger to “re-offend” by having sex with another young man under statutory age, and thus her sentence of 8-25 years in prison was grossly excessive and iniquitous, and her life-sentence of electronic parole monitoring with an ankle-tether she can never remove was “cruel and unusual punishment” in the sense of being wholly gratuitous, completely unnecessary to protect anyone from anything.

But why, seemingly, does he hate her more than most true sex criminals, e.g., males (including biological men under age 18 who are absurdly defined as “children”) who commit violent/forcible rapes and gang-rapes of adult females and underage adolescent girls, most heinously those who use knives and guns and terrorize and brutalize and gravely injure their victims; or men (including underage pubescent teenagers) who rape or prey on and molest prepubertal children.

One senses that his hatred of Abigail is, in some ways and to some degree, whatever the reason(s), deeply personal. One would think he was the “victim’s father,” or a relative. Or that the “victim’s” parents were his friends and/or neighbors, whom he knows intimately.

He appears to revel in her anguish and degradation, pain and suffering. I’m sure he was happy to see her in handcuffs attached to a waist-chain and leg-irons at her over 2-hour sentencing, so enervated by fear and anxiety and despair and lack of sleep that she could barely walk or even stand and almost collapsed twice. I’m sure he hopes her life in prison is hellish, abusive, degrading, and nightmarish, the more so the better. Thanks to the media, led by him, she’s surely the most infamous, and probably the most hated, of all 2000-plus inmates. He might even be glad to hear that she was assaulted, brutally and viciously, or even murdered.

Beyond Insanity: And Abigail was Sentenced to 8-25 Years in Prison!

JESSE WATTERS; The vicious consequences of illegal immigration -that is the subject of tonight’s Watters’ Word….Thirty-one-year-old Mexican National Sergio Jose Martinez has been on a path of destruction in Portland, Oregon, a notorious sanctuary city.

Martinez has been arrested 13 times since 2008 in Oregon alone. The rap sheet includes car theft, hit-and-run, criminal trespassing, meth possession, reckless endangerment, burglary and shoplifting. He has criminal convictions in California too, including burglary, battery, theft, and obstructing a police officer. The man is described as a transient with a daily meth habit. He has been deported -you ready?- 20 times with at least five probation violations from re-entering.

Despite a rap sheet this troubling, Martinez was still waltzing around Northeast Portland on July 24. This is where his latest crime spree began. Here are the sickening allegations: Martinez, armed with a knife, entered a woman’s home through an open window, used  scarves and socks to blindfold her, gag her and tie her up before sexually assaulting her, punching her and slamming her head into the wood floor.

Martinez then stole her car in search for a new victim. Then he waited in the dark corner of a parking garage as a woman approached. He threatened to kill her and forced her into her car at knifepoint. The woman tried to escape, but he tackled her and slammed her head into the ground. Once she screamed, Martinez ran and was caught by police, carrying a knife and stolen items from both victims.

Martinez was high on meth at the times of the attacks. He’s been charged with 13 felonies including burglary, sodomy, sexual abuse, robbery, and unlawful use of a motor vehicle. He remains in jail with bail set at more than two million dollars…

So apparently authorities in Portland, Oregon and Multnomah county have no problem protecting monsters like this. The sheriff and the Portland mayor should explain to the victim’s faces why Martinez was roaming he streets….(Watters’ World, Fox News.)

And Abigail Simon was sentenced to 8-25 years in prison and a lifetime of draconian/Orwellian persecution for allowing a biological man of 15 to penetrate her in a factually consensual love-affair and responding to his hundreds of emails and text messages -and that’s assuming she’s lying about his forcing himself on her and “controlling her life”; at least 8-years of enslavement and a life-sentence of persecution for a first-offender convicted of nonviolent and victimless and mala prohibita “crimes” that are legal acts in dozens of other nations, including European countries. And Kathryn Ronk was sentenced to 6-15 years in prison under a plea-bargain. And Mary Letourneau was enslaved for almost a decade of her life -far longer than the average time-served for murder and roughly twice as long as the average time-served for all violent felonies: aggravated assault, robbery, rape, and murder- and must register for life as a uniquely deviant and dangerous criminal.

A Life-Sentence of Draconian/Orwellian Persecution: Electronic Parole Monitoring

From an article quoted in “Congress, Courts & National News”:

GPS monitoring bracelets are not punishment…Oh, I’m sure they suck. They might chafe. They could cause blisters. They will cramp your style, keep you out of swimming pools, cause a funny-looking bulge in your nylons, spoil your suntan, tether you to a power source for an hour a day…They’ll subject you to derision  -or worse. And they’re an enormous invasion of your privacy: someone will always know where you are, and if you take off the monitor, they’ll come after you…But a monitoring bracelet is not punishment, the (Wisconsin) state court of appeals says so.

“Per the factual stipulation a person subject to lifetime CPS must wear a 2.5 x 3.5 x 1.5- inch battery-powered tracking devise around his or her ankle for the rest of his or her life,” the court wrote. “It is a felony to tamper with the devise in any way…The devise can never be removed -even when showering, bathing, and sleeping- sometimes causing discomfort and blistering.”

For Abigail, a life-sentence of electronic parole monitoring with an ankle-tether/”bracelet” is a form of “cruel and unusual punishment” in that it’s completely unnecessary to protect anyone from anything. To repeat, Abigail is a first-offender convicted of a nonviolent and victimless and malum prohibitum felony that’s a legal act or at worst a misdemeanor in dozens of other nations, including European countries; she’s never committed a violent or other malum in se crime in her life and never will and is not a “threat to society” or to anyone nor even a danger to “re-offend” by having sex with another young man under age 16 or 18, depending on the age of consent in whatever state she resides after her release from prison.

The rationale and justification for this “cruel and unusual punishment,” in being wholly gratuitous, is the absurd premise and illusion that’s she’s as deviant and dangerous, and as likely to re-offend, as a low-IQ male recidivist, probably with a history of crime that began at age 13 or 14, who violently raped an adult female or underage adolescent girl, or a pedophile who raped and/or molested prepubertal children, boys or girls, and who’s surely or likely to re-offend if not subjected to electronic parole-monitoring; that she’s predatory, possibly even violent, and driven by a perversion or “paraphilia” and the consequent desires and impulses that she can’t control and must be deterred by 40-60 years of electronic parole-monitoring until she dies in a house or apartment or hospital or nursing home or wherever.

The generic age of consent is 16 in Michigan. If her lover had been 16, just a few months or weeks older and she had not been his tutor or, apparently, a tutor at another high-school, their affair would have legal under Michigan law. But since he was 15, a few months and weeks short of the legal age, she was guilty of a felony with a maximum sentence of 25-year to life in prison and a lifetime of public sex offender registration and electronic parole-monitoring with an ankle-tether/”bracelet” that is conspicuous and cumbersome, causing not only acute embarrassment, profound humiliation, serious inconveniences, hostile encounters,  but also blisters, chafing, cuts, abrasions, rashes; and that can never be removed, even while showering, bathing, sleeping, and having sex with a lover or spouse

Why did She Reject the Plea Bargains if She’s Lying About Everything?

As I noted previously, in another post with a similar title, perhaps she’s telling the truth, if not as a whole then largely and essentially; e.g.., it’s possibly, perhaps not likely, but possible, that her story is akin to that of Cassandra Sorenson-Grohall. And that’s why she rejected the plea-bargains. But if she’s lying about everything, as almost everyone not only believes but knows, being omniscient apparently, why would she reject all the plea-bargains?

On a Sunday night 1-2 years ago while riding a stationary bicycle with a small television at Anytime Fitness,  I watched a segment of MSNBC’s Lockup Raw, a weekly TV show that depicts life in U.S. prisons and jails. It’s so depressing -if one thinks of all the people with no histories of violence or serious criminality, people who don’t belong in jail or prison because they’re innocent or, if guilty, were convicted of crimes that don’t warrant incarceration- that I usually don’t even watch it for a few seconds and I’ve never watched even as much as 10-15 minutes during a single evening.

For some reason I watched a few minutes of a segment on the county jail in Sacramento, CA, in which a reporter interviewed a woman who was arrested and jailed as an accomplice to murder because she accompanied her lover to the house of a man he shot to death in a confrontation, possibly in self-defense, and in which she described her first hours of incarceration: She was crying, violently and uncontrollably. She was claustrophobic. She was hyperventilating. She had panic attacks. And this was a young working-class female who appeared to be in her early/middle-20’s, whose lover was an Iraq war veteran who appeared to be in his early/middle-30’s. This woman was surely tougher, psychologically, than Abigail Simon, whose experience of being arrested and jailed was almost surely even more traumatic, hellish, degrading, nightmarish.

So why did she reject all the plea-bargains if she’s lying about everything? The obvious answer is that she so dreaded the penalties to which she’d be subjected under even the least punitive of the plea-bargains she rejected -being enslaved and abused and degraded for perhaps as long as 12-18 months or at least for 5-6 months in a hellish jail with male guards and no privacy and grievous overcrowding, and the fights, verbal and physical, the violence and threats of violence, the awful food, the routine strip-searches, the almost unrelenting, often unbearable, noise, etc., and then subjected to a lifetime or at least 20-30 years of draconian/Orwellian persecution- that she decided to plead “not guilty” and go to trial with the hope, however unrealistic, and the chance, however remote, that she’d be acquitted on all counts and thus walk out of the courtroom with family and friends a free women, legally, free to live as normal a life as possible given her travail and it’s negative consequences: finding a job, interacting with other people, ostracism, hostility, hate-mail, death threats, vigilante violence, etc.

P.S. Sentencing judges are not constrained, in many if not most jurisdictions, to honor the terms of a plea-bargain. If Abigail had accepted a plea-bargain in which she plead guilty to third-degree criminal sexual conduct, the judge had the discretion to sentence her to 6-15 years in prison, the sentence imposed on Kathryn Ronk under a similar plea-bargain. And if she’d accepted a plea-bargain in which she plead guilty to “accosting a minor for immoral purposes,” the judge had the discretion to sentence her to 4-years in prison.

A Judge Dismisses the Lawsuit Against the Catholic Diocese


, , , ,

Writes John Tunison at

A judge has dismissed a lawsuit against the Catholic Diocese of Grand Rapids and three Catholic school employees filed by the teen sexual assault victim of tutor Abigail Simon…Attorneys for the teen -who was a 15-year-old Catholic Central High School student when he had sexual encounters with tutor Abigail Simon- have filed an appeal with the state Court of Appeals…In late 2015, the teen filed a lawsuit against the Diocese, Grand Rapids Catholic Secondary School and three administrators, claiming not enough was done to prevent Simon from abusing the teen.

But Kent County Circuit Judge George Quist granted a motion to dismiss the case. In a written opinion, Quist disagreed with claim that school officials knew or should have known that Simon was involved in relations with the teen. “By plaintiff’s own testimony, no school staff member saw or had reason to believe that he and Simon were engaged in a sexual relationship,” Quist wrote….In the lawsuit, the teen sought damages of at least $25,000 from the schools and the administrators. (, 3/15-2017.)

Obviously, if there was any evidence to support the allegations in this lawsuit against the Diocese and “three administrators” -that “school staff members” knew that Abigail was having sex with the football star and other male students at two high schools and “accosting” minors for “immoral purposes” but didn’t inform the authorities- the judge would not have dismissed the lawsuit. So, apparently, the allegations were all lies and exaggeration -apart from Abigail having sex with the young man, assuming he didn’t force himself on her, and exchanging hundreds of emails and text messages- as I argued in my post “Abigail is Sued by Her ‘Victim’.”

Good news for the Diocese, but not for Abigail?

The Michigan Supreme Court ruling that mandatory minimum sentences were “unconstitutional” and the appellate court decision upholding her convictions but ordering a re-sentencing should have resulted in her release from prison on “time-served” or at least a sentence of 3-4 years with “time-served” and also the overturning of her life-sentence of electronic parole monitoring with an ankle-tether/”bracelet.” But, deplorably, the judge who had no discretion but to impose the mandatory-minimum sentence of 8-25 years in prison and all the other penalties now had the discretion to impose a far less punitive sentence but instead chose to uphold her grotesquely draconian/Orwellian sentence.

Apart from cravenness, which was paramount (as I explained in the previous article on Abigail’s re-sentencing), another reason the judge might have upheld her draconian/Orwellian sentence -not only that of 8-25 years in prison but also the life-sentence of electronic parole monitoring- is that he believed all or most of the accusations in the lawsuit filed against the Catholic Diocese and Abigail by her “victim.”

If this is true, at least to some degree, however large, then his view of Abigail as a “predator” who deserved to be imprisoned for at least 8-years if not longer and subjected to a life-sentence of electronic-monitoring was based on lies and exaggerations.

“…not enough was done to prevent Simon  from abusing the teen.” If the “victim” experienced acts of coitus and fellatio and so forth with Abigail and also the hundreds of emails and texts they exchanged as “abusive” rather than thrilling and gratifying and empowering, all he had to do was end the relationship. And if Abigail was the initiator and aggressor, all he had to do was say “no” and he would not have been “abused” by having sex with an attractive and desirable woman. We’re supposed to believe that a 6’3″, 220 lb. biological man and football star was so terrified of Abigail because of her age and power and authority -when he outweighed her by almost a 100 pounds and was at least 6-8 times stronger in the upper-body- that he was too afraid to say no, initially, and repel her importunities, assuming she was the “aggressor,” and then too fearful to end the relationship. And, also, that he was too young and immature to consent to or initiate sex, knowingly and willingly, with an adult female. (I discuss this at length in “More on Traumatization” and also in many other article/blog-posts.)

Assuming she’s lying, the reason he assented to or initiated sex with Abigail and didn’t end the affair is because the sex was thrilling and gratifying and empowering. And so, too, the hundreds of emails and text-messages. And even if he didn’t rape and terrorize her, even if he never forced himself on her, it’s not only possible, I’d say it’s likely, that he was the aggressor. And even if Abigail was the initiator, it’s reasonable to assume that she was responding, usually if not always, to his messages, not vice-versa, probably because she didn’t want to have sex with him as she testified in court and told the police and prosecutors. If so, she was telling the truth about his “controlling her life,” essentially, and perhaps also as to her fearing him, though with lies and exaggerations.

More on Traumatization


, ,

“Trauma” defined: “a mental condition caused by severe shock, especially when the harmful effects last for a long time.” (Oxford learners dictionaries); “a deeply distressing or disturbing experience.” (Oxford dictionaries); “a very difficult or unpleasant experience that causes someone to have mental or emotional problems usually for a long time”; “a disordered psychic or behavioral state resulting from severe mental or emotional stress….(Merriam-Webster)

The above, according to the “conventional wisdom,” defines the varied experiences, the emotions, the psychic states of and effects on young men under age 16 or even 18 who have sex with adult females who are at least 4-5 years older. Invariably so, according to the dogmas of CSA victimologists, irrespective of the facts and circumstances: whether the women seduced them or they were the aggressors and initiators or their liaisons could be defined as a mutual coming together, or whether they had sex dozens of times over a period of months or engaged in a single act of coitus or fellatio or “sexual contact,” and so forth.

In nearly all instances, in reality and fact as opposed to theory and fantasy, the experiences of young men under age 18 who have sex with adult women are the antithesis of traumatization.

Generally, in reality and fact as opposed to theory and fantasy, if one is traumatized by one or a few or many experience(s), one feels the trauma, immediately and profoundly, viscerally and unequivocally, and knows one is traumatized. One isn’t traumatized if one isn’t aware of being traumatized. If there is any doubt as to whether one was traumatized, then one wasn’t traumatized.

If one is traumatized, deeply and genuinely, by one or a few or many experiences, one doesn’t need to be subjected, willingly or compulsorily, to hours and days and weeks and months and years of psycho-therapy to make one realize that one was traumatized, unconsciously, by an act or acts that one experienced, consciously, as supremely pleasurable, and remembers fondly as gratifying, exciting, fulfilling, empowering.

Unless they’re insane and/or masochistic, people don’t assent to or initiate acts that they know will be traumatizing. And, even more so, they don’t continue to assent to or initiate acts which they experienced as traumatizing.

What of instances in which adult women try to seduce or initiate sex with young men under statutory age: If biological men under age 18 don’t want to have sex with adult females for whatever reasons -because they’re in love with girls their own age and don’t want to betray them; because they’re “players” and “super-studs” who’ve had sex many times before and only have sex with females who are at least an “8” and the woman who wants to have sex with them is only a “6′ or at best a “7”; because they were raised to believe that sex outside of marriage is “sinful” and immoral by fundamentalists-evangelical Christian parents; because they’re homosexual, etc.- all they have to do is say “no,” rudely or politely, brusquely or apologetically, to repel their advances and inportunities.

Once again, we see how CSA victimologists and those they’ve indoctrinated, most perniciously the ruling-elites and governing-classes,  conflate biological men under age 16 or even 18 with prepubescent girls of 10 and 11.  Just as the latter are too young and sexless and innocent to say “no” and resist the sexual aggressions of adult men and pubescent teenage males under age 18, so the former are too young and immature to say “no” and repel the advances of women who are nearly always smaller and weaker and usually far smaller and weaker than their putative “victims,” and will not resort to violence/force or overt threats of same (physical assaults and/or weapons) if rebuffed since they’re not crazy and violent and unrestrainedly salacious.

Thus, in the minds of CSA victimologists (and also MRAs, for divergent reasons and motives), they have no choice but to engage in sex-acts that will “traumatize,” “devastate,” and “scar” them for life: even if they’ve had sex before, often many times before, with underage adolescent girls, and/or outweigh the women who “rape” them by 50-100 lbs. and are 4-6 times stronger in the upper body. But they’re not too young and immature to be charged with felonies and possibly “waived” into adult court if they rape adult females and underage adolescent girls.

The reason why few biological men under statutory age will reject the advances of adult females is because they want to have sex with them, just as they want to have sex with underage adolescent girls, and know the sex with be pleasurable.

If biological men under age 18 have had sex once or a few or many times with adolescent girls under age 18, then they know that acts of coitus and fellatio with adult women, teachers or whoever, will be just as if not even more more exciting and gratifying and empowering, physically and psychologically, depending on the circumstances: e.g., the milieu in which they “make love,” the expertise of the woman in the fine arts of love-making, the attractiveness and desirability of the woman, etc.

If they’re virgins and have never had sex with a female, they’ve surely masturbated, most weekly, many daily, and experienced their orgasms as pleasurable: the tickle, the tingle, the sting, and the spit, and then deep relaxation, the joys of onanism. So even if they’re virgins, they know that that sliding or jamming their penises into the vagina of an adult women and ejaculating inside her will be even more gratifying, physically and psychologically, than self-pleasuring by hand in a bedroom or bathroom or wherever in onanistic solitude,  vitiated by anxiety if their parents are home and nearby or if in a public restroom. Or so, too, with her warm, wet lips and tongue fellating him to orgasmic ecstasy.

Ironically, the hysterical and dogmatic fantasy and insistence of the modern anti-sex feminist left that young men under age 16 or even 18 who eagerly assent to or initiate sex with adult women at least 4-5 years older will be “traumatized” and “scarred for life”  is comparable to the hysterical and dogmatic fantasy and insistence of anti-sex Christian puritans that young men who masturbated would “go insane” before they were sentenced to hell for eternity.

Judge Upholds 8-25 Year Prison Sentence after Supreme Court Rules that Mandatory Minimum Sentences are “Unconstitutional”


, , , ,

At sentencing on January 15, 2015, in explaining why he chose to impose the mandatory-minimum sentence of “only” 8-25 years in prison rather than the maximum of 25-years to life for a first-offender convicted of a nonviolent and victimless and malum prohibitum “crime,” the judge noted that Abigail was not a “predator” who was likely to re-offend and that her “victim” also knew their affair was “wrong” and was thus partly responsible. Thus, at the time, he was not a CSA victimologist.

For these comments, merely a bit of honesty and realism compared to what I would have said in his place and have written on this matter in general and specifically on the the laws of Michigan and Abigail’s sentence, I’m sure he was not only criticized, not only rebuked, respectfully, but also condemned, denounced, traduced, vilified, and subjected to a barrage of hate-mail and surely a few if not more than a few death-threats.

In July of 2015, the Michigan Supreme Court ruled that mandatory-minimum sentences were “unconstitutional” -theoretically in violation of the 6th rather than 8th Amendment.

And in August, roughly a month later, in justifying his decision to uphold her 8-25 year prison sentence and her life-sentence of electronic parole monitoring with an ankle-tether/”bracelet,” he now argued (whether sincerely, having been “re-educated,” or insincerely out of fear and cravenness and pure self-interest) that she was a “predator,” possibly even a “rapist” and “pedophile,” who can never be cured but only deterred and controlled by imprisonment and quasi-totalitarian supervision, a “predator” who was likely to re-offend by having sex with young men under statutory age and, perhaps, also molesting prepubescent children.

He now realized or affected to believe that she was so dangerous, such a threat to all the children of Michigan and the other 49 states and the entire world should she be allowed to move or travel after her release from prison, that she deserved to be enslaved for at least 8-years if not longer and also forced to wear an electronic ankle-tether/”bracelet” that she can never remove by herself, not even when bathing or having sex with a lover if the state of Michigan and other jurisdictions permit such relationships, and which can only be removed, finally and officially, I assume by people in roles of authority, when she dies at age 77 or 86 or 94 or 102.

Our great good friend, Barton Deiters, who can barely conceal and contain his joy and approval and tendentiousness, writes:

A judge says the former Catholic Central High School tutor convicted of having illegal sex with her 15-year-old student was not denied a fair trial and does not deserve to be re-sentenced.

Kent County Circuit Judge Paul Sullivan also rejected the contention of Abigail Simon’s attorney that she should be required to wear an electronic tether for the rest of her life.

Sullivan also shot down Teiber’s request that the state-mandated lifetime electronic tether requirement be lifted because she was not a threat of re-offend. Tieber argued that the electronic monitoring violated his client’s privacy and Constitutional right against unreasonable searches and was “cruel and unusual punishment.”

Sullivan dispatched both arguments, saying that the public’s safety outweighed the minimal intrusion into Simon’s privacy.”Additionally, the invasiveness of a GPS monitoring devise can seem relatively minimal compared to the often lifelong effects these types of crimes can have on victims.”

“Shot down,” “dispatched,” what a joke! Yes, the “public’s safety outweighs the minimal intrusion” into the privacy of a woman who never committed a violent or other malum in se crime in her life and never will and is not a “threat to society” and “public safety” or to anyone nor even a danger to “re-offend” by  transporting another biological man under age 16 to carnal elysium -and that’s assuming she lying about his forcing himself on her and “controlling her life.”

Deiters concludes:

Simon remains in the Huron Valley Women’s Correctional facility, where she is serving out her eight to 25-year prisons sentence.

Her case has been filed with the Michigan Court of Appeals, which will likely hear her arguments within the next six to eight months. (“See why Judge says Catholic School Tutor does not deserve a new sex assault trial,”, Aug. 13, 2015.)

Almost a year later, in June of 2016, the Court of Appeals upheld her convictions and also her life-sentence of electronic monitoring with an ankle-tether/”bracelet.”

The Michigan Court of Appeals has upheld the conviction of Abigail Simon, but says Kent County Judge Paul Sullivan should determine if she should get a different sentence…After Simon’s conviction and sentence, the Supreme Court changed the way those sentencing guideline are applied, allowing judges to use them only as a recommendation…In it’s ruling Thursday, the Michigan Court of Appeals sent Simon’s case back to judge Sullivan who will determine if, using the updated guidelines as as guide, Sullivan would give Simon a different sentence…The Court of Appeals also rejected Simon’s claim that lifetime electronic monitoring after her release from prison was unconstitutional. (, 6/17/2016.)

Since Sullivan had already upheld her 8-25 year prison sentence almost a year before the Court of Appeals ruling, shortly after the Supreme Court’s ruling,  he obviously did so again for the same reasons, assuming he made such a decision.

It’s now May of 2017 and she’s been enslaved since November 2014, almost 2 months in jail and now well over 2 years in prison, and the Supreme Court will now decide her fate, apparently in Summer.

I’m 99% certain the Supreme Court, like the Court of Appeals, will uphold her convictions. It’s possible they will vacate her life-sentence of electronic parole monitoring, though I assume they don’t have the power to vacate her life-sentence of public sex-offender registration, since this punishment -which could be defined as “cruel and unusual” for Abigail and myriads of other men and women in the sense of being wholly gratuitous- is federally-mandated. I don’t know if they have the power to reduce her insanely draconian prison sentence.

If, miraculously, they overturn her convictions, she’ll be tried again, almost surely convicted, and crucified by the same draconian/Orwellian punishments -unless her “victim,” now an adult, doesn’t want to testify against her in another trial? If so, does he have that right or can the DA and a judge force him to testify against his will by threatening to charge him with a felony or misdemeanor?

So her only hope of being a free woman again -no jail, prison, mandatory “sex-offender treatment,” quasi-totalitarian post-incarceration supervision, electronic parole monitoring, public sex-offender registration- is if the Supreme Court overturns her convictions and her “victim” refuses to testify against her and the authorities, prosecutors and judges, cannot force him to do so, a possibility so remote as to be almost inconceivable.

So, bearing a miracle, it’s all over. She is doomed. She’ll never be free again. Unlike her “victim,” she’ll be traumatized, devastated, and “scarred for life.” And persecuted and punished for life.


Teresa Giudice’s Prison Hell

For Teresa Giudice, prison was hell. She was away from her husband and four daughters, She had no privacy and creature comforts. Inmates brawled in front of her -when they weren’t intimidating her and humiliating her for her bathroom etiquette.(Reality News, Jan. 11, 2016.)

In her first television interview since being released from federal prison, “Real Housewives of New Jersey” star Teresa Giudice said she experienced horrible living conditions while incarcerated and described it as like “living in hell.”

“I mean there was mold in the bathrooms. There was not running water constantly. The showers were freezing cold…I mean, the living conditions were horrible. Like, horrible,” she said in an exclusive interview with ABC News’ Amy Robach that aired Tuesday on “Good Morning America.” “There were some nights we didn’t even have heat…It was hell.”

….In addition to the living conditions she described as being “horrible,” she said she had no privacy. In fact, she nicknamed her shared room “the boom-boom room” because so  many fellow inmates had sex there.

Asked whether she ever feared for her life while she was incarcerated, Giudice said she never did, although there were fights that resulted in some inmates being “shipped out.” She added: “Believe me…I got pointed at and they were trying to start drama with me. But I just walked away.”

“…(T)here’s a lot of drama,” she said. “That’s all there is, is drama. And I never lived with so many women in my life before, I mean that’s all they…they thrive on drama. It was crazy to me.” (“Real Housewives’ Star Teresa Giudice Say Prison Was Like ‘Living in Hell’,” abcnews.go.come. 2/15/2017.)

Imagine: enslaved for 11 and 1/2 months, almost a year, some 350 days, 8400 hours, with no privacy. And Abigail will endure 8-years, at least, 96 months, over 400 weeks, almost 3000 days, over 70,000 hours, with no privacy! In a prison with far more “drama” and danger.

Teresa was convicted of “fraud,” as was her husband, an arcane “white-collar” felony she didn’t even know she was committing and, apparently, still doesn’t fully or even largely comprehend, and sentenced to 15-months in a minimum-security federal zoo,


Beyond Insanity: Anarchy in Chicago


, , , , , , , , , , ,

From the Guardian:

As violence rises, an increasing number of shootings and murders are going unsolved. Through 28 August, the police department had only made arrests in 73 of the nearly 2,000 non-fatal shooting incidents so far this year -or just under 4%, according to a department spokesman.

The clearance rate for murders is not much better…Police have only made arrests in about 16% of fatal shootings through 28  August this year…Through June, the clearance rate for all murders was 22.2%…(Lois Beckett and Justin Glawe, “Gun Violence, unsolved murders put Chicago on course to set grim record,” 9-4-2016.)

And I’m sure that over 90% of these murders and shootings were committed by violent recidivists who should have been in prison rather than free to commit well over 2,000 shootings, fatal and non-fatal, and other violent and mala in se crimes. And what percentage have histories of crime and violence beginning at ages 14 or 13 or even 12, whatever the age of puberty and biological manhood, and have committed dozens and scores of violent and predatory crimes, from murder and rape to burglary and vandalism, and should have been buried in prison years ago, at least until the age of 30 or 40 or 50, depending on the nature of their crimes and recidivism and number of felony convictions. Illinois abolished the death penalty in 2011.

And of the 16% arrested for murder and the less than 4% arrested for non-fatal shootings, what percentage will be prosecuted, and convicted, and imprisoned? And the failure or refusal to arrest, prosecute, convict, and imprison over 95% of those who committed all these murders and shootings will result in myriads of other violent and mala in se crimes, including aggravated assaults, muggings, armed robberies, burglaries, acts of vandalism, home invasions, abductions, rapes, gang-rapes, and murders committed against men and women who aren’t criminals and are thus innocent victims.

And what percentage are these brutes and savages are young men ages 13-17 who are absurdly defined as “children” and even “little boys.” But if a woman teacher engages in coitus and/or fellatio or even a single act of ‘sexual contact” with one of these violent predators, she’ll be arrested (I’m certain the arrest rate is over 90% for such intrigues), and prosecuted, convicted, and sentenced to months in jail or years (perhaps even decades) in prison and a lifetime or at least 20-30 years of draconian/Orwellian persecution.

Yes,”anarcho-tyranny” in Illinois. Once again: to call all of this insane is an understatement. It’s beyond insanity.