# Vigilantism in OH, is this acceptable?



## OULobo (Aug 18, 2004)

http://www.cleveland.com/cuyahoga/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/cuyahoga/109282650775790.xml

In brief, a man was found out side a 5 yr old's apartment room window masturbating. He was discovered, forcibly raped with a branch and beaten into a coma. The five people that beat him face the death penalty if he dies.

Comments or thoughts?


----------



## OULobo (Aug 18, 2004)

Points of discussion:
-The mother, a stripper, was at a party in a different apartment building within the complex, leaving a 5 yr old alone in the apartment. 
-The whole thing was caught on the apartment's video survaillance, which the attackers tore off the wall and tried to hide. It was found in the apartment.
-The attackers were drunk and high admitting to excessive alcohol consumption and smoking pot. 
-The attackers are unrepentant.
-The attackers left the man bleeding and unconcious for hours and returned to continue the beating, at this time they dicussed where to dump the body if he died. 

While I can understand the viceral reaction of the attackers, the sad fact is that the reaction was both excessive and illegal. This was a minor offense and while I can't condone it, I can say that beating a man to death for it is unjustifiable. One of the people here mentioned that if it was his kid and he saw this, he would restrain him and let the police deal with it. If the guy touched his kid, he would kill him, but then expect that the law would hand him life inprisonment or the death penalty, which he would accept for his actions.


----------



## Feisty Mouse (Aug 18, 2004)

I'm going to go with a "no" on your question, OULobo.  While the masturbating man's behavior is disturbing, and I probably would have wanted to go after him, "going after" someone in a situation like that would, for me, trying to restrain and report him - have the law deal with it.  Would I be tempted to belt him one if I could?  Maybe.

Raping and beating a man to coma?  No.  Would I be tempted to do that if I had found him molesting a child?  Yes.  Would I do it?  No.  

While the situation was scary and creepy, what that band of people did to that man was unjustifiable.  The emotional tides of vigilantism creep me out.


----------



## Baytor (Aug 18, 2004)

In my opinion, the force used on the guy was disproportionate to the crime.  Was he a sick twist that probably needed and a$$ kicking?  Yes, but there is pretty big difference in restraining the guy so the police can do their job and what they did.


----------



## kenpo tiger (Aug 18, 2004)

Chances are, assuming the guy was held for the police and convicted, sent to jail, he would've been taken care of in similar, if not worse, fashion.

I agree with if he attacked one of my children, I'd rip his face off.  No contest.  But - in this case, I agree with Feisty in that the attackers were excessive in their punishment of this man.  KT


----------



## MisterMike (Aug 18, 2004)

Maybe he should have been reported, arrested for indecent exposure and what-not, and then sent to the nearest support group for people with his type of problem. After all, our jails are just too full and what these people really need is compassion, support and education, right?

OK, I'm going to throw up now...


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Aug 18, 2004)

This is one of those things I wish I hadn't read! The whole thing makes me ill. It's a total lose lose situation! The thought of a stranger masturbating outside of someone's home is twisted, but I do wonder why the mom left her kid all alone like that. Granted, this could have happened even if she were sleeping in the same room, but his intent could have been worse. She is lucky in some way for her daughter that that was all the perpetrator did. 



That being said, the punishment should fit the crime. It was excessive with what seems like an almost gang type mentality. Now the child may wind up being without her parent and that to me was extremely irresponsible of the mom. They knew what they did was wrong, because they tried to confiscate the camera and plotted to dispose of the body. 

:-( The whole thing is so unfortunate!


----------



## RandomPhantom700 (Aug 18, 2004)

I wouldn't even call this vigilantism, simply a bunch of drunk psychopaths who found an excuse to take out their aggression.  Reporting the guys to the cops, and even restraining him 'til they got there, would be acceptable.  Beating him?  Not in the least.


----------



## Feisty Mouse (Aug 18, 2004)

> Maybe he should have been reported, arrested for indecent exposure and what-not, and then sent to the nearest support group for people with his type of problem. After all, our jails are just too full and what these people really need is compassion, support and education, right?


 Um, no, but raping and beating a man into a coma isn't appropriate either.  Although I find it disturbing and sick, he hadn't actually touched the child or caused the child harm.  Unless you think that we really should cut off a man's hand for stealing....


----------



## shesulsa (Aug 18, 2004)

There are so many things wrong that happened here.  

 1.  The five-year-old was left alone - sleeping, yes, but still alone.  That in itself is enough to have her removed from her mother's custody.

 2.  I assume the curtains/blinds were open - duh!

 3.  The child's mother admitted to use of illegal drugs and drinking - another big no-no for Mommy Dearest.

 4.  These stoners found a reason to beat up on someone.  They all would have been better off if they had called the cops, said, '...yeah, I've been drinking and smoking pot, but this guy's a sicko."  Clearly, they were more worried about their own fate.

 5.  What if the 5-year-old child happened to wake up from the commotion and see what happened?

 6.  This guy's punishment did not meet the crime.

 I would have had all the same temptations as you all have mentioned, but given the country and the age we live in, this was completely inappropriate from what I can see.


----------



## MartialArtist68 (Aug 18, 2004)

shesulsa said:
			
		

> There are so many things wrong that happened here.
> 
> 1. The five-year-old was left alone - sleeping, yes, but still alone. That in itself is enough to have her removed from her mother's custody.
> 
> ...


I agree wholeheartedly


----------



## Flatlander (Aug 18, 2004)

I could agree with the sentiments expressed here already, as sitting here reading someone else's story affords me the luxury of being removed from the situation, thereby allowing me a degree of moral clarity.

However, had I caught him outside MY kid's window, I cannot begin to try to imagine what my instinctual and immediate response would be. That's a tough call.

In all honesty.


----------



## Feisty Mouse (Aug 18, 2004)

flatlander - I completely understand.  If it had been the child's mother who had found the guy, and had kicked the s**t out of him, that would be another story entirely.  But this was a bunch of drunks who went WAY over any kind of boundary.  Who thinks, "This guy is making me so mad, I'm going to anally rape him with an object, and then beat him until he's almost dead"?


----------



## Flatlander (Aug 18, 2004)

Oh, of course, I concur 100 percent.  My agression does not manifest as anal rape.


----------



## Bammx2 (Aug 18, 2004)

sure he mighta needed a "LITTLE whoopin up on" then handed over to the police......
But in almost ANY crime,
the punishment should FIT the crime.
He didn't deserve anything that severe(that we know of).....maybe a little "hick'ry switch" action fer a bit behind the wood shed,
but definately handed over to the police after!


----------



## michaeledward (Aug 18, 2004)

shesulsa said:
			
		

> There are so many things wrong that happened here.


7. What is the 19 year old Brandon Breeden doing dating a 15 year old? Where are her parents?


Step-Parent to a 16 year old girl and 14 year old girl. - Mike


----------



## Feisty Mouse (Aug 19, 2004)

I didn't mean to imply as much! 



> Oh, of course, I concur 100 percent. My agression does not manifest as anal rape.


:asian:


----------



## OULobo (Aug 19, 2004)

Feisty Mouse said:
			
		

> flatlander - I completely understand.  If it had been the child's mother who had found the guy, and had kicked the s**t out of him, that would be another story entirely.  But this was a bunch of drunks who went WAY over any kind of boundary.  Who thinks, "This guy is making me so mad, I'm going to anally rape him with an object, and then beat him until he's almost dead"?



If I'm not mistaken, it was the mother that found the guy initially and she had the presence of mind to go get everyone else. The mother was part of the group doing the beating. It was her and her friends.


----------



## hardheadjarhead (Aug 19, 2004)

One wonders if this group of losers doing the beating were simply looking for justification of such violence.

Apparently, as voyeurism goes, its a treatable paraphilia.  If left untreated, some studies indicate that upwards of 20% of voyeurs go on to commit other sexually oriented crimes:

http://www.brainphysics.com/ocd/research/voyeur99.pdf

http://www.geocities.com/Yosemite/Trails/1233/voyeurism.html

http://www.realage.com/research_lib...://Utility2/crsfiles/bha/bha_voyeuris_bha.htm


Remember that correlation doesn't equal causation.  James Brudos, a serial killer, was a voyeur.  I find it unlikely that treatment would have been effective in preventing him from killing.  Voyeurism is just one of many steps that serial killers take towards their first act of murder.  This reminds me of the "marijuana as a gateway drug" argument.  Does dope cause heroin addiction?  Or does an addict in the making go through a number of drugs on the way of finding a narcotic of choice?

Pedophilia has a ridiculously high recividism rate.  Had this peeper been treated, he might never have "peeped" again.  He might never have harmed a child by physically molesting them...yet his impulses and desires could well have remained.  On the other hand, this guy might have been a serial rapist who harmed children on a regular basis.  We'll likely never know.  



Regards,


Steve


----------



## OULobo (Aug 19, 2004)

I understand the points you bring up and I know you are just throwing out facts, but we don't punish people on "ifs". You need to commit a crime or attempt to commit a crime before you can be punished for that crime, and the punishment should fit the crime. This guy commited no crime that deserved a near fatal beating or rape, and the fact is he didn't commit any other crime.


----------



## DeLamar.J (Aug 19, 2004)

OULobo said:
			
		

> http://www.cleveland.com/cuyahoga/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/cuyahoga/109282650775790.xml
> 
> In brief, a man was found out side a 5 yr old's apartment room window masturbating. He was discovered, forcibly raped with a branch and beaten into a coma. The five people that beat him face the death penalty if he dies.
> 
> Comments or thoughts?


Were close, lets hook up and organize a lynch, martial arts style.


----------



## OULobo (Aug 19, 2004)

DeLamar.J said:
			
		

> Were close, lets hook up and organize a lynch, martial arts style.



It's actually in the same town as my school.


----------



## shesulsa (Aug 19, 2004)

hardheadjarhead said:
			
		

> Apparently, as voyeurism goes, its a treatable paraphilia. If left untreated, some studies indicate that upwards of 20% of voyeurs go on to commit other sexually oriented crimes:
> 
> ...
> 
> ...


 Just to help you play devil's advocate a little, you're right.  These are startling statistics and the major symptom of disease internationally.  Visual programming is a powerful and frightening thing which seeds alternative behavior - that's what advertising is all about.

 Your powerful statement above speaks to many issues, one of which is the major stigma and lack of personal and psychological counselling and therapy.  Even with the advent of the awareness of physchological, psychiatric and developmental issues, this continues to carry extreme dogmatic effects and the lack of affordable services and insurance's willingness to pay for such doesn't assist the regular Joe or Jane with a bit of a peeping fetish.

 Further, it is ironic that the mother to this 5-year-old is an exotic dancer - a *ahem* "career" solely based on voyeurism and reward for exploitation.  I'm reasonably sure that, given more than one person in this vigilante mob was involved in this line of work, resentment and anger and so many other things related to being a stripper played into their reaction of this Tom's fantastic offense (i.e. fantistic - that of fantasy).

 So many cans of worms we can open here, but the bottom line as far as I'm concerned is that this could and should have been handled in a more legal way, and the crime against the daughter has only been capitalized upon by this mother's irresponsibility and lack of courage to face the authorities stoned.


----------



## hardheadjarhead (Aug 19, 2004)

Honestly, I'm not playing the role of "Devil's Advocate" nor am I simply throwing out facts, as OULobo stated.  What I was offering to the members of the thread was insight into some of the intricacies of some emotional/psychological disorders.  

What we fail to do in our culture is get to the root of such problems and effectively treat them...if they're indeed treatable.  We respond viscerally (quite understandable) and we call for punishment.  In the case of a sociopathic rapist or child molester, I see no redemption and would prefer they never be released.  In the case of lesser paraphilias, treatment might well be appropriate.

Let's take a look at two other emotional disorders that might be treatable.  Froetterism and exhibitionism.  The former is where a person "cops a feel" of an adult stranger in a public place.  The latter is, of course, "flashing".  

Both of these are treatable, provided they're not symptomatic of a more dangerous disorder.  Do we treat these guys, or merely put them away until they're too old to do anything?  If we put them for a limited time in a violent prison environment, their problems will likely be magnified.

Getting back to the thread--had this group of people encountered a flasher of a froetterist who had fondled or flashed the mother, I don't doubt they might have beaten him into a coma.  I'm not sure they needed much of an excuse at all.


Regards,


Steve


----------



## shesulsa (Aug 19, 2004)

Agreed, Steve.  Sorry to have labeled you incorrectly.


----------



## mj-hi-yah (Aug 19, 2004)

OULobo said:
			
		

> I understand the points you bring up and I know you are just throwing out facts, but we don't punish people on "ifs". You need to commit a crime or attempt to commit a crime before you can be punished for that crime, and the punishment should fit the crime. This guy commited no crime that deserved a near fatal beating or rape, and the fact is he didn't commit any other crime.


Just for clarification...are you saying that you don't think he committed any crime at all?


----------



## hardheadjarhead (Aug 19, 2004)

shesulsa said:
			
		

> Agreed, Steve.  Sorry to have labeled you incorrectly.




I didn't take any offense, Shesulsa.  

MJ, I don't think OULobo is saying no crime was committed.  I think he's saying that the crime didn't warrant such a vicious street punishment.  No court would have sentenced this peeper to an anal raping with a stick and a beating of such severity.

The attackers here will get due process.  The peeper might not live long enough to ever see a courtroom.   




Regards,


Steve


----------



## OULobo (Aug 20, 2004)

mj-hi-yah said:
			
		

> Just for clarification...are you saying that you don't think he committed any crime at all?



No, just as HHJH said, I was saying that his crime was not on the same level as the applied punishment of near fatal beating and anal raping, and that despite how many "what if's" we want to apply, he didn't actually commit to any of them except public indecency and vouyerism(sp).


----------



## OULobo (Aug 24, 2004)

Update:

http://www.cleveland.com/news/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/cuyahoga/1093347022303690.xml

Brief: The victim is now in recovery at the hospital, and the police, armed with a video that shows everything, say they don't believe the masturbation claim. The victim is a medical patient, that was prone to seizures before the attack, that cause him to enter a fuge' like state and wander around in an incoherent daze. Evidence points to him being in this condition when the attackers came upon him. 

The article details the police position, the victim's initial condition and current recovery, the recent media reaction, an account of the night of the attack by the victim's live-in girlfriend and a discription of the victim's medical condition.


----------



## Flatlander (Aug 24, 2004)

So the guys who beat him made it up as justification?  Well, hopefully they get theirs in court.


----------



## OULobo (Aug 24, 2004)

Disclaimer: I'm sure the facts are not entirly out, but I'm going to jump the gun and pose a few questions. 

So now my question is; Now that we have a few more facts, how valid are some of the initial negative opinions and comments that were leveled against this man, in regards to him being a pervert and molester? Did the viceral reaction of people to a possible sexual deviant associated to children cause an initial unreasonable reaction that was unjust and possibly dangerous to this man, even after the inital threat to his life, the attackers, had passed? Was he judged by the public on an emotional reaction before he could even speak or before the facts were known? More importantly is that what actually happened in a physical incarnation during his attack?

These questions are not as relevent here on this thread, where most of the posters condemned the actions of the attackers, even with their assumed motivation. The popular media (read Montel, Dr.Phil and the tabloids) however, initially posed this man as a pervert and sexual deviant, and came close to praising the actions of the attackers as acceptable vigilanty justice and a beneficial preventative measure against the remotely possible sexual attack of the child. Now this man has to deal with a nation that still views him, however unjustifiably, as a sexual predator of some sort, despite the fact that the only thing that is truly clear here is that he was indeed a victim. 

Just a note, but the guy had a crushed nose, two eyes swollen shut, a crushed trachea that required him to have a ventilator and feeding tube, a broken jaw, and his features were so jumbled from the beating that he was unrecognisable from a recent picture and his dentures were kicked out of his mouth and landed yards away. The man's face is a mass of bruises, contusions, lacerations, stitches crushed cartilage and rearranged features; and, according to him, he doesn't even know what happened, he just woke up in the hospital that way. 

Lord knows I could be wrong and he could be lying, but right now it doesn't look that way and that type of damage is inexcusible even if I am wrong. 

End rant.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Aug 24, 2004)

So, a group of drunk stoners go out, find someone helpless, assault him, then come up with a story to 'explain' their actions.  Sexual preditor's pretty good.  That'll get folks riled up.  Child sexual deviant is about the deepest one can find, next to maybe child necrophiliac.  (As an aside..which is more disgusting?  Child necorphilia or animal necrophilia?  Maybe puppy necrophilia combined with a few other philias?)

The dirt rags run with the story, and suddenly they are 'heros', not 'criminals'.

Lets assume for a moment they are telling the truth.
Was he physically threatening, harming or otherwise traumatizing his 'victim'?
Doesn't sound like he was.
Having spent a year in Parma, which is close to North Royalton I can tell you they have some very effective police departments.  The size of the town is small so a response would have only taken a few minutes for qualified LEO to arrive and take care of the situation.

I can't believe the attackers. Especially not after they returned several times to the attack.  Regardless of what the victim was doing, he did not deserve what he got.  We have laws in the country.  They should be severely dealt with.
I'm thinking with a stick.

I hate to think I might someday step behind a tree to answer natures call and receive a crippling beating from a drunk high gang of scumsucking stoners in return.

Hang em all. Let the gods sort em all out.


----------



## hardheadjarhead (Aug 24, 2004)

It was interesting seeing some of the responses of the people on this thread to the notions that this man was a child molester.

I recall fifteen years ago a severely mentally handicapped man walking into the restroom at a store I worked at.  He sat down on a toilet and started masturbating--all the while talking to himself.  There was no door on the stall.

He wasn't doing it for sexual gratification.  It was a compulsive response to stress.  He'd just had a fight with another member of his group home (who were shopping in the store together) and running to the bathroom and fondling himself was a way he dealt with it.  He didn't care who saw him, and didn't care if people saw him.   

Had a child witnessed this and told his father, what would the reaction have been?  Violence?  Charges of perversion?   A call for a lynching?

When I read the above article I thought of several alternate explanations for what happened prior to this beating:

-He might have been passed out in the bushes after drinking, or was relieving himself, and the mother misconstrued the situation or intentionally misrepresented it.

-The mother had issues with the guy in question--perhaps he was peeping at her, and not her child--and she wanted him hammered.  Perhaps she knew him and he owed her money or had wronged her on a previous occasion.  

-Maybe the guy in question was indeed looking at the child and fondling himself, but had an I.Q. so low or was psychotic to the point as to impair his judgement.

-Perhaps the alleged peeper was a street person sitting up against the wall and behind the bushes in order to "hide" while he drank his Thunderbird.  As irrational as this seems, one must keep in mind that fully 60% of the homeless suffer from schizophrenia, bi-polar disorder, or some other form of mental illness.  Often they're victimized by other homeless people or bottom feeders such as described here.

We jump too quickly to judgement at times.  Its the risk of our species having greater cognitive powers than other species.  At least, we're thought to.  There are times where I wonder.


Regards,

Steve


----------



## shesulsa (Aug 24, 2004)

Holy guacamole.

 Another incident that makes me cringe and gag (see also the thread on tasing the 9-year-old).

 Okay - I am taking applications for permanent, life-long bodyguard for my autistic son - any takers?

_>>>...walks away, shaking her head...<<<
_
 Morbidly,

 Georgia


----------



## RandomPhantom700 (Aug 24, 2004)

Kaith Rustaz said:
			
		

> They should be severely dealt with.
> I'm thinking with a stick.
> 
> Hang em all. Let the gods sort em all out.


Just as an aside, isn't this the same philosophy (only to a much grosser extreme) that the assailants were following when they repeatedly beat and sodomized the guy they perceived as violating someone else? 

I agree that they were probably just finding an excuse for their aggression, but still.....


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Aug 24, 2004)

You're right...That's probably going a bit too far.

My apologies.

:asian:


----------



## Bammx2 (Aug 24, 2004)

as I said before.....

the punishment should fit the crime....period.


----------



## RandomPhantom700 (Aug 24, 2004)

RandomPhantom700 said:
			
		

> Just as an aside, isn't this the same philosophy (only to a much grosser extreme) that the assailants were following when they repeatedly beat and sodomized the guy they perceived as violating someone else?


Whoa, clarification needed.  The "grosser extreme" refers to the assailant's decision, not yours.  

Carry on.


----------



## JPR (Aug 25, 2004)

hardheadjarhead said:
			
		

> It was interesting seeing some of the responses of the people on this thread to the notions that this man was a child molester.
> 
> We jump too quickly to judgement at times. Its the risk of our species having greater cognitive powers than other species.
> 
> ...


Context is important.  If you walk up on me and I am straddling a woman on the ground pounding on her and ripping at her clothing am I: a) Assulting her, b) attempting to rape her, c) attempting to save her from the heart attack she is having, or d) trying to beat out the flames that were burning her?  Do you know?  Only the context brings meaning to the action.  The action could be noble, or ignoble.  Only the context will tell.

As to vigilantism, once we break the law to enforce the law we risk loosing the law altogether.  Sure, there are crimes that enflame people's emotion (crimes against innocent children do it for me, I hate to see a child hurt by the selfish actions of an adult), and there are cases where justice is thwarted by the "system".  To use these, or other, excuses to justify our dealing out justice is simply to say we are each a law to ourselves.  What happens when I look at you and decide that what you are doing is wrong and decide to punish you for it?  That is why, as a society, we decided upon a set of laws.  

JPR


----------



## dearnis.com (Aug 25, 2004)

Coming onto the thread late, but a few short thoughts...
Lots of horrified reaction to the 5 year old's living conditions and the cast of supporting players ( adult "dating" a minor, etc.)  Gang, I have worked plenty of neighborhoods where this is normal everyday life.  You do what you can, yo try to make certain the kids are clean, warm, dry, and fed, and leave knowing that nothing will change because, for those who live like this, it is normal.  It is what they know.  
As to the man outside the window; if the tape caught the assault it should have documented the masturbation or non-masturbation as well.   Steve summarized the issues relatively well; I am not going to add much as I know he has done a good bit of research and has directed me to some books that have been both helpful and disturbing.  (as an aside, if you want book recs PM Steve; Steve- NO MORE AMAZON LINKS!!!!)
I disagree with the treatment stance simply because a misdemeanor indecent exposure/peeping charge is seldom enough leverage to force an offender into a functioning treatment program.  Treatment may work, but the patient has to want to be cured...
There is a well-established pattern of peepers evolving into burglars then into rapists.
The reaction of the crowd, well, how can you justify any of it.  As punishment goes, no matter how wrong the alleged peeper was, it is not the place of the mob (or the police) to punish.  
No need to waste space on their choice of actions...
I have, on occaision, taken custody of robbery or burglary suspects who were detained by their intended victims.  In a few cases the suspects were a bit worse for wear, but nothing that could be deemed unreasonable, much less illegal or immoral.


----------



## shesulsa (Aug 25, 2004)

The fact that this guy has a history of brain injury and seizures _should_ excuse his questionable behavior in the bushes. How were these stoners supposed to know that? I'm sure they weren't, but they still were not justified in their response. If the tape evidences what we read that it does, they should all get the book thrown at them - not just because their reponse was unjustified, but that it was extreme. 

 What next for the beating victim, though? Can the court mandate that he wear a homing device permanently without placing him under an order of house arrest? This is a medical problem - surely the satellite system used for Alzheimers patients and DD persons would be in order here. Perhaps that's a different thread?


----------



## hardheadjarhead (Aug 25, 2004)

dearnis in bold: 

*(as an aside, if you want book recs PM Steve; Steve- NO MORE AMAZON LINKS!!!!)*

Let me guess.  You get there on Amazon and find you can't leave.  You click and point for hours, and order twelve hardback books.  Am I right?  Do I know book addicts when I see them?  You want those links deep down...don't you?  You feel them CALLING you.  PM me and I'll hook you up, dude.  I have some pure links.  Uncut and bagged.

*
I disagree with the treatment stance simply because a misdemeanor indecent exposure/peeping charge is seldom enough leverage to force an offender into a functioning treatment program.  Treatment may work, but the patient has to want to be cured...*

True.  Regardless, the follow up posted indicated the cops didn't think this guy was peeping.  

*There is a well-established pattern of peepers evolving into burglars then into rapists.*

We could say that many rapists were at one time peepers, but not all peepers become rapists.  Its a little like the "gateway drug" argument.  One might be able to say that most heroin users start out using marijuana, but we know that most marijuana users don't end up using heroin.   


Regards,


Steve


----------



## OULobo (Aug 25, 2004)

Update:

Recent interviews from residents at the apartment building that have attended parties with the attackers, say that the "events" that take place at these parties, like the one happening the night of the attack, include twister (w/ extra rug burns, if you know what I mean), copious amounts of alcohol, use of various illegal and illicite drugs and various forms of prostitution. The implication is now that the man wasn't looking at the child, but at the party. The group attacked the man for peeping in on their swinging lifestyle, at which a minor was present and witness. Another possiblilty is that he witnessed their illegal activities and they wanted to either intimidate him into not ratting them out or make sure he never spoke of it again or at all for that matter. 

Disclaimer: This account was heard on local radio and not verifiable. I would have to wonder if the video would show if he was looking at any other windows.


----------



## dearnis.com (Aug 25, 2004)

Well, I guess the swingers can add gang rape and aggravated assault to their list of party tricks.  



> The fact that this guy has a history of brain injury and seizures should excuse his questionable behavior in the bushes.



Agreed.  It sounds like the needed intent is going to be absent.



> What next for the beating victim, though? Can the court mandate that he wear a homing device permanently without placing him under an order of house arrest? This is a medical problem - surely the satellite system used for Alzheimers patients and DD persons would be in order here


Probably is a different thread.  If he is not deemed to pose a danger to himself or others it is hard for the state to get involved; rightly or wrongly.  That is if he is lucky enough to recover to his pre-assault level of mobility.

Steve- I got off Amazon last time with only 5 books, and only 2 hard covers.  And I can quit any time I want.  Yeah, any time!!
And I do blame you for some of the more disturbing titles on my shelf; a long past sex offender thread as a recall...

I don't fully buy the marijuana analogy.  The gateway theory has serious flaws, I grant you.  A peeper is a major problem, whether he graduates to higher levels or not.  Personally (and professionally for that matter) I am not too concerned about someone smoking weed in their own place, so long as they do not try and drive a car.


----------



## OULobo (Aug 27, 2004)

Fresh from the gossip radio of the Cleveland radio: appearently the child's bedroom window was blocked by furniture when the man was alledgedly peeping. The furniture makes it impossible to see anyone in the room from outside.


----------



## dearnis.com (Aug 28, 2004)

So the upshot is that a group of doped-up persons of questionable character (was that worded politely enough?) beat, raped,and nearly killed an individual with significant mental challenges?  OK, enough said.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Aug 28, 2004)

Chad - Yup

Amazon junkies - You are using the Amazon links below so MT gets it's 10cents per order right?


----------

