Judge says convicted molester can hunt

[Dave Davis]

NORRISTOWN -- A convicted child molester can possess a gun so he can go hunting while on probation, a Montgomery County judge has ruled.


David Raymond Giese, 47, formerly of Lower Providence, shall be permitted to engage in hunting activities and possess hunting weapons, Judge William J. Furber Jr. ruled, according to a court order filed Wednesday.



"This permission is subject to revocation by the Montgomery County Adult Probation and Parole Department in its sole discretion at any time," Furber wrote in the order. Giese sought the judge’s permission while he completes the probationary part of a sentence he received in 2004 for having indecent contact with a 14-year-old girl.

"Prior to (Giese’s) apprehension ... defendant was an avid hunter of game," defense lawyer Peter E. Bort previously wrote in a court document requesting that Giese be permitted to carry weapons solely for the purpose of hunting. Bort said county probation officers do not oppose Giese’s request.

Furber, who imposed Giese’s punishment, had to address the issue because it involved an exception to Giese’s probation conditions.

On Feb. 5, 2004, Giese, formerly of Pawlings Road, pleaded guilty to misdemeanor charges of indecent assault and corruption of a minor in connection with inappropriate contact he had with a 14-year-old girl in the township in July 2003. Giese touched and fondled the girl’s body in an inappropriate manner when she was in his company at a township residence on July 27, 2003, according to a criminal complaint.

As part of a plea agreement, Furber sentenced Giese to six to 23 months in jail to be followed by three years’ probation. Giese, who also listed an address in the 1800 block of West Marshall Street, Norristown, was paroled after serving his minimum sentence and is currently serving the remainder of his probation.

 

[DRMMR02]

I'm gonna go out a limb and say, so what? His crimes really have nothing to do with guns or any weapons. And if he did feel like killing someone, whether they be another 47 year old man, or a 14 year old girl, he doesn't need a gun to do it. He can buy a knife for a few bucks. This article seems to going by the antis' playbook of "emotion a + emotion b = guns are bad". You take the emotional response that a child molestor triggers, add "now he has a gun" and you get "will someone PLEASE think about the CHILDREN?!?!?!"

I think he should be in prison for molesting children. But I really don't see where hunting or guns have anything to do with that.

 

[gego]

If the punishment for the crime does not include the death sentence, then once the punishment is over and he is released, the offender should have the same right as anyone else to defend his life.

As a practical matter, if the bad guy is not going to respect the law once he is released, then it really does not matter what the law about gun ownership is as he is not likely to respect the gun law any more than any other law, so exconvicts owning guns same as anyone else does not bother me.

If the law prevented crime, then there would be no cirme.

 

[22-rimfire]

I tend to agree with the ruling. This was not a felony charge. I feel sure they did pyschological testing and probably determined that he did not have violent tendancies. We also do not know all the circumstances of the charge to which he pleaded guilty. I guess this a another social experiment.

...pleaded guilty to misdemeanor charges of indecent assault and corruption of a minor in connection with inappropriate contact he had with a 14-year-old girl

 

[LanEvo`]

I'm not particularly disturbed by the notion that he'll have access to hunting rifles. You don't need hunting rifles to molest kids. I don't really see a connection here.

 

[Jim Watson]

I am more concerned that the girl did not have a father or big brother who would make sure Mr Giese was completely out of the picture.

 

[Manedwolf]

Of course, I personally feel that convicted child molestation should be a capital offense, as they literally kill a kid's childhood innocence, and it's gone forever. The kid will be in counseling the rest of their lives. It will affect any relationship they might have, likely.

To me, that's worthy of at least a life sentence, if not death by hanging.

I'd also not charge a parent who killed someone who molested their child with anything at all.

 

[LoveMyCountry]

mp510 said - It is a federal offense for a felon to possess a firearm, whether be it for hunting, target shooting, or any other purpose.His maximum sentence could have been more than 1 year so he's cooked, unless he wants to go BP hunting...or use a pre-1899

From the article -

pleaded guilty to misdemeanor charges

Did I miss something?

LoveMyCountry

 

[mp510]

Thanks. My error. Misread with the 6-23 month term.

 

[Phenom]

The guy is a flat out pervert. Someone needs to smack that judge upside the head.

 

[TallPine]

We have no idea of the exact nature of the original charge. It could have been something as innocent as a friendly hug which was somehow resented later for some reason. It is a paradox that while real felonious child molesters are released on parole or probation (or never even prosecuted), our society has such a phobia that innocent actions are sometimes construed as molestation.

And that comes from someone who thinks that actual child molesters should be hunted


Regardless... IMO the firearms possesion/use issue is a non-sequitar. Either an individual is dangerous and should be in prison (or executed) or they should have a chance to start their lives over like everyone else (acknowledging that while still on probation/parole the rules can be different).

 

[Tommygunn]

We have no idea of the exact nature of the original charge. It could have been something as innocent as a friendly hug which was somehow resented later for some reason. It is a paradox that while real felonious child molesters are released on parole or probation (or never even prosecuted), our society has such a phobia that innocent actions are sometimes construed as molestation.

There was a case (I have forgotten where) in which a man driving down a street jammed on his brakes and stopped because a local girl had run out into the road. He got out of the car, and as I recall, grabbed the girl's shoulders as he yelled at her about running out into the road. She complained to her father, who called the police, and the man was arrested.
The short of it is that he was convicted of sexually molesting the kid. Now, perhaps grabbing the kid was wrong even though her running into the road scarred him. But the idea he's a "pervert" is balogna!
There, but for the "Grace of God," goes any of us.

Listen, real perverts who sexually molest kids should be imprisoned until the sun turns into a burned out husk, for sure...but can't we atleast GET IT RIGHT?????

 

[NineseveN]

I agree with the majority of sentiment thus far. This is a good call, though hard for some to swallow I imagine.

 

[Ben Shepherd]

No free man shall ever be barred from the use of arms....

Thomas Jefferson, IIRC.

The exact charges, regardless of our personal feelings towards them, are irrelivant at this point.

 

[Sean Dempsey]

This wouldn't be an issue if sexual offenders and child molesters were dealt with properly by the legal system.

And by properly, I mean executed.

My wife was raped and/or sexually abused pretty much ever day by her step-dad from the time she was 3, til she was 11. She finally called the cops, but her mom refused to let her take the stand.

He did 4 months since without the girls testimony (my wife), they didn't have enough hard evidence to convict.

but yeah, he should have all his rights and privledges. He did his time and paid his debt to society, give him whatever he wants and a parade.

(also, I know there are people here who will say "well how can we trust what your wife says?", so don't bother even posting.)

 

[razorburn]

^I'm with you. Child molestation and rape should be an offense deserving of execution. Regardless of law, I know if I had a wife or daughter molested, if the rapist was released so quickly I would hunt him down and execute him myself. Any time served in jail or other punishment I would receive would be worth it to me.

 

[Thin Black Line]

I've done 100s of child sexual abuse investigations and interviewed 1000s
of victims over the years. The judge's ruling was in accordance with our
society's pendulum swing to the other direction over the last few years in
which children are now less valued and sex crimes in general are down-played
as a "real" crime.

The people who are posting here about the perp's "rights" need to get a
clue. I could really give a cr@p that he was an "avid hunter" before his
crime. He did wrong, he loses out on those things in life that he found
happiness in. He should've thought of that before his 47 year old hands
began fondling a 14 y-o. He has been convicted of a crime and he
is not a free man. There are supposed to be consequences when a
person does something wrong. What's next? Are you guys going to argue
that a probation officer is violating his 4A rights when they check his
computer from time to time for child porn (as is often required for perps
under probation for sex crimes)? However, I doubt the probation officers
in this case are even doing that given that they sound asleep at the wheel.

The short of it is that he was convicted of sexually molesting the kid.

Please post the state, county and cause number because I'd be interested in
the details from the investigative reports that are not known here. It would
help us all here if you could go down to the courthouse get a copy, scan it
and post it here. After all, it is a public record.

Quite frankly, I can tell you that there are far more cases of people not
going to trial than the rumored so-called miscarriages of justice in these
kind of incidents. And sadly, it's often the third time around investigating
the same guy before you catch him slipping up one way or another and
getting enough to go to trial (copious physical evidence). At that point,
we still have to contend with a county prosecutor worried about his batting
average and the possible 70 year-old juror who doesn't even believe child
sexual abuse is possible in this world. They, too, don't have a clue either.

 

[Vitamin G]

Slippery slope?

Sometime in 2008...

"Your Honor,
I know I was convicted of that horrible crime with that 8 year old girl, for which I am geniunely sorry, and will face my punishment in the next life, even after the sentence I faced in front of you X months ago. But I have done my time, and I was wondering if you would be okay with granting a CCW/handgun licence, because child predators are so stigmatized that I fear for my safety..."




Now, I'm all for the intent of the founding fathers, but I'm not sure child molestation was as much an issue in the 1700's as it is today. And by "issue" i mean, "We will not discuss that".
100, 200, 300 years ago it would have been taken care of with rope and/or a shovel. You wouldn't even need a jury. That would require discussion of the problem in a public way.

 

[Thin Black Line]

No free man shall ever be barred from the use of arms....

Thomas Jefferson, IIRC.

The exact charges, regardless of our personal feelings towards them, are irrelivant at this point.

His probation is relevant --he is NOT a free man. This means he is still serving
out time on a sentence for a crime. Probation is prevalent due to restricted
jail space and our "kinder and gentler" culture.

BTW, I need to leave for work now. Just got a report of a daughter being
molested by her father......

 

[Rich K]

Sean, I am sorry for what your wife had to endure. My oledr sister had to deal with that, and I took the physical beatings. I came out of it okay, but she is a mental basket case to this day. Razor, I agree with you completely, child molestation should be a capital offense, punishable by death. Only way to end the molester's cycle.

 

[glummer]

TBL

I could really give a cr@p that he was an "avid hunter" before his
crime. He did wrong, he loses out on those things in life that he found
happiness in.

The problem with that, is we live in a country where we have enemies dedicated to stigmatizing us, and our activities, as inherently deserving of punishment.
Imagine that the law was, "convicted felons not allowed to practice Judaism." Any other religion, OK; but no Judaism. In a country where there existed large, well financed political movements dedicated to destroying Judaism.
Any Jew who would support such a law would be endorsing cultural suicide.

I think we have to be very wary of supporting anything that sets gun-ownership up as different, and deserving different laws.

 

[22-rimfire]

I thought this thread was about a convicted child molester's right to hunt being restored. I have heard all these rants or ones like them on the subject before.

 

[ilbob]

Bort said county probation officers do not oppose Giese’s request.

I suspect that the courts generally go along with what the probation department agrees to. If they do not feel it is a problem, I guess I don't either.

None of us know the circumstances of what he was convicted of. Could be a lot of things. Some much worse than others. If he is not a threat to anyone else, I don't see the harm in letting him hunt. He will be able to in a few years anyway when he completes his sentence. An argument can be made that it is better he start now while there is some supervision rather than later on when there is none.

 

[Lonestar]

I'm all for 2nd admendment rights, however there are a few crimes that I think a person should be harrassed FOR LIFE and child molestation is one of them. He is already on the Megan's law list, and a felon cannot purchase or possess a firearms in the state of PA, so every felon will say they hunt to get around the law. He can still legally bowhunt, but just no firearms. Why should we bend over backward for this pervert. You want to hunt, STOP TOUCHING KIDS!

 

[ilbob]

I've done 100s of child sexual abuse investigations and interviewed 1000s of victims over the years. The judge's ruling was in accordance with our society's pendulum swing to the other direction over the last few years in
which children are now less valued and sex crimes in general are down-played
as a "real" crime.

I think you are seeing the pendulum returning to center after a whole series of cases of people being convicted of very serious crimes on little more than suspicion. When you have high profile cases where people have been convicted solely on the testimony of children who have been interrogated at length by professional interrogators, some of the children are drugged and hypnotized, it is not surprising that people are stepping back and wondering if maybe we went too far.

IMO, child molesters deserve to have the book thrown at them. they are about as low as you get. But they do deserve a fair trial. I am not convinced it is possible to get a fair trial when the primary witness is a young child and there is little in the way of physical evidence. It is just too easy for the child to have a story implanted in his or her little brain either intentionally or otherwise. Children often cannot tell the difference between fantasy and reality for normal every day things. How can you expect to get a straight story after they have been abused. Even older rape victims have a very difficult time with it and it is not unheard of for the wrong person to be charged.