Paul Stenquist wrote:
I read much of what is available. I'm not Monday Morning
Quarterbacking. The players have already decided the outcome. And,
yes, the girl is dead. That's okay with you?
No. Not at all.
All *I* can go on, to get as much of the real story as possible, is to read
what
On 02/09/07, John Sessoms, discombobulated, unleashed:
Stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid, ...
Prejudiced, Prejudiced, Prejudiced, Prejudiced, Prejudiced !
--
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
On Sep 3, 2007, at 8:16 AM, Cotty wrote:
The jury decides sentence?? Hole moly. We do things different here.
The
judge decides. Besides, juries are notoriously fickle - if I was
guilty,
I'd opt to be tried by a jury. If I was innocent, I would opt to be
tried by a just a judge.
You
Here in Ontario, that would equate to about a 15 year sentence. No
parole for about 8 years. He would also get two years for every year
served in pretrial time so that gets taken off.
Bottom line, up here he'd be out in 3-5 years.
Ontario justice stinks.
Dave
On 9/1/07, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL
My experience with the Virginia Judicial System as a juror:
This case involved a 42 year old man who had been caught hunting
without a license, a misdemeanor. It turns out he had two felony
convictions from his early twenties and had lost his right to have gun,
however; this meant he was also
The judge probably thought that 5 years for a victim less crime was a
miscarriage of justice. Especially under a law designed for habitual
offenders.
Steve Desjardins wrote:
My experience with the Virginia Judicial System as a juror:
This case involved a 42 year old man who had been caught
Steve Desjardins wrote:
The judge explained to us that we hadn’t
simply wasted our time that morning. The term for the process was
“jury nullification” since we had used our “authority” to
override a law.
You should have bought a lottery ticket or two that day. Getting a judge
to admit
From:
David J Brooks
Here in Ontario, that would equate to about a 15 year sentence. No
parole for about 8 years. He would also get two years for every year
served in pretrial time so that gets taken off.
Bottom line, up here he'd be out in 3-5 years.
Ontario justice stinks.
If he's out on
If he survives. He's likely to be labeled a child molester, (even though
a 19 year old woman isn't exactly a child), other convicts seem to think
it's open season on them. An acquaintance of mine was jailed after his
ex-wife leveled charges that he molested his daughter. He didn't survive
to
On 9/3/07, John Sessoms [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From:
David J Brooks
Here in Ontario, that would equate to about a 15 year sentence. No
parole for about 8 years. He would also get two years for every year
served in pretrial time so that gets taken off.
Bottom line, up here he'd be out
From:
P. J. Alling
If he survives. He's likely to be labeled a child molester, (even
though a 19 year old woman isn't exactly a child), other convicts seem
to think it's open season on them. An acquaintance of mine was jailed
after his ex-wife leveled charges that he molested his daughter.
in prison?
I wonder if there's ever been a PDML member who posted from jail before
Good luck Bob. Godspeed.
Cory
- Original Message -
From: P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Sent: Saturday, September 01, 2007 1:14 PM
Subject: About Bob Shell
I
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of cbwaters
Sent: 02 September 2007 12:33
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: About Bob Shell
A week or three ago I noticed that one of the books I have
has a positive
quote on the back from
From:
P. J. Alling
I don't know all of the facts in the case, but violent felons have
received lessor sentences for murder than the 37 years that seems to
be the jury recommendation here. Seems somehow out of proportion for
involuntary manslaughter.
He was charged with defilement of a
He's ultimately the victim of his own stupidity.
Who ain't?
Tim Typo
Mostly Harmless
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
At least in rural Virginia...
John Sessoms wrote:
From:
P. J. Alling
I don't know all of the facts in the case, but violent felons have
received lessor sentences for murder than the 37 years that seems to
be the jury recommendation here. Seems somehow out of proportion for
involuntary
On 9/2/07, Tim Øsleby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
He's ultimately the victim of his own stupidity.
Who ain't?
I'm not.
I long ago came to terms with embraced my stupidity.
Cheers,
Dave
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
David Savage wrote:
I long ago came to terms with embraced my stupidity.
Ah, the 2007 PDML Quotations list is gonna be a thing of beauty!
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Pardon me, but LOL
Tim Typo
Mostly Harless
- Original Message -
From: David Savage [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Sent: Sunday, September 02, 2007 5:41 PM
Subject: Re: About Bob Shell
On 9/2/07, Tim Øsleby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
He's ultimately
Looks like the next step for some is to flaunt it. (Present company
accepted, Dave).
Jack
--- David Savage [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 9/2/07, Tim Øsleby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
He's ultimately the victim of his own stupidity.
Who ain't?
I'm not.
I long ago came to terms with
On 02/09/07, John Sessoms, discombobulated, unleashed:
And it's not uncommon for a jury to propose, and a judge to impose,
punishment for things the defendant wasn't actually convicted of. That's
the whole purpose of those charges that get dropped late in the trial.
The jury decides
Cotty wrote:
On 02/09/07, John Sessoms, discombobulated, unleashed:
And it's not uncommon for a jury to propose, and a judge to impose,
punishment for things the defendant wasn't actually convicted of. That's
the whole purpose of those charges that get dropped late in the trial.
The
List
Subject: Re: About Bob Shell
Cotty wrote:
On 02/09/07, John Sessoms, discombobulated, unleashed:
And it's not uncommon for a jury to propose, and a judge
to impose,
punishment for things the defendant wasn't actually
convicted of. That's
the whole purpose of those charges
for the border - that's what I'd be
doing.
--
Bob
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of cbwaters
Sent: 02 September 2007 12:33
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: About Bob Shell
A week or three ago I noticed that one of the books
] On
Behalf Of cbwaters
Sent: 02 September 2007 12:33
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: About Bob Shell
A week or three ago I noticed that one of the books I have
has a positive
quote on the back from a Bob Shell. I thought hmmm and
emailed him,
asking if it was indeed the same
Paul Stenquist wrote:
And of course, the girl is dead. She's not just naked on film. She's
dead. Extreme is probably called for.
Paul
If that's all you know. or care about, you apparently don't know enough.
Just one more example of Monday Morning Quarterbacking, by those who are not
From:
Cotty
On 02/09/07, John Sessoms, discombobulated, unleashed:
And it's not uncommon for a jury to propose, and a judge to impose,
punishment for things the defendant wasn't actually convicted of. That's
the whole purpose of those charges that get dropped late in the trial.
From:
Bob W
Juries, as well as the prosecution and defense, may suggest
sentences
after conviction, but the Judge decides the actual sentence.
The system
is based on UK Common Law.
There is no UK Common Law, and never has been. There is English law
and Scottish law in
I read much of what is available. I'm not Monday Morning
Quarterbacking. The players have already decided the outcome. And,
yes, the girl is dead. That's okay with you?
On Sep 2, 2007, at 9:28 PM, keith_w wrote:
Paul Stenquist wrote:
And of course, the girl is dead. She's not just naked on
I don't know the whole facts in the case, (only what I've read on the
Internet), and I reserver comment...
http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/blog_index.html
--
Remember, it’s pillage then burn.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
Darn. Apparently the jury didn't reserve comment.
Paul
On Sep 1, 2007, at 1:14 PM, P. J. Alling wrote:
I don't know the whole facts in the case, (only what I've read on the
Internet), and I reserver comment...
http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/
blog_index.html
I don't know all of the facts in the case, but violent felons have
received lessor sentences for murder than the 37 years that seems to be
the jury recommendation here. Seems somehow out of proportion for
involuntary manslaughter.
Paul Stenquist wrote:
Darn. Apparently the jury didn't
Actually is a pretty scary set of actions, true or not.
Jack
--- P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't know all of the facts in the case, but violent felons have
received lessor sentences for murder than the 37 years that seems to
be
the jury recommendation here. Seems somehow out
? That is, if it's legal to perform
certain acts, and thus see them as a participant, is it nevertheless an
offence to photograph those acts even for strictly private viewing?
I'm not making presumptions about Bob Shell, it just happens to remind me of
a circumstance in Australia about 30 years ago, where
, and thus see them as a participant, is it nevertheless an
offence to photograph those acts even for strictly private viewing?
I'm not making presumptions about Bob Shell, it just happens to remind me of
a circumstance in Australia about 30 years ago, where a celebrity ran foul
of the law because he had
In VA, if you have sex with a person who is sufficiently incapacitated
that is considered rape. We warn male students about this all the time.
If you are at a party and a women is really drunk, then don't have sex
with her even if she appears to be willing. If a court/jury decides
that you
I doubt that it is as simple as all that. Roanoke is still a small town.
You're dealing
with a local paper, not the New York Post or Daily News, it is most likely
they toned down
their report rather than playing up the more sensational aspects of the
case to spare the
local populaces's
Shell's wife had enough of the whole thing:
http://www.roanoke.com/roatimes/news/story150953.html
BR
about Bob Shell?
I doubt that it is as simple as all that. Roanoke is still a small town.
You're dealing
with a local paper, not the New York Post or Daily News, it is most likely
they toned down
their report rather than playing up the more sensational aspects of the
case to spare the
local
, 2003 5:06 PM
Subject: Re: Did you hear the one about Bob Shell?
I doubt that it is as simple as all that. Roanoke is still a small town.
You're dealing
with a local paper, not the New York Post or Daily News, it is most likely
they toned down
their report rather than playing up the more
PM
Subject: Re: Did you hear the one about Bob Shell?
Oh, I very much doubt that. You'd be surprised at what goes on regularly
in
small towns, and what the cops find on a regular basis. A LARGE portion of
the weirdness in this country is in its small towns, and if I were to
describe to you
High Street, Broadford,
Vic, 3658
Mob: 0414-967 644
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.heritageservices.com.au
-Original Message-
From: Bill Owens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, 16 June 2003 9:05 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Did you hear the one about Bob Shell?
As someone
PROTECTED]
www.heritageservices.com.au
-Original Message-
From: Bill Owens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, 16 June 2003 9:05 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Did you hear the one about Bob Shell?
As someone who grew up in Roanoke and still visits quite often...
It's not what you
, beyond the
shadow of doubt.
Len
---
From: Caveman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Did you hear the one about Bob Shell?
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2003 17:25:01 -0400
Weird laws. So if X gets a girl in his house, takes her photos, then they
have sex
My Dad always said Roanoke was too big to be a small town and too small to
be a big town.
Bill
Well, more properly the town I live in used to be a small town, about 20
years ago we had a year round population of about 3000, now it's about
20,000.
It's still got a small town mentality.
At
And to think people have been comparing me to Bob
shell, K
__
Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca
Well, Leonard,
You've hit the nail on the head. He's innocent until proven guilty. And the
State has to prove it's case against him beyond a reasonable doubt (not beyond
a shadow of a doubt - commone mistake g). Hard to know what the guy did or
didn't do, or what the girl did or didn't agree
Biting my tongue, biting my tongue, biting my tongue...
vbg
-frank
Brendan wrote:
And to think people have been comparing me to Bob
shell, K
__
Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca
--
What a senseless
Fank be nice :D
--- frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote: Biting my tongue, biting my tongue, biting my
tongue...
vbg
-frank
Brendan wrote:
And to think people have been comparing me to Bob
shell, K
Naah, listen to good old Caveman: you have to get married first. This is
the only true way to get a divorce. (And that's why wimin are so
insistent about it.)
Then get a studio and do nudes. Lots of them, including fetish, bondage
and the whole dark side. Get published. From this moment wife
So that's why you work in an underground bunker, completely impervious to
nuclear (or as GW would say, nuk-u-lar) attack? So your signifcant other
won't know what evil lurks in your mind? vbg
cheers,
frank
Caveman wrote:
Naah, listen to good old Caveman: you have to get married first. This
The circumstances of her death will weigh heavily against him. Remember
there is
a death involved here. There is no question of the girl agreeing or not, she's
dead that is not an option of consent, not in any jurisdiction I'm aware of.
At 08:40 PM 6/15/03 -0400, you wrote:
Well, Leonard,
frank theriault wrote:
Hard to know what the guy did or
didn't do, or what the girl did or didn't agree to,
Strange: a tape recorded with a porn movie constitues evidence
(pornography found on premises), while one with a record of what
actually happened in the room can't be used as evidence in
That was clearly an improper instruction, and if appealed, would likely have
resulted in a new trial. The fact that the Crown didn't appeal just says
that they didn't give a s**t either...
-frank
William Robb wrote:
We had a case here a few years back where a couple of rich white kids
frank theriault wrote:
I didn't mix sex into it at all, the police did. AFAIK, he hasn't been charged with
murder yet, only with sodomy (which shouldn't be a criminal charge, imho), and with
sexual penetration with an object (which shouldn't be a criminal charge, either).
Huh. So using a
Who the hell am I kidding? Any reference to my sex life must be presented in the past
tense. vbg
-frank
I rather optimistically wrote:
snipNo one here knows anything about my
sexual preferences (and it's gonna stay that way!)snip
--
What a senseless waste of human life
-The Customer in
I wouldn't say this can't happen here but it shouldn't.
At 08:03 PM 6/15/03 -0600, you wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Peter Alling
Subject: Re: Did you hear the one about Bob Shell?
The circumstances of her death will weigh heavily against him.
Remember
there is
a death involved
I think they'd need a bit more than you've described unless the subjects in
the jpegs can be
construed as being under age. You might be in trouble then US or Canada.
At 10:19 PM 6/15/03 -0400, you wrote:
frank theriault wrote:
I didn't mix sex into it at all, the police did. AFAIK, he hasn't
--- Caveman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So it can
be used as evidence, but only if it's
against you. Sounds fair
to me. ;-)
Oh no what evil thoughts are you thinking now
__
Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca
I'm not that cave, I don't even remotely think of messing with such
things. I was speaking of rather tame things like a playboy centerfold
or some nude pics from usefilm, photosig, photonet. It's so easy to
label them as porn. It takes only one grouchy old lady and whoaaa
you're a pervert.
necessarily mean it is.
- Original Message -
From: Caveman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2003 9:19 PM
Subject: Re: Did you hear the one about Bob Shell?
frank theriault wrote:
I didn't mix sex into it at all, the police did. AFAIK, he hasn't been
Caveman wrote:
frank theriault wrote:
(snip,snip)
I was using the word sordid tongue-in-cheek.
I feel relieved. For a moment I suspected you of being the grumpy old
man type ;-)
Not what leaps to mind when the phrase tongue-in-cheek comes up in the middle
of this discussion g
annsan
PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Did you hear the one about Bob Shell?
Caveman wrote:
frank theriault wrote:
(snip,snip)
I was using the word sordid tongue-in-cheek.
I feel relieved. For a moment I suspected you of being the grumpy old
man type ;-)
Not what leaps to mind when
T Rittenhouse wrote:
I especially don't like, even the concept of, bondage.
There's nothing wrong with the concept. Your objections are probably
against some ways of executing it.
cheers,
caveman
there.
- Original Message -
From: Caveman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, June 14, 2003 2:34 PM
Subject: Re: Did you hear the one about Bob Shell?
Was the boy knowing what he was doing, wanted it and consented to it ? I
suspect that the case you mentioned was about rape
Treena wrote:
Whether she consented or not, I suspect he will still be charged with
negligent homicide or manslaughter. I doubt he intended to kill her, but
he'll have a difficult time proving he didn't help her get there.
Weird laws. So if X gets a girl in his house, takes her photos, then
they
- Original Message -
From: Caveman
Subject: Re: Did you hear the one about Bob Shell?
Was the boy knowing what he was doing, wanted it and consented to it ?
I
suspect that the case you mentioned was about rape.
Most jurisdictions in North America have a statutory rape law.
You and I
67 matches
Mail list logo
