My daughter's childhood friend's dad was busted for kiddy porn.

[Maine Mary]

I always thought there was something a bit "off" about him, but could never but my finger on it.... my daughter says he never touched her, but she thought he was weird. (Mollie will be 21 in March) She has since told me that her friend, the daughter used to discuss "peeing contests" off the back deck and showering/with her father at ages 8, 9 and 10. (BEFORE YOU GET ON ME, lET ME TELL YOU THAT I TOO JUST HEARD ABOUT IT-OVER THE HOLIDAYS)

God help me, but I want to kill him. Mollie was spared of him, but he still makes me sick. I think of what got him by; lying as he did, was the fact that he has a "Smokey Bear"-- Really! He played the part in area schools and the kids loved it. He was a Maine State employee for the Dept of Conservation. Plus his wife was a 6-8th grade teacher.. My daughter used to spend the night there OMG please excuse me .... :puke:

She was home on Christmas break and told me that FBI people actually surrounded her friend's home and forced him out. -of the house. (I don't know how they got in on the muddy, dirty road but some how they did it.)

If it can happen here, it can happen anywhere. I just feel bad for the two girls. F. the sick pig.

[GOPisEvil]

1. Man, that just makes my skin crawl.

I'm glad this creep didn't lay a hand on your daughter. I hope his own daughter isn't too traumatized.

[KitchenWitch]

2. No words....

Thank heaven nothing happened to Mollie, but I feel terrible for what must have happened to her friend.

:cry:

[deadparrot]

3. Sorry to hear that, MM.

:hug:

I felt the same way when I found out that one of the priests at my grade school was convicted of molestation...of my friend's older brother. I had (and have) been a lapsed Catholic for a long time, but that still hurt. Child molesters are, without doubt, the absolute scum of the earth.

Hope everyone involved is coping.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

4. How sick is that......

Hope your daughter is OK......ICK....

[SeattleGirl]

5. Oh God!

Awful! Just fucking awful! I'm happy Mollie was not harmed by him, but the other two girls! :cry:

[Crazy Guggenheim]

6. HANG UM!

[crispini]

7. Duuuuuuuude.

I am glad your daughter is ok. :scared:

[barb162]

8. I take it Mollie's friend is about 21 also

Do you still see her around the neighborhood? I was thinking when you calm down from this very late-realized close call with your own kid, you could contact that young woman, say how sorry you were to hear about her family's trouble, mention a tiny bit about what your kid said and then suggest to get herself in therapy, to talk to a professional.

Do you think this guy"bothered" any of these other kids as Smokey Bear

[Maine Mary]

13. It'd thankfully be dificult

As both the Mollie and her friend don't live in the area and I am thankful for that This is a very rural place with most of the remaining people being old folks. There are no jobs here so most of the young families have left the State

About seeing her in the neighborhood: It's hard to explain... we are so rural we have no store, post office (which means no zip code), church ect.... well we've nothing. But yes, I have seen "her" only once and it was in a "SuperWalmart" in her local college town. She had a guy with her who seemed like a nice young man and she seemed happy.(BTW this was before I learned everything).

[LisaL]

58. I would leave the kid alone.

I am sure she got enough people snickering at her as it is.

[Redstone]

9. Oh, yuck.

Try not to let it get you too shaken up. I know that won't be easy...You're right, though; you never know where you'll find one.

Redstone

[momophile]

10. Very very sad.

Pisses me off so much. I understand how you feel.

I had a friend who had a little girl with a creep. Years after she was divorced her ex was busted for molesting his stepchild who was the same age as his own child. The two girls played with each other. As far as I know, he was never busted for touching his own daughter but I'll always wonder. Absolute sick. And he was the cocky kind of jerk who acting high and mighty all the time and looked down on everyone around him. Bastard.

[elshiva]

11. Sorry!

That's horrid. At least they got him now. Is he in jail now? I hope so! I will pray for your daughter's healing.
:cry:

[leftofthedial]

12. busted is not the same as convicted

child porn (by some definitions) can be "found" on many computers

this is one crime, the mere accusation of which is enough to ruin the lives of even the innocent

anyone who actually harms a child is beneath contempt, but things aren't always what they seem or what they are labeled.

[Maine Mary]

14. What do you mean by "some definitions"

Oh please, "the lives of the innocent'? Just because a 16 year old girl looks 18 and some guy makes a mistake doesn't mean he is innocent :wtf: what was he doing SO CLOSE TO THE LINE (where it it could have been in question) in the first place? :crazy:

[leftofthedial]

17. I am not defending any child molester--there is no sufficient punishment

what he's been (apparently) ACCUSED of is horrific. You seem to have already found him guilty. Based on your original post, it sounds like he's been accused of an awful crime. I'm pointing out the inconvenient fact that here in America, one is supposed to be assumed innocent until proven guilty.

[Robeson]

18. "in America, one is supposed to be assumed innocent"......

...sorry dude, didn't you know that changed after 9/11, 9/11, 9/11...repeat after me...9/11, 9/11, 9/11.....

[Maine Mary]

21. You are correct

But we are funny about that particular crime here in America. WE will NOT take chances with our children. If there is any teeny tiny HINT of danger and we know in advance, you can bet your V ass we won't attempt it... not with our children!

I don't know if the guy is guity or not. However, I'd never take the chance to find out either.

[Heidi]

22. We take chances with our children _all the time_.

1. Day care.
2. Eight hours of school daily.
3. Sleepovers at other kids' homes.
4. Entrusting DARE and other programs to teach our kids about drugs.
5. Entrusting teachers, whose values we don't know, to teach our kids about sex.
6. Leaving our kids unsupervised for hours on end to play video games, surf websites we rarely check out ourselves, and to chat with people we've never met.

Maybe I'm overly protective, but I believe we as adults need to protect kids _before_ they come into contact with situations we'll all later regret. In many instances, I think many of us have drunk the kool-aid that is the mainstream belief that the police can protect us and our kids.

I'm sorry your family has had this brush with what may or may not be a person with big problems, MaineMary. :(

[hickman1937]

48. Why? n/t

[leftofthedial]

56. makes it pretty easy for despots to ruin their enemies

like, oh, say Scott Ritter

[Floogeldy]

23. Thank you

These crucifixion threads with no verifiable facts or evidence are disturbing.

[Heidi]

24. .

:hug:

[bettyellen]

26. it's strange it went from viewing porn to the asumption that

he is a molester. i can understand parents wanting to be cautious, but it is a big leap.
aside from the fact that we don't know if the whole thing was a mistake, either.

[Rabrrrrrr]

28. It's no different than the assumption that gay men molest children

I, too, am surprised at how it went from "busted for kiddy porn" to "guilty of incestuous child molestation".

This is one of the areas at DU in which it IS okay to villify and destroy a person's life without due cause or trial. My personal feeling is that if we're gonna stick up for the people being detained at Gitmo without charges brought up against them and no access to a trial (and well we should stick up for them), we should be equally willing to stick up for ALL people for whom no trial and no verdict of guilt has happened, including this guy. I find myself hoping he is found not guilty, just to piss off the people who held the trial and found him guilty before the sun set.

[bettyellen]

37. it's a big jump....

and so sue me, i think there's a big difference between looking at something and doing something. so that was a big leap it suprised me that people took so easily. almost every poster just assumed he also molested kids.
i know people who look at porn, and never do the things they look at. maybe they would if they could, but it ain't the same as actually doing it, is it? and some people are happy just looking. that said, who the hell here knows the facts? not a single one of us.

[Heidi]

44. Thank you, Rabrrrrrr.

This is one topic where so-called progressives just leave the constitution in the dust and allow emotions and presumptions free-rein. And Lord have mercy on the progressive who suggests treatment for sex offenders would be a more effective approach than punishment. I guess some people would rather have a pound of flesh than a pound of "cure."

[hickman1937]

52. Rabrrrrrr sometimes you piss me off,

and sometimes you are so right on target. Thank you for this, but you and I know even if he is found innocent of all charges the charges have already killed his life.

[Rabrrrrrr]

62. Thanks. And sadly, you are right - even assuming he's perfectly not

guilty, even to the point that the judge buys a full page ad in every paper in the country and the president himself announced it in a presidential news briefing taht the guy's arrest was a total mistake, they had the wrong man, they were one house off, blah blah blah, just by the fact of being accused, that poor guy's life is pretty well over.

Innocent until proven guilty. Unless, of course, we *just know* he's guilty....

[Evergreen Emerald]

60. Evem if he were found not guilty it just means it could not be proven.

It doesn't mean he did not do it.

[miss_american_pie]

64. I think your analogy is a bit off

People don't generally view porn of things that repulse them, I'm guessing. I think it's safe to say if a person views sexual images of children, it's because he/she is attracted to children.

Of course, the man hasn't been convicted of even the porn charges, and if he is that doesn't mean he molested anyone. But I bet the odds are better that a person viewing kiddie porn would molest than a person viewing porn that doesn't involve kids.

[CanuckAmok]

76. DING!DING!DING!

Rabrrrrrr nails it.

And, now, you can bet there are a flurry of PMs going back and forth talking about "Can you believe it?! Rabrrrrrr is in favour of child molestation?!"

[Rabrrrrrr]

81. LOL! Yes, there very well could be.

"Rabrrrrrr thinks that parents who force their children to have incestuous sex should be given congressional medals of honor and have their own monuments erected in Washington to which we should all travel once a year to see and bow down in obiesance".

[mongo]

87. LOL!

Sorry I'm late to the party again, just saw this thread.

Thanks for your comments

[LisaL]

82. I can believe it. WIthout any trouble whatsoever.

[philosophie_en_rose]

78. There is a huge difference.

Assuming gay men or women or martians molest children is nothing like assuming child pornographers are molestors.

Some child had to be raped or molested to create child pornography.

We should not be willing to "stick up" for someone without knowledge, any more than we should burn their houses down. It's just as illogical to insist that someone is innocent, when you don't have a clue.

That's one of the reason children don't come forward. People "stick up" for the nice pedophiles.

[Rabrrrrrr]

80. No, there's no difference at all - and I am not sticking up for pedophiles

What I am sticking up for is the United States Constitution and our laws which say that one is innocent until proven guilty.

The man in question is so far ACCUSED of child pornography. he has NOT been found guilty. Others then have made the automatic assumption that this man must also be a child molestor, because he is ACCUSED of having child pornography, and more than likely has molested his daughter. Some have even said that yes, surely, the man is a molestor.

Now, if it comes out that he has molested children, then whoopee - let me be the first to hang him.

But I'll be goddamned if I'm gonna condemn the guy just for being accused of something; and I am certainly NOT going to condemn him for ancilliary crimes of which he is not accused, just because I feel that if he did "A" then he must surely also have done B, C, and D.

Does he deserve to go to jail? We'll know that AFTER the courts make their decision. You say that it is illogical to assume the man is innocent - if it's illogical, then our entire system of law is illogical.

And it's a good thing that we have these laws, and that we have courts, and that we have jury by peers, or the DU lynching mob would already have hanged this man, no different than the KKK hanging men for being black or the Nazis gassing people for being Jews, homosexuals, or liberals.

[regnaD kciN]

83. Not always...

Some child had to be raped or molested to create child pornography.

There's a wide disparity of laws in this county on what constitutes "child pornography." In some cases, as you indicate, there has to be actual sexual activity taking place. In others, even partial nudity of someone a day under 18 qualifies. Still other statutes claim that fictional works depicting characters under 18 having sex, even if the sex act itself is not shown or described (i.e. it takes place "offstage") is considered kiddie porn.

As I have pointed out beforehand, in some jurisdictions, owning a DVD of The Blue Lagoon or Zefferelli's Romeo and Juliet would make you legally guilty of "possession of child pornography." :eyes: (Remember the Tin Drum case in Oklahoma some years back?)

In the current case, I would doubt that the charges are that minor -- I doubt that the police would surround the house if it was just a matter of the guy having downloaded a couple of topless photos of 17-year-olds. (Of course, the severity of the charge still doesn't mean the accused is guilty.)

[amitten]

36. Well, he was showering with his daughter at age 8 or so...

By her own admission. I'd say that's a clue in the general direction of molestation, when coupled with the child porno.

[bettyellen]

39. i had a friend whose whole family did that. naked 24/7.

it only bothered her because she couldn't bring friends over when she was a teen. no molestation occured. they had a big shower and people went in and out as needed. also no privacy when they used the toilet. that didn't bother her at all.
for some reason, she did hate it when her brother would stand in front of the fridge with the door open for too long. :shrug:

sp

[amitten]

40. Well, it does happen but it is pretty unusual for a dad to shower

with his daughter. It doesn't mean he's a molester, but it doesn't exactly score him any brownie points.

[bettyellen]

42. for some people nudity isn't necesarily sexual at all

and some people assume it always has to be.
i dunno, it is very sketchy. seems like the OP knows nothing about what was actually found either. and yet pretty much evryone assumed additional things besides the viewing happened.
foe everyone's sake, i hope they are wrong.

[amitten]

43. Well, that is probably because it's so very common.

I haven't met a single girl (myself included), when the subject comes up, that hasn't been touched inappropriately at some point in her childhood by an older male. I think the actual statistic is something like 1 in 3 girls is at some point molested, and 1 in 7 boys. I think the problem is by far underestimated by the general public.

So, I'm not usually the one to play devil's advocate on this subject. I don't want anyone accused unfairly. But sometimes you can put two and two together, and it really is four, y'know?

[bettyellen]

47. i think it's 1/3 of all women, from what i recall.

and what irked me wasn't really that people put the 2+ 2 together and said maybe.
what they did was pretty much talk about it as if they were certain that had also had occured.
as if that's why he had been arrested, it was kinda weird, you know?

[LisaL]

57. 2+2 is 4. Most of the times.

[bettyellen]

73. except no one here knows either variable clearly, do they?

i know a few parents who are getting paranoid over stuff like this. one is always naked in his house and just puts on boxers if people visit,
we were seriously talking about if a nosy neighbor got wind of it and didn't approve, what might happen. i'm just grateful he has no enemies, you know, because i don't see him breaking the habit any time soon, child or no.
i remember people talking about how they thought it looked perverted for john edwards little daughters to be climbing all over their dad (fully clothed, of course), and i was like wtf? So, i've seen people making really stupid assumptions, especially hung up people who disapprove of nudity in general. too easy for them to make some crazy leaps. and in this thread, many people made that leap in a snap, based on two unknown variables. x +y = assume stuff and talk about wanting to kill the person. that mentality scares me.

[LisaL]

74. And there are plenty of perverts that abuse their kids.

And I am sure when the poster said she is so angry she could kill him it was just a figure of speech.

[amitten]

79. Yeah. n/t

[Maine Mary]

27. We are not burning him, we're are just keeping kids away

Why is that so terrible?
:shrug:

[Floogeldy]

29. Hmmm

"God help me, but I want to kill him."

[Robeson]

41. That is a troublesome statement, isn't it.....

...:yoiks:

[Heidi]

45. Wouldn't it be unfortunate if

statements like that could be as successfully prosecuted as un-acted upon deviant thoughts about children?

[Floogeldy]

46. Whew!

Home run. She scores! :thumbsup:

[bettyellen]

50. it was sorta a death threat.....

good one, heidi!

[hickman1937]

49. Because,

But we are funny about that particular crime here in America. WE will NOT take chances with our children. If there is any teeny tiny HINT of danger and we know in advance, you can bet your V ass we won't attempt it... not with our children!

[Heidi]

51. See Post 22.

We take chances with our children all the time.

[hickman1937]

53. I'm not going to fight in this battle.

I do believe that, in the end, you have to pay for anyone you've hurt in your fight to keep your children safe. And no I don't believe that Jesus understands and forgives. I believe he sees and judges accordingly.

[Heidi]

54. I understand, hickman1937.

For me, what Jesus would think about it should have no bearing on how the justice system should operate (Establishment clause of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and all).

[hickman1937]

55. You are correct.

Innocent until proven guilty should be the rule.

[GoddessOfGuinness]

15. Is Mollie still friends with the girl?

If ever she needed a friend, it's now.

The thought of your daughter being under the same roof as that asshole must be nauseating! I'm so sorry... :hug:

[Maine Mary]

16. They are still, and always will be friends

However they live a distance of about 9 hours from each other and their interests (M's sports /and Mollie's politics ect) just don't really mesh so they've drifted. However Mollie has "come back home" so to speak for M who never left the state and is a nearby college. In fact she felt a bit insulted when I asked her to please not forget M. E-mail or phone call every day is what she promised and I believe her.

Thank you SO much for your caring. :-)

[GoddessOfGuinness]

19. I'm glad she'll be able to keep in touch with her...

Maybe they'll find that it takes more than different interests to break up a friendship.

I had a friend that I went all through elementary school with...we were in each classroom together for 6 years. We went to different junior high schools, then only saw each other occasionally in high school. I think of her often, as there are few people I've ever been close friends with. I wish I knew where she lived...I'd try to get in touch with her.

[Maine Mary]

25. I hope you reach her

She'll be all that morew enhanced by your presence :-)

[Heidi]

20. What do you think justice would be in this case,

if the charge(s) of possessing child porn is proven true?

[Maine Mary]

30. NOTHING for possession

They'd have to catch the purveyors.

However child porn should be treated as an act against a a person who did not have the where withall to know the difference between yes and the implications they may have.

[Evergreen Emerald]

61. I usually depends on the source of the porn

If he took the pictures, it would be much more significant.

Possession of child porn in many states is not a sex-offense.

[Maine Mary]

31. NOTHING for possession

They'd have to catch the purveyors.

However child porn should be treated as an act against a a person who did not have the where withall to know the difference between yes and the implications they may have.

[Maine Mary]

32. NOTHING for possession

They'd have to catch the purveyors.

However child porn should be treated as an act against a a person who did not have the where withall to know the difference between yes and the implications they may have.

[Maine Mary]

33. NOTHING for possession

They'd have to catch the purveyors.

However child porn should be treated as an act against a a person who did not have the where withall to know the difference between yes and the implications they may have.

[Rabrrrrrr]

34. Holy crow! I haven't seen a four-repeat post in a LONG time!

That brings back memories of the big software switch a few years ago...

[Maine Mary]

38. LOL! But holy Crow?

What's so great about crows? Napoleon, my cockatiel is all bristled up. (Shhh... but he's got that little-man complex) :-)

[Maine Mary]

35. Wow! I must have made my point.

There was OBVIOUSLY no need to repeat it. Just happened I guess. ;-)

[Maine-ah]

59. Hi MM

:hi:

Did it make any of the news up here? I'm glad the bastard never got his hands on your daughter. How about her friend? I hope she is going to be o.k. Learning something like this about your father is very difficult to deal with. My own father was a teacher, and got into a bit of trouble with a female student. He was bi-polar (not an excuse IMHO) it was rather difficult for me to deal with. He's been dead for almost 11 years, and my family is slowly telling me more about it. Everything I had felt for him (being daddy's little girl) has been thrown out the window.

On Edit:

The reason I ask about the news, is that in my situation, it did make the news. People treated my family (especially my mother) as if it were our fault that my father did this. At the time I was young, and I didn't know about it, but people that were family "friends" would turn their backs on my mom if they ran into her at the grocery store, or anywhere else in town.

[aclog]

63. I thought this was a copycat at first

but that is fucked up and your daughter is lucky as hell

at least they got the bastard

[Heidi]

65. Anyone can be accused of anything.

Being accused doesn't make one a "bastard." It makes one _accused_. Presumption to the contrary from anyone not directly involved in any given case is Bush-think.

[LisaL]

69. And if you let your children associate with the accused

, what does that make you? A very stupid irresponsible parent?

[Fleshdancer]

71. Yes.

Would anyone here let their kid sleep over at Michael Jackson's house? I don't care what the jury says, there's no way in hell my child would be allowed anywhere near the guy. I would rather be judged as narrow minded and "judgmental" than risk my child's safety.

My guess is that you feel the same way. ;)

[Heidi]

72. Not stupid.

Stupidity is a birth defect. Ignorance, however, is a lifestyle defect. :shrug:

[LisaL]

75. You have lost me on this one.

If the guy is accused of some shady dealings with the kiddies, do you propose parents still send their kids over to his house for a sleep over? Otherwise, they are ignorant, cause until the guy gets convicted, he is innocent and everything is peachy-rosey?

[skygazer]

66. That is just so creepy

I had a friend when I was a kid whose father was a perverted pig. We were in our early teens when she confided in me - told me that he used to come to her bedroom and touch her inappropriately. She didn't know what to do and neither did I, of course. And then one night, I stayed over at her house (because it never occurred to me not to) and he came to her room that evening and was sort of "tucking her in" and behaving really oddly. It creeped me out and I bolted out of there - he found me in the dark driveway (this was a very rural area of Vermont) and I told him I wanted to go home and he'd better keep well away from me and he LAUGHED at me - told me no one would believe me because I was just a kid and he was an upstanding citizen. And the sad thing is, he was right - my father wouldn't have believed me. He would have thought I was being dramatic and ignored it.

I ended up staying there that night and my friend and I never talked about it again. :( I'm glad people take this stuff more seriously than they did then.

I hope your daughter's friend is okay. How creepy....

[Fleshdancer]

67. wow. the FBI surrounded his house?

sounds like he was probably trading images. From what I understand, the evidence has to be pretty intense in order for the FBI to do that. It involves a long investigation on their part. I hope this isn't the case...I really hope he wasn't hurting children but as a parent, I can understand your anger. The idea of my daughter getting hurt sends me in to a blind, uncontrollable rage that I can't quite explain to those who don't have kids.

Oprah had a horrible show last week about a man who adopted a girl, chained her up and kept her for a sex slave. He also took pictures and traded them with other pedophiles online. The FBI surrounded his house too and caught the bastard. The girl was 5 or 6 when her nightmare started. She's 13 now and still healing emotionally. I imagine she'll be healing her whole life.

[LisaL]

68. That is true. I kind of doubt FBI would be interested in

someone who is sitting in their home and quietly looks at kiddie porn. There is got to be something more to them than that, for them to surround the house and arrest this man.

[Fleshdancer]

70. I think working the child porn task force would be the worst job ever

could you imagine seeing images/video of kids being abused, know what they look like, know what is happening to them and NOT knowing where they are to stop the violence? Knowing that each day you DON'T catch the person responsible could mean a new day of hell for that innocent child...I have a lot of respect for the agents who do this job. Goddess knows I couldn't do it and stay sane.

[mongo]

88. The FBI is very interested

Not as much now as under Clinton, as Bush has taken the focus off of child porn and onto adult obscenity.

But what the FBI does is when they bust a child porn internet site, they Don't take it down. They leave the site up and get anyone who accesses the site.

[MiniMandaRuth]

77. Frightening.

I knew someone who's cousin lived in Oregon. She was a normal kid until her mom got a new boyfriend. She was molested quite a few times and kept quiet. When she was raped, she went to her mother, who didn't believe her. When she went to the police, she was put into CPS. Turns out the mom didn't give a f*** what happened to her kid, and said that she would give up her own daughter for a new boyfriend. Terrible story. Apparently, the girl is still in therapy and is now legally insane because of the sudden neglect from her mother.

Sad.

Glad your daughter is safe. As a teen girl, it's one of my greatest fears to be raped or molested by anyone.

[Floogeldy]

84. DNA Exonerates Death Row Inmate

Wednesday, December 10, 2003

By Cindi Lash, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

A Pennsylvania death row inmate became the first in the state to be exonerated by DNA evidence after prosecutors announced yesterday they would not retry him for the 1981 rape and murder of a suburban Philadelphia woman.

Associated Press
Nicholas Yarris is the first Pennsylvania death-row inmate to be cleared by DNA evidence.

Standing in shackles before a Delaware County judge, Nicholas James Yarris, 42, smiled broadly at his parents, Jayne and Michael Yarris, and said he bore no ill will toward investigators and prosecutors whose efforts have kept him on death row for half of his life.

"Despite the 22 years that the commonwealth did its best to kill me, I used the opportunity to become a good man," Yarris said in court yesterday. "I wish you well.''

After reading a newspaper article about DNA testing in 1989, Yarris became one of the earliest of the nation's death row inmates to seek the testing to prove his innocence. He is the nation's 112th death row inmate to be exonerated since the death penalty was reinstated in 1976, and one of about a dozen to accomplish it using DNA evidence.

As his mother wept, Yarris' relatives embraced and expressed hope that he could be released from prison in time to celebrate Christmas at home.

Whether that will happen is uncertain because Yarris' attorneys first must convince authorities that the time he's spent in Pennsylvania prisons satisfies sentences for offenses he committed in Florida after he escaped from prison in 1985.

A Miami attorney will argue on his behalf that the 30-year sentence he faces in Florida was based on his status as a convicted killer and should be recalculated.

"That's what everyone wants, to have him home for the holidays,'' said assistant federal public defender Michael Wiseman, who assisted with Yarris' efforts to win his freedom.

Yarris could not speak publicly after yesterday's hearing in Media because he was quickly transported to the State Correctional Institution Greene in Waynesburg.

"He was very happy, but he didn't get to walk out of the courtroom, so it was a little anticlimactic," Wiseman said. "But he said he had no bitterness toward anyone involved in it all. He was quite gracious. I'm not sure I would be so gracious."

Jacqueline Larma, Associated Press

Jayne Yarris, left, and Sissy Whalen, cheer as they leave the Delaware County Courthouse yesterday. Yarris' son, Nicholas, spent 20 years on Pennsylvania's death row for a murder that DNA evidence suggest he did not commit.

Yarris was scheduled to stand trial a second time in January on charges that he assaulted and fatally stabbed Linda Mae Craig, 32, of Boothwyn, after abducting the mother of three from a shopping mall in December 1981. Prosecutors argued that he killed her because she resembled a girlfriend who'd dumped him.

That conviction was vacated in September, however, after DNA tests showed that traces of semen found on Craig's underwear, and skin found under Craig's fingernails and on gloves near her body, could not have come from Yarris.

Delaware County Deputy District Attorney Sheldon Kovach yesterday told Common Pleas Judge William R. Toal Jr. that his office lacked evidence to proceed with a second trial.

Prosecutors declined to say if they still believe Yarris was involved in the slaying, but said they will continue to seek the person whose genetic profile matches the DNA samples. Craig's family could not be reached.

Investigators have compared the DNA samples to those of other possible suspects, but haven't found a match. Now they will ask the FBI to compare the samples against those in its Combined DNA Index System. So far, the FBI has not done so because the testing that ruled out Yarris was done by a private firm rather than its own lab.

Assistant District Attorney Joseph J. Brielmann said prosecutors and police put together a fresh team to re-examine evidence in Craig's death after learning in August that Yarris did not leave the DNA found at the scene. The DA's office also joined with Yarris' attorneys in asking the court to throw out his original conviction, based on the DNA test results, Brielmann said.

"They have not uncovered enough information to proceed against Mr. Yarris,'' he said. "In fairness to Mr. Yarris, we requested that the prosecution be dismissed. The appellate process has worked in this instance.''

At a news conference after the hearing, Delaware County District Attorney G. Michael Green said he might be willing to offer an apology on behalf of his office to Yarris "in a private way." But he and Brielmann would not go so far as to call the case a miscarriage of justice.

"The question is, does the system work in Pennsylvania? I would say action proves that it does," Green said.

That stance outraged Yarris' supporters -- many of them opponents of the state's death penalty -- who said his case provides horrifying evidence that innocent people could be unjustly convicted and executed in Pennsylvania.

"Clearly the problem of wrongful convictions of those facing the death penalty has not gone away,'' said Richard Dieter, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center in Washington, D.C.

"Unless executions are halted while this crisis is studied more closely, the risk of executing innocent people will remain unacceptably high.''

Jeff Garis, executive director of the 8,000-member Pennsylvania Abolitionists United Against the Death Penalty, renewed his organization's call for Gov. Ed Rendell to impose a moratorium on the state's death penalty. Too often, Garis said, it is imposed on defendants who are minorities or are too poor to afford adequate legal counsel.

"At the very least, whether you support or oppose the death penalty, I think we can all agree that an innocent person shouldn't go through this experience. We need to examine the system and make sure that what happened to Nick Yarris doesn't happen again.''

The Associated Press contributed to this report. Cindi Lash can be reached at [e-mail] or 412-263-1973.

http://www.post-gazette.com/localnews/20031210yarris1210p1.asp

[LisaL]

85. What on Earth does it have to do with the discussion?

It's wonderful for the inmate, but because he was exonerated-does it mean that anybody accused of any crime is innocent? That no one can be actually accused of a crime and be guilty of it at the same time? Sometimes innocent people get convicted. And sometimes guilty people go free. It happens. But an innocent death row inmate exonerated by DNA has nothing to do at all with some guy busted for kiddie porn.

[Floogeldy]

86. Everybody accused of a crime is innocent.

Until proven guilty. There is just that little bitty problem of juries finding innocent people guilty and sentencing them to death.

[terrya]

89. Floogeldy

Per DU rules, please limit articles to 4 paragraphs.

Thank you
terrya
DU Moderator

[lukasahero]

90. Interesting comments on this thread

I wonder if everyone who's so quick to remind us that all are innocent until proven guilty would be doing so if this person was a proven Republican?

Or hey, how about jumping into threads that call shrub a criminal with that line of thought or those that are posted with glee with photoshops showing him in orange and chains? He hasn't been tried and he is, of course, innocent until proven guilty as well.

Or perhaps it really is only this particular crime that demands such treatment?

Maine Mary, I'm glad your daughter was not hurt and also glad to hear that she still has contact with this man's daughter. Hopefully she can be some comfort to the young lady. :hug:

[khashka]

91. That's gotta be scary Mary

Even though your daughter says nothing happened - in retrospect something could have. We try to protect our children, but don't always know who to protect them from. So I can understand your anger - but just be glad Mollie is OK. That's what really matters.

Khash.