From Spree over at Wake Up America
Democratic Lawmaker Sued for Groping Male Page
Amazing that when any type of sexual misconduct is alleged from a Republican it is blared to high heaven and back again and yet this is the first I am hearing about this AP article.
FORT PIERRE, S.D. (AP) State Senator Dan Sutton of Flandreau has been sued for $250,000 in damages by former legislative page Austin Wiese (WEES), who alleges Sutton groped him in a motel room in Fort Pierre.
Wiese's lawsuit alleges two counts of sexual battery and one count of sexual assault. It's a civil lawsuit no criminal charges have been filed.
The suit claims Sutton invited Wiese to stay with him at the motel during the 2006 session.
Court documents say they shared the one bed in the room and that on three nights in a row, Sutton inappropriately touched and fondled Wiese, who then moved out of the room.
Wiese, now 19, says he has suffered mental anguish, shame, indignity, embarrassment, pain and suffering.
He's being represented by former Congressman and Governor Bill Janklow.
Early this year, the state Senate held a hearing on the allegations. The Senate then voted to censure Sutton rather than expel him.
Censure but not expelled... do I sense some sort of double standard here?
NewsBusters notices something else of interest.
Notice that when it is the AP writing they hide the party of this sexual misconduct because it is a Democrat?
Technorati has a list of those discussing this double standard phenomenon that the AP shows so often.
Hypocrisy from the left knows no bounds. Still nothing from them that I have seen about the Democrat and the page though.
Posted by spree at 1:48 PM
Labels: AP, Associated Press, Dan Sutton, Media, Media Bias, Senate
As well as this:
http://neveryetmelted.com/?p=3044
07 Oct 2007
Name That Party
Democrats, Media Bias, Crime, The Mainstream Media
http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber/2007/04/19/aps-name-that-party-smackdown/
.
Is it possible that this act was not illegal?
If so, then there should not even have been censure.
Look, what this guy did disgusts me, but the solution is for people like you and me to stop associating with this fellow, not to start letting the courts get in to people's bedrooms.
Getting monetary damages for verbal sexual harrassment or getting "groped" is a liberal thing, not a conservative thing.
The "victim" should publish the story, and that should make no one want to vote for the state senator anymore. That's all.
Nineteen year old boys get drafted and serve as US Marines. He could probably have taken care of himself. This is not a 110 lb girl we are talking about here. And how much money is the embarassment worth? Sounds like a gold-digger to me.
Oh, and they should let Republican Craig off the hook, too. As tacky as it is, there should be nothing illegal about soliciting sex in a bathroom. But in Craig's case, it points out that he is a hypocrite since he voted for the defense of marriage act. No one should vote for him again, but he should face no trials or investigations. These are witch hunts, no matter which side of the aisle they are on.
If you believe in liberty, you need to defend tolerance of acts that violate no one's rights.
Posted by: Bruce Guthrie on October 7, 2007 08:45 PMBruce, remind yourself that you are not a conservative, but a libertarian, and not a particularly thoughtful one either.
I actually lean toward the libertarian side of the conservative spectrum myself, but to say that you shouldn't be able to sue for damages for being "groped" sexually is preposterous. I might agree that we shouldn't be suing people for talking dirty, but actually going out and touching someone is something else entirely.
Just how much has a 19 year old guy been harmed by this action?
How can his "pain and suffering" be quantified?
What are they worth, $10?
Look, here is justice in this case:
The politician should have to write a public letter of apology and pay the boy's attourney fees. The people should vote the idiot out of office at the next available opportunity, if he doesn't quit first in disgrace.
For the boy to settle out of court, the politician would be willing to settle for thousands in order not to have to write the letter. So the boy gets paid off anyway, unless the boy wants to stand on principle, and demand the apology, for which I would applaud him for doing a great public service.
Now, if the politician were a member of a private organization, he would have broken one of their rules about sexual harassment, and should be fired. This is just. Private organizations can have any rules they want. Does the elected body he represents have any ethics rules? If so, they should be applied.
But this is not a 110 lb girl we are talking about here. If it had been, I'd be whistling a different tune. Call me sexist, but in this case I am, because there is a difference. I could be wrong, but I suspect this boy of being a gold-digger.
Now, if the page were a girl and was a 200 lb karate expert and expressed no sense of being offended, that would be totally different. No damages would be warrented other than an apology.
But emotional pain and suffering damages are liberal things, and subject to a lot of abuse in courts. We fiscal conservatives should be careful about advocating them, I think.
Soliciting sex in a bathroom, as Craig did, should not be illegal, any more than selling newspapers on the street or panhandling should be illegal. It is tacky and disgusting, and should make the voters want to oust him because he is a total hypocrite, but his actions harmed no one.
Posted by: Bruce Guthrie on October 9, 2007 03:42 PMThe left realizes that they are obsolete and like any cornered animal, their only recourse is to lash out irrationally and in an unfair and biased manner.
Posted by: Jeff B. on October 9, 2007 11:19 PM