PDA

View Full Version : Tim Pawlenty wiped a serial child molesterís record clean in 2008




bobbyw24
05-24-2011, 05:31 AM
Former Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty formally announced his campaign seeking the GOP nomination for the presidency Monday morning, but by midday, his political past had already caught up to him. Reporting by Minneapolis City Pages' Nick Pinto brought to attention a pardon then-Gov. Pawlenty granted to a sex offender in October 2008, which is sure to haunt the candidate throughout his campaign: the man Pawlenty pardoned was later arrested again for molesting his daughter more than 250 times in an eight-year span, including six years prior to his pardon.

Jeremy Giefer served 45 days in prison in 1994 after being convicted of statutory rape. However, because he married the then-14-year-old girl and stuck around to father the child they conceived together, he begged the state for an extraordinary pardon, which would no longer require Giefer to report himself as a sex offender.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/05/23/tim-pawlenty-wiped-a-serial-child-molesters-record-clean-in-2008/

AndrewD
05-24-2011, 06:48 AM
This needs to go out to every last corner of the internet. I will send this a very direct question on this topic into the news channel for the next debates. I'd like to see Mr. Pawlenty answer for this on the national stage.

Aratus
05-24-2011, 09:25 AM
this is worse than poor huckabee pardonning
the fellow who later on went into a diner
and killed the four cops who were eating lunch.

Aratus
05-24-2011, 09:27 AM
gov. huckabee from a distance could
not predict a psychotic break...
some child molestors are brazen.
they do not change because they can't.

S.Shorland
05-24-2011, 10:59 AM
Pawlenty is mad.

dannno
05-24-2011, 11:13 AM
Anybody know how old is Jeremy Giefer is?

dannno
05-24-2011, 11:20 AM
gov. huckabee from a distance could
not predict a psychotic break...
some child molestors are brazen.
they do not change because they can't.

Ya I wouldn't assume that any guy (how old?) who marries a 14 year old is a child molester, that's been happening for centuries, BUT a child molester could certainly marry a 14-year old, have kids and then molest them as he did.

Obviously it's an unfortunate situation and this guy belongs in jail. Obviously this is going to sink Pawlenty. I just don't know if i have enough details to know whether people should really be all that upset at his very unfortunate decision. I feel horrible for the daughter either way.

dannno
05-24-2011, 11:26 AM
http://www.bluestemprairie.com/bluestemprairie/2011/01/pawlenty-pardon-update-jeremy-giefer-makes-bail-out-of-jail.html

Ok, so Jeremy Giefer is 37 today.... so back in 1994 he was 20 years old when he fathered the child with the 14 year old. I don't think this was a horrible decision by Pawlenty at all. Obviously it had horrible consequences, but there's no reason that I know of why he shouldn't have made the decision when he did.

S.Shorland
05-24-2011, 06:35 PM
It's certainly a different country.A man wanting to marry a 14 year old here would be hung.

reduen
05-24-2011, 07:16 PM
http://www.bluestemprairie.com/bluestemprairie/2011/01/pawlenty-pardon-update-jeremy-giefer-makes-bail-out-of-jail.html

Ok, so Jeremy Giefer is 37 today.... so back in 1994 he was 20 years old when he fathered the child with the 14 year old. I don't think this was a horrible decision by Pawlenty at all. Obviously it had horrible consequences, but there's no reason that I know of why he shouldn't have made the decision when he did.

The way that I see it, if you agree with the law or not, the man did break the law with a 14yr old girl in the first place. I see no reason to believe that a man that would do this type of thing would not do the same thing with somone younger. What good reason would there be to pardon him to the extent that he no longer even had to report as he was originally sentenced?

dannno
05-25-2011, 12:47 PM
The way that I see it, if you agree with the law or not, the man did break the law with a 14yr old girl in the first place.

So what, it's a bullshit law? Even Pawlenty was intelligent enough to see that a 20 year old guy who impregnates a 14 year old, then marries her and tries to have a real relationship is NOT NECESSARILY a child predator and we shouldn't assume that he is. Girls have been settling down and having kids at age 14 for thousands of years, and no statist government is going to change that. Secondly, a 20 year old guy is not that far off maturity wise from a 14 year old girl. Girls develop physically, emotionally and mentally ahead of males.




I see no reason to believe that a man that would do this type of thing would not do the same thing with somone younger.

That is so completely wrong. Many 14 year old girls are fully or near fully developed from a visual standpoint. This statement is so completely wrong I don't even know how to respond, except that there are MILLIONS of guys in the 15-20 age range who would have relations with a 14 year old, but would not have relations with a 12 or 13 year old or younger. That can go for guys above 20 as well, although the older you go, the more your statement becomes true in general.. In other words, if a 30 year old dude is looking for 14 year olds, then he is more likely to be willing to go younger, but STILL not necessarily. It is the difference between pedophilia and hebephilia. You are assuming that all males who are attracted to teenage girls (who are having sex with guys their own age anyway) are attracted to children (who are NOT having sex with guys their own age, or anyone, we hope). That is the big difference here. Someone being attracted to a person who is more than likely already having sex, and is capable of doing so, versus someone who is not. HUGE GRAND CANYON of difference there.



What good reason would there be to pardon him to the extent that he no longer even had to report as he was originally sentenced?

Because even though THIS GUY turned out to be a child predator, not every guy in the 15-20 range who is attracted to certain 14 year olds are child predators.. In fact most of them aren't and I don't think they should be treated this way unless they are actually predators.. This guy just happened to be a child predator who apparently 'settled' for an 'older' girl early on or something.

reduen
05-25-2011, 01:45 PM
So what, it's a bullshit law? Even Pawlenty was intelligent enough to see that a 20 year old guy who impregnates a 14 year old, then marries her and tries to have a real relationship is NOT NECESSARILY a child predator and we shouldn't assume that he is. Girls have been settling down and having kids at age 14 for thousands of years, and no statist government is going to change that. Secondly, a 20 year old guy is not that far off maturity wise from a 14 year old girl. Girls develop physically, emotionally and mentally ahead of males.




That is so completely wrong. Many 14 year old girls are fully or near fully developed from a visual standpoint. This statement is so completely wrong I don't even know how to respond, except that there are MILLIONS of guys in the 15-20 age range who would have relations with a 14 year old, but would not have relations with a 12 or 13 year old or younger. That can go for guys above 20 as well, although the older you go, the more your statement becomes true in general.. In other words, if a 30 year old dude is looking for 14 year olds, then he is more likely to be willing to go younger, but STILL not necessarily. It is the difference between pedophilia and hebephilia. You are assuming that all males who are attracted to teenage girls (who are having sex with guys their own age anyway) are attracted to children (who are NOT having sex with guys their own age, or anyone, we hope). That is the big difference here. Someone being attracted to a person who is more than likely already having sex, and is capable of doing so, versus someone who is not. HUGE GRAND CANYON of difference there.



Because even though THIS GUY turned out to be a child predator, not every guy in the 15-20 range who is attracted to certain 14 year olds are child predators.. In fact most of them aren't and I don't think they should be treated this way unless they are actually predators.. This guy just happened to be a child predator who apparently 'settled' for an 'older' girl early on or something.

What can I say; you make way too many assumptions here to have a credible debate.

Assumptions:

1. "it's a bullshit law"
2. "a 20 year old guy is not that far off maturity wise from a 14 year old girl"
3. "who are having sex with guys their own age anyway"
4. "there are MILLIONS of guys in the 15-20 age range who would have relations with a 14 year old, but would not have relations with a 12 or 13 year old or younger"
5. "etc....."

I was making my point from purely a lawful/legal perspective...

dannno
05-25-2011, 01:55 PM
What can I say; you make way too many assumptions here to have a credible debate.

Assumptions:

1. "it's a bullshit law"

If a 14 year old can legally consent to having sex with another 14 year old, why is it worse if she has sex with a 20 year old who can actually provide for her? Who is more mature, yet close enough in maturity to be mentally and emotionally compatible?




2. "a 20 year old guy is not that far off maturity wise from a 14 year old girl"

Science says that, it's not an assumption. Girls on average develop earlier than guys, so, there are many 14 year old girls out there who are at the same or similar maturity to guys many years older than them.




3. "who are having sex with guys their own age anyway"

Later on I said the same quote with "more than likely" tagged on, one of us missed a tag because I'm pretty sure there is a similar statement attached to that quote that you either purposely or mistakenly missed or I must have forgotten, but the point still stands. There is a huge fucking difference between a 20 year old having sex with a 14 year old who CAN have sex, is probably going to have sex with guys closer to her age anyway, and someone having sex with a child who isn't having sex and isn't really physically able to do so. I don't see how that's an assumption at all, it makes perfect sense.




4. "there are MILLIONS of guys in the 15-20 age range who would have relations with a 14 year old, but would not have relations with a 12 or 13 year old or younger"

That's not an assumption, you have to be kidding me.. I don't remember being in high school and having a bunch of friends who were going after girls in middle school and elementary school, but many of them did go after freshmen. If you think I'm wrong, then you must have skipped growing up or something.




I was making my point from purely a lawful/legal perspective...

Great, you wanna lock me up for smoking weed next?

carmaphob
05-25-2011, 02:08 PM
This story came out last year...

When Jeremy Geifer was charged with 11 counts of sexual misconduct November 18th, Tim Pawlenty might have envisioned his presidential ambitions going up in smoke.

Just over three years ago, the Minnesota governor granted Giefer a pardon extraordinary, voting with the two other members of the Board of Pardons to wipe clean his previous criminal sexual record.

Oops?


In 1993, Giefer, then 19 years old, had fathered a daughter with his girlfriend, who was only 14 years old at the time of conception. He pleaded guilty to statutory rape, but claimed to the Star Tribune that he was being unfairly singled out for sticking around and supporting his girlfriend when other men would have bolted.

read the rest - http://blogs.citypages.com/blotter/2010/11/jeremy_giefer_tim_pawlenty.php

reduen
05-25-2011, 02:24 PM
If a 14 year old can legally consent to having sex with another 14 year old, why is it worse if she has sex with a 20 year old who can actually provide for her? Who is more mature, yet close enough in maturity to be mentally and emotionally compatible?




Science says that, it's not an assumption. Girls on average develop earlier than guys, so, there are many 14 year old girls out there who are at the same or similar maturity to guys many years older than them.




Later on I said the same quote with "more than likely" tagged on, one of us missed a tag because I'm pretty sure there is a similar statement attached to that quote that you either purposely or mistakenly missed or I must have forgotten, but the point still stands. There is a huge fucking difference between a 20 year old having sex with a 14 year old who CAN have sex, is probably going to have sex with guys closer to her age anyway, and someone having sex with a child who isn't having sex and isn't really physically able to do so. I don't see how that's an assumption at all, it makes perfect sense.




That's not an assumption, you have to be kidding me.. I don't remember being in high school and having a bunch of friends who were going after girls in middle school and elementary school, but many of them did go after freshmen. If you think I'm wrong, then you must have skipped growing up or something.



Great, you wanna lock me up for smoking weed next?


I would love to carry on with you a bit more here Danno my man but i gotta go for now... Never fear, I shall return!!!

dannno
05-25-2011, 02:51 PM
This story came out last year...


In 1993, Giefer, then 19 years old, had fathered a daughter with his girlfriend, who was only 14 years old at the time of conception. He pleaded guilty to statutory rape, but claimed to the Star Tribune that he was being unfairly singled out for sticking around and supporting his girlfriend when other men would have bolted.

He made the correct argument, I think the right decision was made.. unfortunately it did not turn out well in the end this time.

Johncjackson
05-25-2011, 09:28 PM
http://www.bluestemprairie.com/bluestemprairie/2011/01/pawlenty-pardon-update-jeremy-giefer-makes-bail-out-of-jail.html

Ok, so Jeremy Giefer is 37 today.... so back in 1994 he was 20 years old when he fathered the child with the 14 year old. I don't think this was a horrible decision by Pawlenty at all. Obviously it had horrible consequences, but there's no reason that I know of why he shouldn't have made the decision when he did.

I agree with you. Politically this is bad for Pawlenty, which is good for us. However, there is nothing really condemnable about his decision. He didn't have the benefit of hindsight and making a judgment based on another crime that hadn't happened yet and he had no way of knowing it would happen.

I've personally never been interested in a 14 year old, even when I was 14. I was into older women ( and no, I wasn't a molested child). However, a late teen or early 20s male ( who is probably developmentally on par with a 14 year old female in many ways) being attracted to a 14 year old girl is not a pedophile ( at least not evidenced by this behavior). Pedophiles/child molesters are into children, who are prepubescent. Most 14 year old females don't fall into that group.

I don't see how people who support Ron Paul on principle/philosophy could justify condemning a pardon decision based on the later activity of the criminal. Based on the facts of the case that he was considering, the original crime seemed to be nothing more than a guy who married a young wife who was not victimized.

What if Ron Paul were in a position to pardon a non-violent marijuana user, and he went on to rape or kill someone? "Ron Paul Pardoned Sadistic Drug-addicted Murder/Rapist." "Well, the guy was a criminal. He broke the law. If he used pot, he will probably do crack and kill people, because he's a criminal."

Johncjackson
05-25-2011, 09:42 PM
It's certainly a different country.A man wanting to marry a 14 year old here would be hung.

I don't know where that is, but throughout history in many parts of the world it was pretty common, including in the "Good Old Days" in the United States. Husbands tend to be older than their wives, and the age of marriage used to be pretty young. Throughout my life, from my observations and those of my parents and grandparents.. it was pretty common for situations like: Freshman girls dating Senior boys ( who were often 18) in high school, high school girls dating college guys, and so on. In fact when I was in High School ( and I'm pretty young) I don't think I remember more than 2-3 girls in my class who even dated guys in our class. Most dated older guys and brought 20-somethings to their prom. I graduated with a girl who dated a 26 year old when she was 15. Then when she was 17 she dated a 13 year old ( they are married now).

My mother was married when she was 17. She saw that as her only option in life really, unless she wanted to live with her parents her whole life. She sure didn't marry a 17 year old boy. My grandparents were 13 and 17 when they started "going together."

I've rarely met any males under the age of 25 ( or even 30) these days who could be called "men" and girls tend to become women a little faster. A 20 and 14 year couple isn't that rare and certainly not a molestation case. If they were 24 and 18, no one would care, while they would probably still be relatively the same level of maturity.

reduen
05-26-2011, 09:37 AM
If a 14 year old can legally consent to having sex with another 14 year old, why is it worse if she has sex with a 20 year old who can actually provide for her? Who is more mature, yet close enough in maturity to be mentally and emotionally compatible?




Science says that, it's not an assumption. Girls on average develop earlier than guys, so, there are many 14 year old girls out there who are at the same or similar maturity to guys many years older than them.




Later on I said the same quote with "more than likely" tagged on, one of us missed a tag because I'm pretty sure there is a similar statement attached to that quote that you either purposely or mistakenly missed or I must have forgotten, but the point still stands. There is a huge fucking difference between a 20 year old having sex with a 14 year old who CAN have sex, is probably going to have sex with guys closer to her age anyway, and someone having sex with a child who isn't having sex and isn't really physically able to do so. I don't see how that's an assumption at all, it makes perfect sense.




That's not an assumption, you have to be kidding me.. I don't remember being in high school and having a bunch of friends who were going after girls in middle school and elementary school, but many of them did go after freshmen. If you think I'm wrong, then you must have skipped growing up or something.



Great, you wanna lock me up for smoking weed next?

lol, Yeah that's it, I skipped growing up or something. Here you again make the assumption that everyon's life experiance must be similar to yours and/or that something is abnormal if not. Come on Danno, I have come to expect so much more from you. However, I will attempt to follow your logic....

In truth I grew up in basically two different worlds. (Thanks for the concern..) I lived in Phoenix, AZ until I was about 13 and then we moved to Mayberry, AR. (Not really Mayberry of course...) and I finished "growing up" there. I have been witness to all the sex, drugs, murder and gang violence that comes from living in a big city and the simple life that comes from living in a town of less than 2000 people. My wife and I had our first child when she was 15 and I was 16. (Both "under age") Most of the people that I knew when I was that age were not sexually active and in fact we were somewhat exiled by everyone when they found out that we were. (Sexually active..)

1. One reason would be that if a 14 yr old does in fact have sex with another 14 yr old, scientifically they are not nearly as likely to transmit a sexual disease to one another nor are they as likely to create another human life and have to worry about providing for.

2. Who is to say that we are dealing with an average guy or an average girls here?

3. Who is to say that they weren't having sex at say... 19-13, 18-12, 17-11, 16-10 etc....? At what point would you personally decide that this is unexceptable?

4. No, I do not want to lock you up for smoking weed. I think it is a bogus law just as you do and I would like to see it changed. Now, if I were a law enforcement officer, I would write you ticket if possible and arrest you if that is what the law required.

Aratus
05-26-2011, 10:04 AM
jerry lee lewis had married a young cousin.
did t~paw pull strings? i had mentally cut
governor huckabee some proverbial slack
over how many of the people he had let
loose who didn't be a repeat offender. i had
not blamed him for doing the pardon. precisely
who the 20 year old was and what he had
done at the time is whether T-Paw has a job
or not. it's up to T-Paw to explain this one...

Aratus
05-26-2011, 10:10 AM
i can remember willie horton and the duke.
if mike huckabee runs in 2016, and none of
the people he gave pardons to do anything
wrong or immoral in the interum, i feel he will
be a significant factor in GOP politics then...

jclay2
05-26-2011, 10:11 AM
I agree with you Danno as well. I also think it would be better if we focused on Pawlenty's positions instead of minor things like a pardon that ended badly.

Krugerrand
05-26-2011, 10:26 AM
Age for marriage (I left out a boat load of 15's):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriageable_age#North_America
* Massachusetts: 18 for first marriage, 14 (male) 12 (female) with parental and judicial consent.[56]
* New Hampshire: 18, 14 for males and 13 for females, in cases of "special cause" with parental consent and court permission.
* New York: 18, 16 with parental consent, 14 with parental and judicial consent.[62]
* Pennsylvania: 18, 16 with parental consent, 14 in case of pregnancy and with the approval of a Judge of the Orphans Court.
* Texas: 18, 16 with parental consent. 14 with judicial consent or if person under 18 had previously married and divorced.

Age of consent is exceptionally complicated in how it varies by state:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_North_America#State_laws

Aratus
05-26-2011, 10:31 AM
jerry lee lewis would have needed a judge up here
to marry his YOUNG second cousin in the way he 1950s did.
i am uncertain about minnisota law. i am a baystater...

Aratus
05-26-2011, 10:33 AM
if the 20 year old's morals at the time
were worse than mr. jerry lee lewis...
t~paw is going to be dogged by this.

Aratus
05-26-2011, 10:33 AM
if the 20 year old's morals are neatly
better than jerry lee lewis's ever were...

Aratus
05-26-2011, 10:34 AM
if...

jmdrake
05-29-2011, 06:18 AM
If a 14 year old can legally consent to having sex with another 14 year old, why is it worse if she has sex with a 20 year old who can actually provide for her? Who is more mature, yet close enough in maturity to be mentally and emotionally compatible?

Who says a 14 year old can legally consent to having sex with another 14 year old in that state? Do you have the statute in hand or are you just making that up? If two 8 year olds are caught playing "doctor" the usual response is not to throw them both in prison, but that doesn't mean that a 20 year old should now be able to molest an 8 year old. Anyway, this story isn't for you. I'm pretty sure you aren't voting for Pawlenty. ;)