Hey, there! Log in / Register
Lawyer for cop charged with sending teen girl dick pics doubts they're the first dick pics she's ever seen
By adamg on Sat, 01/23/2016 - 11:34am
The Herald reports on comments by the lawyer for Edwin Guzman, a BPD sergeant facing charges in Quincy of dissemination of harmful material to a minor and annoying and accosting behavior, and how he doubts the photos were really that troubling to her.
"You can’t tell me someone her age has never seen a picture of a penis on the Internet," Anderson said.
Neighborhoods:
Topics:
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
That moment...
...when you run out of ideas for a defense.
And now ...
we have a good idea of what Mr. Anderson spends his spare time doing.
And he has plenty of spare time
According to the Herald article, he's collecting his full $93,000 salary from the Boston Police Department without having to report for work until this case is settled.
Kenneth Anderson, Esq is Edwin Guzman's defense council
Anderson is a moron to make an argument about the lack of innocence of his client's victim but that may be his only option since she filed the complaint and has evidence.
How would they validate the evidence in court? Mr Guzman would you please show us you penis?
The obvious question is what were his motives. I don't want to know the answer, neither did the 16 yo who filed the complaint.
She's 16. He's a 38 year old male who is a police officer. He's paid to enforce the law and be trustworthy.
Collective bargaining agreement says he gets paid by the public while the case is adjudicated. Innocent, etc.
Who hired him w/o psych eval
That's the (protect and serve ) defense? Amazing. She seen a dick before.
Also,
I notwatched this on the TV news yesterday. Did all the TV people read the cop's name as "Guhzman"? Because on Miami Vice, they always pronounced it "Goozmon."
Short version ...
She's a certain type of teen, you know (wink nudge). It's okay to victimize her, right?
excellent observation
She's like that so he didn't do anything wrong.
although...
if youve seen one dick... you havent seen em all
You mean she's seen
attorney Anderson?
Good for the gander
I'm sure this punk's prison boyfriend will say the same thing.
If rape isn't funny when it
If rape isn't funny when it happens to women, it shouldn't be funny when it happens to men.
i agree
I think that "joke" comes from a widely held belief that justice is when a perpetrator suffers the same or equivalent harm or pain they caused. That is retribution and its based on an old testament principle, eye for an eye. It calls for harming the one who did the harm. It's an equal pain argument. What's implied but not necessarily true, is that their suffering makes them understand the harm they've done and motivates them to stop doing it. That's the other theory of justice, when the perpetrator understands the harm they've done and they choose to stop doing harm. That justice includes rehabilitation.
An actual case:
Comm. v. Mititello 66 Mass. App. Ct. 325 (2006)
Frank Militello showed photos from a playboy magazine to boys aged 9-13. The magazine could not be introduced into evidence so testimony of the boys is what the court relied on. The photos were described as "women naked on the top and the bottom, full complete pictures of naked girls lying down".
The court ruled that since the boys only saw photos of naked women and that there was no mention of sexual concuct or excitement, it could not be determined that the material lacked literary artistic political or scientific value.
That being said, material that is Harmful to a minor is described as " contrary to community standards and lacks academic value".
I don't think the cop has a shot here, unless his Johnson is some sort of artistic masterpiece.
Anyone remember artist Robert Maplethorpe?
- the photographer, and I don't mean his beautiful flower photos! He died from AIDS -to give you a hint on his subject matter.
or former US Representative Anthony Weiner?
Quit while you're behind
Please.
more than one definition for dick in this case.
woah
Wow.. just wow at that comment. Doesn't matter anyways, he shouldn't have sent them.
I know, right?
Same "logic" as saying "well, it wasn't like she was still a virgin" as a justification for sexual assault.
PENIS
The issue is not whether she has see one before but what was this pervert thinking when he sent it.
Stupid law
with the age of sexual consent at 16 in Mass, why is seeing a mere photo by someone 16-18 considered harmful? That makes zero sense.
As an aside, a friend asked me about content filters for computers. Her son is entering puberty and has discovered pornhub. Laws need to keep up with reality because kids have already at least seen pictures if not the actual body parts.
Nope
Nope. That's not the law. The age of consent is 16 if your partner is less than two years older. Full age of consent is 18.
In any case, the charges here have nothing to do with the age of consent. They have much to do with the lack of consent. Sending somebody pictures of your genitals is sexual harassment if they do not want to see them. The relative ages only matter if additional charges are sought, as they are in this case (and should be in the case of a cop sexually harassing a minor).
No it is 16 Swirrly.
You are probably thinking of penalties for statutory rape for various age differences (different penalties if a 13 year old has sex with a 9 year old, or a 25 year old has sex with a 9 year old).
Interesting
This is what they were telling the kids at MHS.
In any case, the age of consent is moot here. This was not a consensual relationship issue, but harassment. Being old enough to say yes doesn't mean that you are no longer allowed to say no.
It's almost as if you should
It's almost as if you should do your research first before emphatically chiming in
Depends on which law you pick
This one is still on the books, and says that you can't entice minors:
How many children do you have, Anontroll? Ages?
About your chiming in SwirlyGrrly
Next time you 'chime in' in the comment section of a blog, don't be emphatic.
Instead, make your point weakly and vaguely.
Sexual harassment is different
and if that's the case, that should be the charges made. Completely independant of an age issue. You are conflating the two.
Again, completely stupid that a 16 year old can have unlimited sex with a guy, but not see a picture of him naked. That is what is wrong about the law.
No. You were conflating the two.
I made a clear distinction. I even split it out into a different paragraph.
You, on the other hand, stated that it was okay to send a dick pick because she was past the age of consent.
Mark is pro dick pic and pro justice
..and because of Anthony Weiner and Robert Mapplethope, it's ok for Officer Guzman to send the 16yo girl a photo of his junk, because that's a perfectly reasonable and legal way for a 38yo man to solicit a sexual relationship with a 16yo woman.
No, there is a difference between not OK and illegal
No, I don't think its OK for a man to send dick picks to a 16 year old. I just don't think the harm or injury rises to the point of illegality or being a felony when someone that age is legally allowed to see, touch, and play with a dick in person, and most likely has already been exposed by choice to such pictures and lived.
Context is everything
You really don't see the difference? Being "legally allowed to see, touch and play with a dick in person" has nothing to do with the case here.
You're creating a false equivalency. If you don't see the difference between a girl that age exploring her sexuality with someone and a 38 year old cop (i.e. an authority figure) sending her pictures of his dick then you really are standing on a very small island when it comes to morality.
The only point I'm going to concede to Markkk is....
Legally this cop (or anyone) and a 16 year old girl could date, have sex, and marry each other.
But if the cop had a naked picture of her, or sent her pornography, it would be a felony.
I feel like
I know too much about markkk already.
Will we be reading about his neighborly guidance in the Herald next month?
>As an aside, a friend asked
>As an aside, a friend asked me about content filters for computers. Her son is entering puberty and has discovered pornhub. Laws need to keep up with reality because kids have already at least seen pictures if not the actual body parts.
/hosts.ini
mere
"mere"
But has someone her age ...
seen a picture of _a cop's_ penis on the Internet?
Yeah
but I'll bet she's never seen a dick in a three piece suit before.
He should not only be fired
He should not only be fired but serve prison time. The DA is TOO SOFT on punishing cops or former Boston Police Officers.
unwanted sexual solicitation
This is unwanted sexual solicitation via an illegal means that she said offended her sensibilities. It was an overture that many people young or older would be offended by and perhaps more so because of his identity as a law enforcement officer. I think it scared her. In a moment, her trust relationship changed. .
If he is found guilty and I were the judge, I'd want to know if he's done this with other young girls. He needs help to understand his problem. If this incident mirrors similar incidents in his history, then I'd bet he had his own trauma which he hasn't processed. That's what humans with traumatic psychological injuries do, replay them repeatedly in their minds and in their lives. Incarceration would let him no he'll lose his freedom for doing this. That alone wouldn't get him closer to understand what's f*cked up about it and how to conduct himself without violating the law and the trust of people he likes. Everything I wrote in this comment is conjecture, have at it.
The problem is that it isn't always "unwanted"
I hate to admit it, but 16 year olds can consent to sex, but cannot consent to anyone sending them lewd materials.
I don't know the particulars of this case, but many times a parent will find things on a kids phone and that starts the process. If the girl complained first, it most certainly makes a stronger case of course.
I would't wish this on the victim but
wouldn't it be poetic justice to have Anderson have to argue the Constitutionality of the admittance as evidence of a penis pic before thee US Supreme Court? It would follow him through his obituary.
I get what he's saying
If dick pics were as commonplace as soda ads as you walked down the street, it would be hard to call them shocking any more. If you go online and are inundated with penises, then how can one more have done irreparable harm to your sensitivities since you still choose to go online where they are unavoidable and accepted and commonplace.
But, first, they aren't that commonplace online and there are plenty of ways to use the internet that won't show you a penis at all.
Second, context is king. I may expect to see a penis or two as I browse the internet because they are occasionally unavoidable. However, I don't expect to ever find one in my text messages. Thus, you lose, councilor.
C+ for effort though.