Former coach contests offender listing

Shapiro has a history of letting sex offenders out early. Case-in-point, Harig. He also is the Judge who sabotaged the rape case involving the dead victim.

Hope he sleeps well.

sara wrote:

i dnt thnk dat er body shuld be all up in their buisness cuz it thire lives not urs.

You would not think that way if you had a daughter.
He made it our business when he chose his actions.

The Big Lebowski wrote:

<quoted text>
He got out early because Judge Shapiro granted him shock probation. That being the case, the judge should also have the discretion to classify him as a Tier 3 offender. This wasn't the first time this guy has pulled this kind of stuff, as his history with the Canton schools shows.

Yes, Shapiro granted him probation. But he doesnt necessarily have the authority to impose conditions of release that alter the terms of the original sentence that the state agreed to in exchange for his guilty plea. The State and Federal Constitutions will apply, and how the courts interpret their application will determine the outcome.

Your other argument, the "not the first time he pulled this off" theory is completely irrelevant, a proverbial red herring.

Not only is there no prior conviction related to that history, it has absolutely nothing to do with this conviction, the original sentence, or the constitutionality of the changes in the reporting requirements at issue here.

woof

Manard G Crebbs wrote:

<quoted text>
Isn't Shapiro a big Rusty Pry supporter? It all fits doesn't.

How, exactly, would that "fit"?

Duke for Mayor wrote:

<quoted text>
Yes, Shapiro granted him probation. But he doesnt necessarily have the authority to impose conditions of release that alter the terms of the original sentence that the state agreed to in exchange for his guilty plea. The State and Federal Constitutions will apply, and how the courts interpret their application will determine the outcome.
Your other argument, the "not the first time he pulled this off" theory is completely irrelevant, a proverbial red herring.
Not only is there no prior conviction related to that history, it has absolutely nothing to do with this conviction, the original sentence, or the constitutionality of the changes in the reporting requirements at issue here.
woof

Well, since you seem to think this guy is so swell, then I suppose that you wouldn't mind having him live next you and your teenage kids -- without having to register as an offender.

If you think his prior history didn't come into play in the judge's ruling, then you are kidding yourself. If this guy doesn't want to register, then he needs to go back into jail. This is a public safety issue in my mind.

First of all is Brown was found guilty of O.R.C 2907.03 for sexual battery he should have received a felony of the 3rd degree. Under Ohio classification of a F3, confinement runs from 1 to 5 yearsO.R.C 2929.14. Looks like Marvin blew this one by letting Brown out 4 months short of what was to be the least amount of time spent in prison for his crime. If he doesn't want to register from his home then he should register from prison! I do agree on one point on Brown's behalf, he was guilty of a F3 and Summit County want's to treat him as if it was a F1. People who get out of prison for raping children have to register the same way Summit county want's Brown to. I understand that the girl was under 18 but should this be treated the same as if the girl was 5 or 3? Brown should know by now that YOU CAN'T BEAT the Summit County Rail Road by now. They will do what ever they want..when they want to.

Cloverine Fleetwood wrote:

This fellow has a history of preying on vulnerable children. He got his "pass" when Canton Schools covered up his behavior. I feel not one iota of sympathy for him.

i must be missing something. a few posters referred to indiscretions in canton. what happened?

getting out early and his plea agreement are two different issues. With the adam walsh act ohio is trying to renig on originally plea agreements. He agreed to plead guilty and register as the lowest level sex offender for ten years. Now the state is changing that and listing him as a predator for life. If the state wanted him to be a predator they should have done it in the plea agreement. He obviously got special treatment..what sex offender has ever got shock parole? The state cannot go back and change plea agreements like they are doing to thousands of people with the implemtation of the adam walsh act. The state sure didn't like the kid in the cage club shooting messing around with their end of the plea agreement.

The Big Lebowski wrote:

<quoted text>
Well, since you seem to think this guy is so swell, then I suppose that you wouldn't mind having him live next you and your teenage kids -- without having to register as an offender.
If you think his prior history didn't come into play in the judge's ruling, then you are kidding yourself. If this guy doesn't want to register, then he needs to go back into jail. This is a public safety issue in my mind.

First, Where did you get the impression that I "think this guy is so swell'? Certainly not from anything I wrote. That came from your little mind, not mine.

Second, your other posts seem to indicate that you thought Shapiro DIDN"T fully or properly consider Brown's "prior history", and if he had, he wouldn't have let Brown out early.

So which is it?

woof

sara wrote:

i dnt thnk dat er body shuld be all up in their buisness cuz it thire lives not urs.

Oh GOD, I've seen it all now based on the way that message is written.

Duke for Mayor wrote:

<quoted text>
First, Where did you get the impression that I "think this guy is so swell'? Certainly not from anything I wrote. That came from your little mind, not mine.
Second, your other posts seem to indicate that you thought Shapiro DIDN"T fully or properly consider Brown's "prior history", and if he had, he wouldn't have let Brown out early.
So which is it?
woof

To put it in a vernacular which you would feel comfortable with, I think Shapiro screwed the pooch on this one. This guy should not be out of prison in the first place, as he has not served enough of his sentence. However, since he is out, I feel that he should be required to register. To me, it is quid pro quo.

bily0509 wrote:

First of all is Brown was found guilty of O.R.C 2907.03 for sexual battery he should have received a felony of the 3rd degree. Under Ohio classification of a F3, confinement runs from 1 to 5 yearsO.R.C 2929.14. Looks like Marvin blew this one by letting Brown out 4 months short of what was to be the least amount of time spent in prison for his crime.

Partially true. Brown was convicted and sentenced on two counts of F3 Sexual Battery. He was sentenced to two two year terms, to be served concurrently. Neither term was mandatory. Had Brown's victim been under 13 years of age, the offenses would have been F2, carrying mandatory sentences of two years each.

The sentencing order, and Browns plea are readily available on the Court's website.

Since there was no mandatory sentence involved, Brown was eligible for judicial release and could file a motion requesting it after serving 6 months under 2929.20(B)(2).

woof

duke is right wrote:

getting out early and his plea agreement are two different issues. With the adam walsh act ohio is trying to renig on originally plea agreements. He agreed to plead guilty and register as the lowest level sex offender for ten years. Now the state is changing that and listing him as a predator for life. If the state wanted him to be a predator they should have done it in the plea agreement. He obviously got special treatment..what sex offender has ever got shock parole? The state cannot go back and change plea agreements like they are doing to thousands of people with the implemtation of the adam walsh act. The state sure didn't like the kid in the cage club shooting messing around with their end of the plea agreement.

For more information:

http://opd.ohio.gov/Adam_Walsh/Adam_Walsh.htm

woof

Paul Adamson is the scum of the earth anyway. He doesn;t even follow through with his responsibilities in New Franklin.
This man doesn;t qualify for exemption because his release comes after the law was passed. Since his petetion for early release is filed after the new law it is a complete different filing. He screwed an underage girl while in the position of authority and should consider himself lucky to only need to register instead of her father murdering him.

Duke for Mayor wrote:

Ooops:
Ex post facto AND Double Jeopardy provisions.
woof

I don't give a damn about any technicalities..........as far as I'm concerned, that sex offender doesn't have anymore rights in my country!

sara wrote:

i dnt thnk dat er body shuld be all up in their buisness cuz it thire lives not urs.

I say we move all paroled sex offenders in with Sara. Claude was only a social studies teacher, but have no fear Sara, because I'm sure one of the sex offenders moving in with you will be an English teacher who can teach you how to spell. I really hope that whole sentence is a joke, because if it's not, then that would make you the joke. Old Claude gave up the right for people to "not be all up in his business" when he got "all up" in his 17-year old female student's business.

JAFO wrote:

Shapiro has a history of letting sex offenders out early. Case-in-point, Harig. He also is the Judge who sabotaged the rape case involving the dead victim.
Hope he sleeps well.

Good Ole Marv is retiring this year.....Good Riddance...The only time he was hard on criminals was during his election year. Bye Marv!!

The Voice of Reason wrote:

Paul Adamson is the scum of the earth anyway. He doesn;t even follow through with his responsibilities in New Franklin.
This man doesn;t qualify for exemption because his release comes after the law was passed. Since his petetion for early release is filed after the new law it is a complete different filing. He screwed an underage girl while in the position of authority and should consider himself lucky to only need to register instead of her father murdering him.

we cannot allow the state to randomly change plea agreements because the politcal winds demand it. What next? Should we go back and start changing any conviction or plea we dont feel was right? What is a binding plea agreement? What if criminals renig on their end of the plea agreement? His plea agreement should be binding. This is a constitutional issue.

As a police officer with over 25 years of service, I can tell you first hand that most of these sex offender registrys are protecting no one. And my limited law enforcement training of over 25 years does point to the US and state constitutions, and sorry but this is ex post facto type of law. But let the courts figure that one out. What he did was wrong and if those that write the laws realy wanted to protect the public they would require ALL KNOWN sex offenders to take testing that would show how likely they are to re-offend. And then only place those with the highest rate of possiable recidivism on a sex offender regestry. The cost of this would be paid for by the sex offender. Until those in office do this type of law for testing they should stop passing feel good laws that do nothing to protect the public. Look to the US Dept. Of Justice statistics on recidivsm and you will find sex offenders as a group are one of the lowest to re-offend with only 3.5% reconvicted within 3 years of realase from prison. But that aside we need to have a system to ID those who are the most likely to re-offend and known testing is avalible for that. Tim P.

John wrote:

<quoted text>
I don't give a damn about any technicalities..........as far as I'm concerned, that sex offender doesn't have anymore rights in my country!

Yep. Dont let them thar lil' ol docyuhmints named the Ohiyuh and Fedrul Konstitooshuns git in yer way o justissssss, John.

After all, Dis heer's da Yewnited States o' John-Merika, dammit

woof