The Recidiva sex offender disconnect

[eyer]

But seeing people talk about this as if it were a crime...defamation of character is a crime, cyber bullying is a crime, cyber stalking is a crime

And a woman in her mid to late 20s knowingly and intentionally conducting a cyber BDSM relationship with a 14-year-old kid is not a crime in your full of crap book.

Stuff your allegations shit and defamation fodder up your ass, wannabe...

...if you aren't man enough to discuss the facts of the matter, just keep your mouth shut like the child you are and sit quietly at your little people table.

 

[lemonbread]

Read:

Recidiva the Proud Sex Offender Thread

Tearing other people down will never make yourself better.

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

...if you aren't man enough to discuss the facts of the matter, just keep your mouth shut like the child you are and sit quietly at your little people table.

Now there's some advice you should be taking yourself there little man who wouldn't know a fact if it sneaked up and bit his wrinkled ass.

How's the pitchfork and torch sales going? I think you and Ms_Ann_troll should make a few more threads.. Maybe you'll get some traction.

 

[jomar]

LC, there's a larger context here than just age 16. The original threads are still there to read, but they have been redacted so use your own judgement on that.

 

[1sickbastard]

I figure if he's bugging me he's not bugging someone else who might actually give a damn about his opinion.

Wait a minute...

There are people who actually give a damn about eyer's opinion?

 

[Recidiva]

Wait a minute...

There are people who actually give a damn about eyer's opinion?

Yes, I've counted several.

I know, right?

 

[eyer]

I see Ms_Ann_Troll and Eyer the Liar are busy STILL trying to gather the villagers. Not so many takers in the pitchfork and torch lines huh?

Hey, cuck...

...since you posted you were conducting an online relationship with him too at the same time, was the kid 13 when your wife Recidiva the Proud Sex Offender began her cyber BDSM relationship with him?

I ask because she posted that she'd already been messing around with the kid when she finally found out he was 14, and then chose to keep fooling around with him online at least until he turned 16 and they finally met to fool around in the front seat of a car.

BTW:

Why is it that neither you or your wife Recidiva the Proud Sex Offender ever dispute a word of the links posted here...

Recidiva's Sexual Offense Upon a Minor

...or here:

Recidiva the Proud Sex Offender Thread

 

[eyer]

Tearing other people down will never make yourself better.

That's nice...

...no comment on Recidiva the Proud Sex Offender, in her mid to late twenties, intentionally BDSM cybering with a 14-year-old?

Can you serve her some of your fortune cookie wisdom?

 

[eyer]

Now there's some advice you should be taking yourself there little man who wouldn't know a fact if it sneaked up and bit his wrinkled ass.

How's the pitchfork and torch sales going? I think you and Ms_Ann_troll should make a few more threads.. Maybe you'll get some traction.

Here're the facts...

...why don't you quit cuckoldedly deflecting for your sex offending wife and try to dispute any of them:

Recidiva the Proud Sex Offender Thread

 

[lemonbread]

BTW:

Why is it that neither you or your wife Recidiva the Proud Sex Offender ever dispute a word of the links posted here...

Recidiva's Sexual Offense Upon a Minor

...or here:

Recidiva the Proud Sex Offender Thread

Maybe it's because her actual posts that you linked to in your threads already dispute your claims to begin with. Just sayin.

 

[Recidiva]

Maybe it's because her actual posts that you linked to in your threads already dispute your claims to begin with. Just sayin.

Someone who can read!

 

[eyer]

Wait a minute...

There are people who actually give a damn about eyer's opinion?

It has nothing to do with my opinion, wannabe...

...but everything to do with Recidiva the Proud Sex Offender's acts:

http://forum.literotica.com/showpost.php?p=67370023&postcount=1

You should realize that you belittle others their own stances when you so failingly try to measure your starving ego's wanting, little unit to mine.

 

[eyer]

Maybe it's because her actual posts that you linked to in your threads already dispute your claims to begin with. Just sayin.

Really?

Maybe you'd like to educate me instead of Just say?

 

[smoothg103rd]

Once a boy go through puberty he should be allowed to get some ass. At 16 and think he should of been through puberty, so it doesn't matter.

 

[ms_ann_thrope]

I normally dont get into these types of arguments, but I think weather or not something like that was abuse, regardless of the legality, has everything to with the maturity levels of both partners and whether or not one was coerced or had less power in the relationship, and nothing to do with a physical age gap.

If neither partner was harmed emotionally or physically, the only wrongdoing was if anything done was actually illegal. In my state at least, one can consent to many sexual activities at 15 or 16, so even that question is still up in the air as far as we as outsiders can determine. We were not there. We saw nothing. We know nothing.

We'd have to talk to all of the individuals involved to even come close to any kind of solid argument either way. Maybe we'd best leave it alone before we get ourselves banned though, hm?

What's the weather got to do with it?

 

[lemonbread]

What's the weather got to do with it?

Damn it! And just when I thought I had teh smartz.

I skipped most of highschool. I'm sure I can make a metaphor about barometric pressure or something.

 

[eyer]

Damn it! And just when I thought I had teh smartz.

I skipped most of highschool. I'm sure I can make a metaphor about barometric pressure or something.

How about just pointing out Recidiva the Proud Sex Offender's "actual posts that you linked to in your threads already dispute your claims to begin with"?

Or, were you really...

...Just sayin?

 

[lemonbread]

How about just pointing out Recidiva the Proud Sex Offender's "actual posts that you linked to in your threads already dispute your claims to begin with"?

Or, were you really...

...Just sayin?

I'm lazy and I'm also not one to go dragging other people's business around. But it's your thread, you could read it.

 

[1sickbastard]

It has nothing to do with my opinion, wannabe...

...but everything to do with Recidiva the Proud Sex Offender's acts:

http://forum.literotica.com/showpost.php?p=67370023&postcount=1

You should realize that you belittle others their own stances when you so failingly try to measure your starving ego's wanting, little unit to mine.

Question:
When you label someone as a 'wannable', exactly what is it you think that person wants to be?

And I'm sure the rest of your response made sense to you, but how does it apply to me? Spell it out in no uncertain terms, if you can.

 

[eyer]

I'm lazy and I'm also not one to go dragging other people's business around. But it's your thread, you could read it.

So then, you were "Just sayin"...

...got ya.

 

[eyer]

Question:
When you label someone as a 'wannable', exactly what is it you think that person wants to be?

I don't believe I've ever labeled anyone "wannable"...

...but when you prejudiciously have to allude to my "opinion", aping Recidiva the Proud Sex Offender, you're just showing you wannabe be right instead of understanding the facts of the matter are what determine others' stances on this issue, not your prejudiced opinion of me.

How about you?

Do you support Recidiva the Proud Sex Offender...

...or do you consider an adult woman knowingly and intentionally conducting an online BDSM relationship with a 14-year-old, and then meeting him in person when he's 16 and fooling around with him in the front seat of a car, to be uncompromisingly intolerable?

 

[Colonel Hogan]

Is the problem here that you all don't believe that she had sex with a minor as an adult woman or is it you don't care that she had sex with a minor as an adult woman? These are two distinct issues , or they would be if she hadn't said so in so many words.

And OMG is that her picture in her avatar?

Since I've been unusually quiet in this forum over the past few weeks, but more because I truly value and respect your past contributions to this community, allow me to offer my personal perspective on this issue in the remote possibility that it is a perspective shared by others, and that my framing of it might better help you come to terms with the apparent general lack of shared outrage that you seem to find almost, if not equally, offensive as the offending act itself.

My own ability and/or inclination to overlook, neglect, withhold judgment toward or in any way minimize the intentional criminal torts committed by one person upon another are typically influenced by one or more of the following circumstances:

1. the fortunate fact of my not having been directly harmed in any way by the criminal act of the offender.

2. the lesser comparative status of the criminal act relative to other criminal acts generally, i.e. non-aggravated assault as compared to murder.

3. the lesser comparative status of the criminal act relative to the greater severity of the same or similar criminal offense specifically, i.e. non-aggravated vs. aggravated assault.

4. an expression of remorse by the offender and/or restitution made to and/or an expression of forgiveness by the victim (regardless of remorse or restitution from the offender).

All of these elements act both solely and in combination to form my emotional response to the commission of criminal acts, but they in no way affect my belief as to a defendant's actual guilt or innocence, and their effect as to the intensity (or lack thereof) of my emotional response to someone's guilt should certainly not be confused as my approval of any criminal act.

I can't imagine that the operation and widely varying affect of these considerations would be surprising to anyone. But they seem to be surprising to you.

My father spent much of the latter years of his life active in a Christian ministry for prison inmates. I remember his long friendship with a particular young man who was serving a sentence for involuntary manslaughter. I never asked my father if his relationship with the young man would have been impaired or even possible had I or another family member been the young felon's murdered victim.

Had I made such an inquiry, I don't believe I would have been the least bit surprised had my father responded in either the affirmative or negative extreme. And I would have never for a moment thought that any particular response would have been reflective of my father's moral position with respect to criminal homicide or that his moral opposition to criminal homicide would have necessitated a particular response to such an inquiry, had it been made.

As I say, I suspect many people would agree with me, though I suspect you do not.

 

[1sickbastard]

I don't believe I've ever labeled anyone "wannable"...

Really?

It has nothing to do with my opinion, wannabe...

So was this an intentional lie or are you just that reality adverse?

...but when you prejudiciously have to allude to my "opinion", aping Recidiva the Proud Sex Offender, you're just showing you wannabe be right instead of understanding the facts of the matter are what determine others' stances on this issue, not your prejudiced opinion of me.

I was asking if there was anyone on the GB who actually gave a flying fuck about your opinions. I know I don't. However, I try not to let my personal incredulity interfere with my understanding of demonstrable fact. Someone opined there are some who do give a flying fuck about what you think. I continue to find it difficult to believe, but do accept the possiblity.

How about you?

Do you support Recidiva the Proud Sex Offender...

...or do you consider an adult woman knowingly and intentionally conducting an online BDSM relationship with a 14-year-old, and then meeting him in person when he's 16 and fooling around with him in the front seat of a car, to be uncompromisingly intolerable?

Again, if you have actual, legally admissible evidence, why the fuck are you busy harassing Recivida online and NOT producing that evidence for an actual prosecution in a court of law instead of trying to convict her in the court of public opinion?

Once more, you bloviating, misierable, self-important five pound sack of shit in a one pound sack;
Either put up, for real, or shut the fuck up!

Oh, right, you got nothing but your hate, misery and empty life, which is why you're still here after making a public vow you were going to leave.

Maybe the proper response to you is to respond to every single one of your posts with a direct quote from you that you were going to quit Lit forever.

That way everyone would be continually reminded that your mouth writes checks you ass refuses to cash.

 

[eyer]

Really?

So was this an intentional lie or are you just that reality adverse?

For someone who obviously needs to play Perry Mason online...

...you really should pay attention to the factual evidence, wannabe.

I was asking if there was anyone on the GB who actually gave a flying fuck about your opinions. I know I don't. However, I try not to let my personal incredulity interfere with my understanding of demonstrable fact. Someone opined there are some who do give a flying fuck about what you think. I continue to find it difficult to believe, but do accept the possiblity.

If you ever find any one who gives less of a fvck about what you just had to vent...

...let me know, ok?

Again, if you have actual, legally admissible evidence, why the fuck are you busy harassing Recivida online and NOT producing that evidence for an actual prosecution in a court of law instead of trying to convict her in the court of public opinion?

Here's the evidence, Perry...

...Recidiva the Sex Offender's own testimony verbatim:

Recidiva's Sexual Offense Upon a Minor

Once more, you bloviating, misierable, self-important five pound sack of shit in a one pound sack;
Either put up, for real, or shut the fuck up!

Calm the fvck down, Perry...

...if you don't stop spittling on everyone, we're going to strap you back in your wheelchair and ball gag you.

But, I digress...

Here, again, in her own words verbatim...

...Recidiva the Sex Offender testifies:

1. what she confessed to above was "outside of what is considered lawful";

2. that for what she confessed to above, she "could have been charged with a crime", and

3. "If my daughter or son had a relationship with a person that much older, would I freak out? Hell yes."

Maybe the proper response to you is to respond to every single one of your posts with a direct quote from you that you were going to quit Lit forever.

You may want to try that and see how it works for you...

...anything beats the sap you're playing so perfectly now.

 

[1sickbastard]

For someone who obviously needs to play Perry Mason online...

...you really should pay attention to the factual evidence, wannabe.



If you ever find any one who gives less of a fvck about what you just had to vent...

...let me know, ok?



Here's the evidence, Perry...

...Recidiva the Sex Offender's own testimony verbatim:

Recidiva's Sexual Offense Upon a Minor



Calm the fvck down, Perry...

...if you don't stop spittling on everyone, we're going to strap you back in your wheelchair and ball gag you.

But, I digress...

Here, again, in her own words verbatim...

...Recidiva the Sex Offender testifies:

1. what she confessed to above was "outside of what is considered lawful";

2. that for what she confessed to above, she "could have been charged with a crime", and

3. "If my daughter or son had a relationship with a person that much older, would I freak out? Hell yes."



You may want to try that and see how it works for you...

...anything beats the sap you're playing so perfectly now.

Right, so in other words, you got nothing.
Did you forward your "evidence" to the FBI yet?
If yes, let's see the email and confirmation.
If no, why not? You're ducking your legal obligations if you haven't

By the way, didn't you say you were going to leave Lit forever, or was that just another line of bullshit, neverwas?