Why has Foley not been charged with a Crime?

[Toots]

It has become apparent to me after reading a bit on this issue that what he did was indeed a crime both Federal and State and yet he has not been charged. Why????

[Cooley Hurd]

1. Dateline NBC's child predator stories always result in an arrest...

...BEFORE any physical contact takes place. Foley's IM's are as bad if not WORSE than the ones created by the sickos on Dateline.:grr:

[YDogg]

3. My thoughts exactly.

[malaise]

6. But the Dateline predators

show up for action. You've got to catch Foley's folly - he must have shown up somewhere.

[MrCoffee]

7. because Dateline works with local law enforcement.

i think what happened is that the group that outed him went straight to the press.

[Webster Green]

2. He is a repuke, therefore above any laws...

Laws are for us peasants.

[moc]

4. My understanding is that it's been under investigation for 2 months

by the FBI. Just because he hasn't been charged doesn't mean he won't.

These things take a long time, much longer than most think. Sadly, I have personal experience in how long it takes to charge someone of abusing a minor. :(

[MrCoffee]

12. Where did you read about the FBI investigation? The only investigation

I've heard of is by that group that tries to out Repukes...the ones that gave the emails/AIM transcripts to the press.

link please?

[moc]

16. Sorry for no reply. Been offline for most of yesterday afternoon

(10yo daughter's volleyball tournament - they won!) as well as last night (got to see Al Gore!).

Somewhere in the early reports on Friday afternoon I saw/heard references to a 2mo FBI investigation. I can't guarantee I can find anything but I'll try.

[maddezmom]

24. here's a link

Bush admin, refused to investigate Foley case
http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/09/gop-congressman...

3. Taking the lead from House Republicans, Bush Administration refusing to investigate child sex predator, even though the FBI was given copies of the emails by CREW back in July.

At the Justice Department, an official said that there was no investigation under way but that the agency had “real interest” in examining the circumstances to see if any crimes were committed.

CREW gave the FBI the emails two months ago. The FBI isn't investigating, but says they're interested in seeing if any crime was committed, but don't plan to investigate. Uh, apparently not that much interest. Then again, it's only a child sex offender.

It's good to know that George Bush doesn't care about child sex predators even two days after the story becomes a national scandal. How would Bush feel if some 52 year old guy asked Jenna and Barbara, at the age of 16, if he made them feel horny, and then asked to describe how they masturbate? How is this any different than Denny Hastert, Shimkus and the rest of the House Republicans refusing to investigate Foley when they knew about this last year? It's not.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=364&topic_id=2272935

[moc]

26. Thanks again!

I knew I'd heard "2 months ago" and "reported to the FBI" somewhere. However, when I heard it the first time, I don't think it was qualified by the fact the FBI hadn't really done anything about it.

This puts an interesting twist on the whole thing. One could argue whether or not Republican house leaders are "mandated reporters" of child abuse (my husband is a clinical social worker and we've been discussing that aspect of this), but law enforcement officials definitely are. What consequences are FBI officials liable for failing to follow through?

[MrCoffee]

5. Because the group that outed him went to the press, not the cops

the police still have to investigate. At least, that's what I understand so far.

[napi21]

8. Be patient. I suspect that is yet to come.

I don't believe in judging someone guilty before there's hard proof, but the fact that Foley resigned from the House is proof to me that there's a lot more to this story than wenow know. I bet someone told him to get the hell out of Dodge NOW before he gets arrested!

[MnFats]

9. If he ISN'T charged it will be rank injustice...

...
and you know what? I will make a million-dollar bet that instances of sexual contact with minors will yet come out....
One so relentlessly owned by his fantasies will almost inevitably act on them, don't you think?
the other shoe will drop any minute now

[radfringe]

10. doesn't the victim have to file a complaint first?

I'm no lawyer, but I think the victim has to file a complaint or something before any investigation can begin with police/DA's office to determine IF a crime has been committed and then they decided what (if any) charges are brought against Foley.

[Toots]

11. It was my impression that the victim did indeed come forward and was hushe

He came forward and asked another Represetative to resolve the matter. It was then discussed among the Majority leaders and hushed up. This appears to be a case of aiding and abetting a crime by the highest in Government..

[G Hawes]

13. But his parents were also told, and so was

a newspaper reporter.

It sounds like the family didn't want any further action taken. I don't understand that, personally, but that's what it sounds like.

Efforts to reach the boy were unsuccessful, but he told the St. Petersburg Times last November, "I thought it was very inappropriate. After the one about the picture, I decided to stop e-mailing him back." The Times didn't publish the comments until Friday.

Alexander said the boy notified a staffer in his office about the e-mails. The congressman said he learned of it from a reporter 10 or 11 months ago and promptly called the boy's parents.

"My concern then was the young man's interests and the parents' interests," Alexander said Friday. "We weren't trying to protect anybody except the parents. ... They told me they were comfortable with it and didn't want to pursue anything, didn't want to talk about it anymore."

Even still, I think that the repug party should have gone further, investigated, and censured the pervert. They were covering up.

[radfringe]

15. going to the repub leaders

is not the same as filing criminal charges...

but yes, I can see why the repubs wanted it hushed up. What's hushing pay these days?

and what legal jurisdiction would this fall under? DC police? Justice Department?

[KharmaTrain]

14. Stay Tuned...

Foley sure cut and run in a hurry didn't he? Not even one of those Dukestir pressers or a press release. He got on the first flight out of town...whereabouts unknown. That smells like there's more stuff on the way.

It's already been pointed out on several sites that Foley may be in violation of a law he sheppard through Congress. Ahh the irony. Methinks its too soon to say, but I sense a couple of serious legal matters coming up and why Mr. Foley took his powder.

First...there's the latest IMs that, if ascertained was with a minor, would be a violation of a federal law. Next, there was the FBI investigation several months ago that came up inconclusive. Did Foley or someone else lie to investigators there? And that's just based on the first batch of information.

This story was tipped to ABC because there had to be more coming down. We still don't know if he acted on any of these meetings or if there was another investigation that we still haven't learned about. Also, be assured the hunt is on for any and all who have had encounters with Mr. Foley that will fuel this puppy.

Lastly, Congress voted 410-0 for an investigation into this matter that is supposed to be concluded in the next 10 days. Ed Sherman from California is our point man on this. Doc Hastings...the Repugnican who DeLay kicked out as chairman is back at the helm and knows he has to get this story out as fast as possible to keep it from dragging on toward election day.

This is truly an October surprise...and for once, it's in our favor!

[Swede]

17. Wait for the other shoe to drop.

It's still early. It's too big to sweep under the rug.

[blogslut]

18. what did you read?

As far as I know, Foley never met any page for sex. If the parents wish to bring charges, then I am all for it. But what was the crime?

If you're talking about Glen Greenwald's misinterpretation of Adam Walsh Law (HR: 4472) well, I think Greenwald is wrong about that law.

[seabeyond]

19. if consent is 16 and the kid is 16 is it a crime? n/t

[Maine-ah]

20. yeah, except, I do believe that is with some one

under the age of 24, then it would be legal, but Foley is like 50 something...

someone correct me here if I'm wrong, but I read that somewhere on DU yesterday.

[seabeyond]

21. we need to know. i have never heard such a thing. is perverted

54 on 16 but i am not seeing it as a law broken

[Maine-ah]

27. maybe this will help.

http://www.ageofconsent.com/florida.htm

) A person 24 years of age or older who engages in sexual activity with a person 16 or 17 years of age commits a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. As used in this section, "sexual activity" means oral, anal, or vaginal penetration by, or union with, the sexual organ of another; however, sexual activity does not include an act done for a bona fide medical purpose.

[seabeyond]

28. so since foley didnt commit any of this, doesnt sound like law broken

"sexual activity" means oral, anal, or vaginal penetration by, or union with, the sexual organ of another;

[Maine-ah]

29. don't know what to tell ya, maybe go looking for the

info you want yourself.

Regardless of whether or not what he did was legal or not, it's still disgusting, immoral, and just plain old wrong.

on edit:

point being, if Foley was 24 then age of consent is 16, which I do believe was your question in the first place. But Foley is in his 50's which makes 16 non-consensual.

[seabeyond]

30. my question is, did he break the law. the op is why fbi isn't in it

or arrested? why this would go into battle with anyone on this board, i dont get. truth is not a bad thing. if it does not break law, then it doesn't. i am not going ot say he broke law if he didn't

i clearly said regardless it is disgusting, wrong and should be punished. to have him as child advocate is ludicrous. to want truth is the right thing

i am not looking for a way to get this man off the hook, so please do not imply that, it is offensive

hastert and others covered up. they should be penalized also

this party runs on family values. they should all feel shame and disgust

this was kept from democrats, this should be addressed

[Maine-ah]

31. sorry if you were offended, I wasn't implying anything,

your posts read that way, to me anyway.

[seabeyond]

33. cool. seeing a couple things on the law in another thread

something about federally it is 17. but not seeingthat it would apply to foley situation. the thing is,i DO want the facts. because i amalways mouthing off in the red of texas. i better know what i am talking about

[TahitiNut]

34. Laws are different in each state. Florida has the 2-tier age-of-consent .

*IF* the laws of the State of Florida apply (which is NOT clear) then the age-of-consent test is ...

FLORIDA ........... 18

The age of sexual consent is 16 for adults who are under 24 years of age, or if the adult that is 24 years of age or older is married to the minor. For adults who are 24 and over and not married to the minor, the age of sexual consent is 18.

It's not clear that Florida's statutes apply, but it's probably irrelevant since there's no indication that there was physical contact, let alone sexual contact. Erotic communication isn't (imho) "sexual activity" in the sense of any such laws.

[Yupster]

32. Maybe sexual harrassment

since it occured in the workplace.

In the Dateline stings, the children are always under the age of consent, and they tell the target to bring two specific things with them which proves intent to commit the crime.

As far as Foley goes, I don't know what the ages of consent are wherever he did his messages from, and if the boys were below the age of consent, I don't know if there's a way to prove he intended to have sex with them, rather than just talk dirty, ala O'Reilly.

I think sexual harrassment would be the way the investigators would go.

[maddezmom]

22. couple of DU links here

Agencies consider whether Foley should face charges
WASHINGTON — A spokesman for the Florida Department of Law Enforcement confirmed late Saturday the agency is deciding whether to press charges against former U.S. Rep. Mark Foley, who hastily resigned from office Friday.

"We will be discussing this matter with the FBI in an effort to determine if there are grounds for a criminal investigation and if so, who has jurisdiction," said Tom Berlinger, chief media spokesman for the FDLE.

Berlinger said the decision would be made this week. He added the FDLE had not contacted Foley about the matter.

FBI officials could not be reached for comment Saturday.

http://www1.tcpalm.com/tcp/florida_news/article/0,2820,...

more: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=2538833&mesg_id=2538833



Bush admin, refused to investigate Foley case
http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/09/gop-congressman...

3. Taking the lead from House Republicans, Bush Administration refusing to investigate child sex predator, even though the FBI was given copies of the emails by CREW back in July.

At the Justice Department, an official said that there was no investigation under way but that the agency had “real interest” in examining the circumstances to see if any crimes were committed.

CREW gave the FBI the emails two months ago. The FBI isn't investigating, but says they're interested in seeing if any crime was committed, but don't plan to investigate. Uh, apparently not that much interest. Then again, it's only a child sex offender.

It's good to know that George Bush doesn't care about child sex predators even two days after the story becomes a national scandal. How would Bush feel if some 52 year old guy asked Jenna and Barbara, at the age of 16, if he made them feel horny, and then asked to describe how they masturbate? How is this any different than Denny Hastert, Shimkus and the rest of the House Republicans refusing to investigate Foley when they knew about this last year? It's not.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=364&topic_id=2272935

[moc]

23. Thank you!

[maddezmom]

25. you're welcome

:hi:

[BlooInBloo]

35. I'm glad you're so knowledgeable!

Please tell me EXACTLY which crimes, under which juridictions "what he did" should be charged under?

Alternatively, we can wait for the FBI to perform the investigation that's been opened. But I'd rather let you decide, since you're clearly more knowledgeable.

[TahitiNut]

36. (sigh) The posse of vigilantes has been formed.

It's hard to keep a firm grasp on the facts when one's hands are full of tar, feathers, and rails. Foley sure isn't someone I'd support to be a Scoutmaster, but I've not seen anything yet that gives "probable cause" for criminal charges.

I would've preferred seeing him get eaten in a feeding frenzy of homophobes and 'values coalition' running amok. "Live by the (pork) sword; die by the (pork) sword."

Since I don't see "evil" in homosexuality, don't see "evil" in phone sex or internet chat sex, and it's not clear that there was "sexual activity" so age-of-consent isn't a legal issue, and since such communications were (so far) with FORMER pages it's not workplace sexual harassment ... I just don't see the applicability of a lot of the spittle-festooned rhetoric being thrown around. As a liberal, I'm obliged to afford Foley the same civil protections as I'd afford anyone - so I'm not inclined to allege law-breaking. Since one man's perversion is another man's Saturday night, I won't call him a pervert, either - even though it sounds good. At most, I'd say he was a sexual predator, and that might be a bit of a stretch.

Disgusting? Yep. Hypocritical? Yep. Unworthy of trust? Ubetcha.

I'm not above feeling some schadenfreude, though. :evilgrin: