5 comments

I guess local LE forgot to inform the Feds about the Sting

Feb 25, 2015, 4:38 AM

Looks like a "high up" fed got with his pants down. Anyone willing to bet this guy goes on paid suspension for a few weeks and is back to work. One of the problems with make all sex illegal is that it promotes shit like underage prostitution and the government powerful unable it. This guy either ignored a warning there was a sting going on or the local LE did not tell the feds so they could warn the power pervs.

foxnews.com

Remember no crime is to great (other than promoting smaller government) to lose your job if you work for the government or a school.

comments (5)

Tiredtraveler10 years ago

damned auto correct it should have been 'problems with making all' ..

rickdugan10 years ago

Tired, he's done. Even federal civil servants can be fired - it just takes a lot more to justify firing them. In most instances, the steps and paperwork involved are so onerous that it is easier for their managers problem employees in a corner and assign them some low risk tasks, but this guy solicited a minor for sex. This guy is also fa enough up the food chain that he falls under one of the Senior Executive categories, which do not have the same civil servant protections and are much easier to replace than line employees.

Assuming he doesn't end up in prison, his next stop is the unemployment line. He is utterly screwed. Even a fast food joint won't hire a 40-something year old guy with a conviction for soliciting sex with a minor.

Papi_Chulo10 years ago

He’s not just accused of soliciting sex; but soliciting sex w/ a minor – that is a whole other ball of wax.

Per the article:

“… Police won't say who initiated the contact in the sting operation that led to his arrest. A spokesman for the Fairfax County police said the department has a proactive child exploitation unit that makes as many as 100 arrests per year of people allegedly seeking sex with minors …”

No doubt knowingly soliciting sex w/ a minor is a no-no; but the statement by the local LE of “the department has a proactive child exploitation unit” concerns me that often times “proactive” LE can be overzealous in trying to catch people (e.g. like when cops hide at an intersection just waiting for any little thing so they can issue a traffic citation).

It could be the defendant wasn’t fully aware he was dealing w/ a minor; the article really does not state he was fully aware.

If it’s proven he was fully aware; then there is a price to be paid.

Papi_Chulo10 years ago

“… the department has a proactive child exploitation unit that makes as many as 100 arrests per year …”

w/ its “proactiveness” they just manage 100 arrests a year – if they were as “proactive” w.r.t all P4P; that number would probably be 100x – point being that underage or trafficked P4P seems to be a very small % yet anti “P4Pers” often make it sound like it’s the norm.

mjx0110 years ago

It all depends on how good this guy's lawyers are.