The Link to the story here
Vegas DA responds to protests
Pressure continues for prosecution of homosexual cop for molestation
© 2001 WorldNetDaily.com
A national legal watchdog group is accusing the Clark County district attorney's office of ignoring the law and making a political decision not to prosecute a homosexual Las Vegas policeman for sexually molesting a teen-age boy.
The U.S. Justice Foundation wrote to District Attorney Stewart L. Bell last month urging prosecution of narcotics detective Vinten Hartung for allegedly luring a boy, now 16, into a sexual relationship. Hartung reportedly plied the boy with alcohol.
While dropping felony molestation charges, the district attorney's office said it was continuing to investigate Hartung on two lesser charges of stalking and furnishing alcohol to a minor. Hartung resigned from the Las Vegas police force, shortly after WorldNetDaily brought the case to national attention.
"This letter is being written in an effort to urge you to prosecute the above matter to the fullest extent permissible under the law," wrote USJF attorney Richard D. Ackerman. "Nevada law holds that it is illegal to have sexual relations with a 'minor.' In this case, the victim is a 'minor' for purposes of your consent laws.
"Various publications have quoted you as saying that, 'We in essence concluded neither the state nor the federal authorities are able to pursue the sexual offenses. ... It discriminates against a class of people, and that's not allowed under the equal protection clause of the Constitution.' It is our understanding that this 'class' of persons, to whom you refer, are homosexuals."
The USJF makes the case that, with regard to liability for criminal offenses, homosexuals are not a protected or immune class of persons as suggested.
Bell responded to the organization in a letter dated March 28.
"I received and reviewed your correspondence of March 21, 2001," wrote Bell. "In that regard, I can only attribute the inaccuracies in your factual understanding and conclusions to the fact that the information you received was filtered through the print media. The bottom line is that in Nevada a person of the age of 16 or older has the ability to consent to sexual interaction, whether they be either male or female. To that end, while it offends the moral sensibilities of all of us that a 42-year-old adult male had consensual sex with a 16-year-old teenager, in this case, since the relationship was consensual, it is not prosecutable."
Ackerman has already drafted a response to Bell for the U.S. Justice Foundation, saying "we are left even more confused than we were before corresponding with your office."
"To wit, it appears that in almost all statutory and common law contexts, the term 'minor' relates to those who have not yet attained the age of 18 in Nevada," Ackerman writes. "While it is true that the age of consent for most sexual activity is 16, this is not true for what your Legislature has defined as 'crimes against nature' and other crimes involving public morality and social conscience. It is presumably these laws that you wish not to carry out because of your own beliefs about their soundness."
Ackerman cites a series of Nevada laws defining the term "minor."
"More disturbing is the fact that your courts have held, on at least three occasions, that a 'minor' is someone who is under the age of 18 for purposes of determining violations of the type that Vinten Hartung has engaged in," he continued. "As your letter admits, there is no doubt that Hartung engaged in the subject acts with a person under the age of 18. The media and your office have also made it clear that the relationship began when the victim was 15."
Ackerman cites four cases that define a "minor" as someone under 18 in similar circumstances.
"With all due respect, the decision not to prosecute in this case can only be attributed to political factors since Nevada's Legislature and judiciary have concurred in their findings that (these laws) are designed to protect minors," Ackerman concluded.
The U.S. Justice Foundation is a nonprofit public interest, legal action organization dedicated to instruct, inform and educate the public on, and to litigate, significant legal issues confronting America.
-- Anonymous, April 09, 2001
Answers
This story got me to thinking.
One valid question this World Net Daily story doesn't address: who
filed the complaint? It doesn't appear to be the "victim", so who has
their knickers in a twist over this, enough to take it to the DA?
Also, does the Clark County district attorney make a habit of
prosecuting statutory rape cases where the victim makes no complaint?
If there is no pattern of the DA seeking to prosecute statutory rape
cases in the past, then the charge that this decision is motivated
solely by the fact that the perp is a gay policeman fall down.
And why is it so important to the "US Justice Foundation" that this
case be tried as a rape and not on some less sensational charge, like
plying? What is their interest here?
-- Anonymous, April 09, 2001
To demonize homosexuals?
Just a guess ;-)
If you want to know more, check out their web site here.
I doubt you'll find any surprises.
-- Anonymous, April 09, 2001
USJF's Executive Director called on Sen. Barbara Boxer and
other liberals — who castigated Sen. John Ashcroft for allegedly
being a racist — to use the same standards with members of their own
party. Gary Kreep has asked that Boxer demand the resignation of Sen.
Robert Byrd and California Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante for using the "n"
word.
I see no problem with that...all should be held to the same standard
IMHO.
-- Anonymous, April 09, 2001
That wasn't the question, U.B., and I have no problem with one
standard for both parties.
It seems, however, that no such equity exists.
Again, though, that wasn't the question posed.
-- Anonymous, April 09, 2001
My daughter's girlfriend got pregnant by a guy 38 years old when she
was 16 or 17. Nobody liked the age difference, and the girl's mom
thought about filing statutory rape charges. The girl asked her not
to, and no charges were filed. The little boy is 4 or 5 years old
now, being raised and supported by both the mom and dad. *I* may
think the guy a scumball, but he's putting a roof over their head,
loves his son, and my daughter's friend is able to continue with
school, work part-time, and raise her son with a father figure [which
is something SHE never had.] A suit [if won] by an outside party
would have put him in jail and her on welfare.
-- Anonymous, April 09, 2001
To demonize homosexuals?
nope...to demonize molestors...
-- Anonymous, April 09, 2001
Then why not "MOLESTOR" in the sub-headline rather
than "HOMOSEXUAL"?
U.B., this is no different than the ConWeb using Jesse Dirkhising
as a springboard to condemn (and/or demonize) ALL homosexuals.
-- Anonymous, April 09, 2001
Sorry, hit "submit" too fast.....
In fact, the actual headline of this article as you have re-
printed it is Vegas DA responds to protests, yet look at what
YOU chose to use as the thread title.
Where is the USJF's outrage over the THOUSANDS of HETEROSEXUAL
molestations and rapes?
Talk about a double-standard.
-- Anonymous, April 09, 2001
P...
I didn't chose the title, as usual I copied/pasted it. I'll give you
that the word homosexual sensationalizes the story. And no, I
have never seen a story with "heterosexual cop busted for not
being able to keep his pecker in his pants..." However, IMHO,
homosexuality does add the odd twist to the molestation part of the
story. I would rather be molested by a female cop than a gay cop (a
joke, people)...
-- Anonymous, April 09, 2001
Stewart Bell
A national legal watchdog group is accusing the Clark
County district attorney's office of ignoring the law and making a
political decision not to prosecute a homosexual Las Vegas policeman
for sexually molesting a teen-age boy.
As reported by the also neutral and always accurate WorldNetDaily.
This story is beyond laughable. This is about the Metropolitan Police
Department seeking legal action and being told there is nothing to
prosecute. What is the problem here?
This is ALL about one thing,,,,homophobia.
Now with that said, outsiders of the local Vegas scene should also
know Stu Bell didn't become Stu Bell by chasing after "maybes". This
I think is what the problem maybe and has little if anything to do
with Homosexuals. There are plenty of other cases in town he ignores
because they are not winnable which have no Homo component. About Stu
Bell's resume my take.
-- Anonymous, April 09, 2001
BOOB NEVER LEARNS. He respreads........typical HORSE SHIT SPREAD BY:
© 2001 WorldNetDaily.com .
-- Anonymous, April 09, 2001
Charlie, he's not a "BOOB".
Yes, U.B., I DID look at it as if WND was sensationalizing
the "homosexual" part because they ARE sensationalizing
the "homosexual" part.
It's what the ConWeb does.
If you disagree, then please link up the WND stories on the
thousands of heterosexual molestation and/or rape cases and I will
gladly rescind my statement.
(Joke understood.)
-- Anonymous, April 09, 2001
P...
WND is a conservative web-rag?!? Has anybody tallied the
number of news sites on the web? And of those would they be
categorized by spin, i.e.: left, middle, right? Just curious...
I'll bet NewsMax would spin this story the same way...
-- Anonymous, April 10, 2001
Oh, CPR, ya missed taking your medicines again...
-- Anonymous, April 10, 2001
Bob,
Hate to do this to a fellow conservative ... but start
here, then go
here (at the second link, skip over the part where Mike Adams
wins a Flying Pig Award[g]).
Sorry, I lost all respect for WND over Y2K. The fact that WND is now
pushing Tax Protester garbage (they're even pimping one of those
books about the 16th Amendment never being ratified) proves to me
that they still don't deserve my respect, don't care HOW much we
might agree on other, fundamental conservative issues.
(An aside: I like Bill O'Reilly and I very much wish that he'd find
another online forum for his views, too. Being associated with WND
does him no good whatsoever in my eyes.)
And just for the record, Newsmax and WND came from the same parent:
Richard Mellon Scaife. In fact, Chris Ruddy used to work for Farah.
Both used to work for Scaife newspapers. Newsmax, in a very real
sense, is simply the slightly-more-mainstream "spinoff" of the (far
more outrageous) WND and the Western Journalism Center.
(Newsmax, for example, manages to avoid the Tax Protester stuff. Give
them credit for that.)
-- Anonymous, April 10, 2001
Mr. Poole...
Yep, the tax protestor stuff is getting a little thin. I liked Ruddy
better when he was pursuing Ron Brown and Vince Foster conspiracies.
I'll check the link(s) and get back to you...thanks...
-- Anonymous, April 10, 2001
Bob,
Well, I spoke too soon.
Newsmax is jumping onto the tax protest bandwagon, too.
-- Anonymous, April 10, 2001
Hate to do this to a fellow conservative ... but start here, then
go here (at the second link, skip over the part where Mike Adams wins
a Flying Pig Award[g]).
OK, one source and 2 stories. WND and NewsMax are right-winger to
the core (anti-tax bias can only lead to their premature demise
IMHO). But my question still remains: has anyone truely catagorized
web-rags? Also, where would you put BBC in the mix (seem to be in
the middle on US news and politics).
BTW, the closest thing to a media watchdog I've found (they are right-
wingers as well) is here.
-- Anonymous, April 10, 2001
OK, one source and 2 stories. WND and NewsMax are right-winger to
the core (anti-tax bias can only lead to their premature demise
IMHO). But my question still remains: has anyone truely catagorized
web-rags? Also, where would you put BBC in the mix (seem to be in the
middle on US news and politics).
?? You are a BOOB or at best, another shill for the Net Fringers. You
have been cutting and pasting CRUD off those two services for years.
They are not "right winger". THEY ARE **FRINGE** and border on when
not crossing over to being OUT AND OUT LIARS ABOUT FACTS.
FARAH has NO CREDIBILITY WHAT SO EVER EVEN ON THE RIGHT. His decade
long rants of LIES vs. The Clintstones not only discredited Farah but
also enabled Hillary to make her statement about endless persecution
at the hands of right wing extremists.
-- Anonymous, April 11, 2001
For what it worth Bob, stick to the comedy dude.
-- Anonymous, April 11, 2001
Moderation questions? read the FAQ