Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (136146)	6/10/2004 4:18:56 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

So, who was doing the "hushing up"? If I was the father, it wouldn't be me. Maurice.. Ritter wasn't talking to "real" minor girls. He was caught "red-handed" by detectives mimicing minor girls so they can SPECIFICALLY CATCH people like Ritter before he gets his hands on a REAL MINOR. If I was the prosecutor, it wouldn't be me. But it sure was in NY. They hushed it up, just like they hushed up the first incident with the 14 year old, just TWO MONTHS prior to the second incident. It was never made clear whether the first incident was an actual minor child, or another police detective posing as such. Persevere as much as you want Maurice, but I don't think Scott Ritter deserves to be cut much slack. One would think the first incident, where he was met by police, would have sent a clear signal to leave the little girls alone. But no.. two months later he's caught again.. While I might excuse somebody who was in their 20's when they were chatting with a minor, it's hard to do the same for someone almost 40 years old. Hawk