Sotomayor's Porn Trial
Tuesday, June 9, 2009
PrintEmailPDF
McClatchy's Mike Doyle digs up Farrell v. Burke, a case from 2006 involving a sex offender who had violated his parole by purchasing porn. The salacious details, including Sotomayor reading excerpts from Scum: True Homosexual Experiences, are here. (Unfortunately for the culture warriors, she ultimately sided with the state.) Doyle also highlights this classic exchange between the sex offender's attorney and parole officer:
MR. NATHANSON: Are you saying, for example, that that condition of parole would prohibit Mr. Farrell from possessing, say, Playboy magazine?
P.O. BURKE: Yes.
MR. NATHANSON: Are you saying that that condition of parole would prohibit Mr. Farrell from possessing a photograph of Michelangelo['s] David?
P.O. BURKE: What is that?
MR. NATHANSON: Are you familiar with that sculpture?
P.O. BURKE: No.
MR. NATHANSON: If I tell you it's a large sculpture of a nude youth with his genitals exposed and visible, does that help to refresh your memory of what that is?
P.O. BURKE: If he possessed that, yes, he would be locked up for that.
Sotomayor's Porn Trial
[Source: Good Times Society - by The American Illuminati]
Sotomayor's Porn Trial
[Source: Mma News]
Sotomayor's Porn Trial
[Source: Boston News]
Sotomayor's Porn Trial
[Source: Market News]
posted by 71353 @ 4:20 AM,
0 Comments:
Multimedia
Top Stories
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Post a Comment