Man Claims Right To Have Sex With Boys

Joe Wordsworth

Logician
Joined
Apr 22, 2004
Posts
4,085
Wow.

......

Ohio Man Claims Right To Have Sex With Boys
Admitted Pedophile Says Children Can Consent


CLEVELAND -- It was probably not a defense the court had heard before.

A suburban Cleveland man accused of sexually assaulting nine disabled boys told a judge Wednesday that his apartment was a religious sanctuary where smoking marijuana and having sex with children are sacred rituals protected by civil rights laws.

The admitted pedophile offered a surprising defense Wednesday to 74 charges of rape, drugs and pandering obscenity to minors.

Appearing in an Ohio court for a pretrial hearing, Phillip Distasio, 34, of Rocky River, Ohio, said he was a pedophile.

He told the judge, "I'm a pedophile. I've been a pedophile for 20 years. The only reason I'm charged with rape is that no one believes a child can consent to sex. The role of my ministry is to get these cases out of the courtrooms."

Distasio, a self-professed pagan friar, is representing himself on 74 charges. He said he's the leader of a church called Arcadian Fields Ministries, and that some of his congregants are among the victims in his case.

The judge told Distasio to confine his arguments to secular laws at his trial, scheduled to begin Sept. 11.

"If you want to challenge the law, that's your right to do so," Judge Kathleen Sutula said. "But we're going to follow the laws of Ohio in this courtroom."

Cuyahoga County Bill Mason said Distasio was arrested after he wanted to write a blog for the Lakewood Library. Officials noticed something was wrong and notified Rocky River police.

Distasio was arrested on charges he molested two disabled boys he was tutoring at his home. He's also accused of raping seven other autistic children at a Cleveland school for special-needs students, The Plain Dealer reported. All but one of the boys was under 13, which carries a mandatory life-in-prison sentence if he is convicted, the paper reported.

Police said they found journals at Distasio's apartment in which he described his illegal activities, along with child pornography and videotapes of him engaged in sex with boys, The Plain Dealer reported

"Not all pedophilia is bad, and sex [with boys] can be healthy," Distasio told the court.

According to the journals, two of Distasio's victims were so helpless they could never tell anyone what happened.

"The defendant describes acts in which he had autistic children and he did what I would call sadistic sexual acts with these children," said Mason.

The school he ran from his apartment was called Class Cutters. According to Distasio's Web site, students and parents chose the curriculum in the school for unique children.

But prosecutors said it was little more than a trap that snared one victim and then another.

"Like all predators, he used this one child to bring other children to him and that's what was happening, and that's how he got his second victim," said Mason.

And prosecutors believe there may be more victims.

Distasio has a history of working with children dating back 10 years.

Prosecutors said he could be sentenced to life in prison if convicted.
 
You've got to be fucking kidding me. I can conjure up no response to this that doesn't involve some manner of extreme violence.

If this guy gets any time in prison I don't think he'd last a week once his fellow inmates find out why he's in there.
 
Remember how that one thread started with talk about the death penalty and I said that the decision was situational for me?

I'll pull the trigger personally here.
 
Belegon said:
Remember how that one thread started with talk about the death penalty and I said that the decision was situational for me?

I'll pull the trigger personally here.

Sorry, but something like this requires a little more creativity than a bullet to the head. I'm thinking something involving dogs, barbed wire, and a cutting torch.
 
Oddly enough. he may actually have a defense based on Constitutionally Guaranteed Religious Freedom. However, I sorta doubt it will fly.

Fortunately, the best part of this court case is the old adage: The lawyer who defends himself has a fool for a client. :D
 
Belegon said:
Remember how that one thread started with talk about the death penalty and I said that the decision was situational for me?

I'll pull the trigger personally here.

I'll buy you the bullets, and the powder, and the gun (or an electric chair, whichever you prefer).
 
Children are not equiped with the self knowledge and responsibilty to consent to sex, especially those with mental handicaps. The fact that he chose to victimize the most vulnerable goes to show how base a predator he is.
 
Belegon said:
Remember how that one thread started with talk about the death penalty and I said that the decision was situational for me?

I'll pull the trigger personally here.
Lee's right, you won't have to. No matter where they put him, his fellow inmates will find him. Dahmer was in solitary for life...did you notice the good it did him? I'm against the death penalty, but fine with prison justice. They'll be far more creative than a bullet, followed by a comfy sleep for the dirtbag.
 
Joe Wordsworth said:
I'm against both... because I can't find a position to rationally divide one from the other.
It's simple. The state doesn't have the right to execute someone who is at their mercy (in my opinion). A criminal getting jumped by a bunch of other criminals...that's just what happens when you play with fire. I'm not saying we should open the doors and let them take control, but they have ways of handling these things. One thing is for certain, I don't believe this guy deserves EXTRA protection. He should be in general population and have to explain his theories to his fellow inmates. If they disapprove of his actions, well...that's just life.
 
S-Des said:
It's simple. The state doesn't have the right to execute someone who is at their mercy (in my opinion). A criminal getting jumped by a bunch of other criminals...that's just what happens when you play with fire. I'm not saying we should open the doors and let them take control, but they have ways of handling these things. One thing is for certain, I don't believe this guy deserves EXTRA protection. He should be in general population and have to explain his theories to his fellow inmates. If they disapprove of his actions, well...that's just life.
I just can't get behind that.
 
Doesn't the legal system only apply to humans?
This thing is not human, so human laws of decency need not apply. Exterminate it, in the most painful and slow way you can come up with.
 
Joe Wordsworth said:
I'm against both... because I can't find a position to rationally divide one from the other.
Logicially and intellectually, I agree with you. Emotionally, I have a hard time feeling sorry for a child molester being attacked by fellow inmates. That said, I'm not proud of it.
 
My. God.

And by that, I mean my god, not his one who regards abusing autistic children and then claiming they consented and are willingly part of a fucked up religion, as okay.

The Earl
 
Its a old story, last I heard I think he got like 26 life terms.

I haven't heard if he has been kilt in prison yet, but then, that wouldn't really be news.

The story was bilked by everyone right and left and out in space for things it had nothing to do with. He was a criminal, all politics aside, and tried and convicted and sentenced.

His crimes were especially sicko, and I agree with the judges decision that he should never be allowed out of prison..
 
Jenny_Jackson said:
Oddly enough. he may actually have a defense based on Constitutionally Guaranteed Religious Freedom. However, I sorta doubt it will fly.

Fortunately, the best part of this court case is the old adage: The lawyer who defends himself has a fool for a client. :D

It wouldn't fly. Free exercise does not extend to acts that are patently illegal. Suppose I found a church and one of the tenets of the sect is that we should all rob convenience stores and shoot the clerks.

Another sad part is that, after this slimeball starts doing his time, he will claim the judge should not have allowed him to defend himself. That way, he would get two chances in court.
 
Lisa Denton said:
Its a old story, last I heard I think he got like 26 life terms.

I haven't heard if he has been kilt in prison yet, but then, that wouldn't really be news.

The story was bilked by everyone right and left and out in space for things it had nothing to do with. He was a criminal, all politics aside, and tried and convicted and sentenced.

His crimes were especially sicko, and I agree with the judges decision that he should never be allowed out of prison..
I seriously don't think he expected anything less either. He knew he was heading to a small cell for the rest of his life, and this was his way to either look insane or just make a political statement. As a statement it has the same chance to fly as a ton of bricks, and unless he's dumb as a tapeworm, he knows that. It's pedophile attention whoring for the sake of it, NAMBLA style.
 
minsue said:
Logicially and intellectually, I agree with you. Emotionally, I have a hard time feeling sorry for a child molester being attacked by fellow inmates. That said, I'm not proud of it.

I'm with you, here. I don't think I could wish a beating on anyone...but it is hard to get upset on behalf of this...monster.
 
Boxlicker101 said:
It wouldn't fly. Free exercise does not extend to acts that are patently illegal. Suppose I found a church and one of the tenets of the sect is that we should all rob convenience stores and shoot the clerks.

Another sad part is that, after this slimeball starts doing his time, he will claim the judge should not have allowed him to defend himself. That way, he would get two chances in court.
I didn't say it would work, Box... but the defense case could still be made by a really good lawer (which is isn't). It would challenge some legal standards, but would not change them. He would still be found guilty.

If I were representing him, I'd have called him a nut job just for suggesting that defense and coped an insanity defense.
 
minsue said:
Logicially and intellectually, I agree with you. Emotionally, I have a hard time feeling sorry for a child molester being attacked by fellow inmates. That said, I'm not proud of it.

I have no real problem with the child molester being attacked by fellow inmates. If he doesn't like it, why he can assert his legal rights! [The same legal rights the helpless children he used have.]

JMNTHO.
 
When I saw this thread, I thought it was somebody from NAMBLA. Although I have very little positive to say about that group, I believe that even they would frown on raping mentally retarded children.

I don't like the word "molest" as used here. To me, it means bother or irritate or pester. To use it when what you mean is "rape" somehow doesn't seem right.
 
all the above points are good; children require protection; also the mentally or physically handicapped.

that said, i'm not at all keen on the state getting involved in 'protecting' 14-17 years olds. i think these young persons should be treated as mature, and they should be educated, not shepherded and chaperoned by social workers (with the cops at their beck and call) and insulated by high school curricula that exclude books like Catcher in the Rye.
 
Last edited:
Pure said:
all the above points are good; children require protection; also the mentally or physically handicapped.

that said, i'm not at all keen on the state getting involved in 'protecting' 14-17 years olds. i think these young persons should be treated as mature, and they should be educated, not shepherded and chaperoned by social workers (with the cops at their beck and call) and insulated by high school curricula that exclude books like Catcher in the Rye.

These were autistic children, Pure. Surely you're not going to claim that someone with severe disabilities is as capable as a normally functioning person of the same physical age?
 
Back
Top