BTW: I don't do Facebook, but a friend of mine does. Turns out there is a convicted pedophile that lives in Hinesville that has a Facebook page. My friend wondered why he was not on any sex offender registry. I told him I did not know but would find out. I first called the Police and they referred me to Sheriffs Office where I got to talk to a Detective who was very helpful. He assigned one of his colleagues to look into it. Turns out the child rapist was paroled in 93. The sex offender registry in Georgia did not come into existence til 96 and was NOT retroactive. We all know that pedophiles don't just molest ONE child. They go on and on until caught. My concern is that this man has a Facebook page which affords him a big net to prey upon innocents. He has many Facebook "friends" who are unaware of this perverts history. He went to school at BI and graduated the year before me.
Anyway, the Detective was very professional and advised me of options. I am going to pursue them and take this guy down. He certainly does not need to be on Facebook and the public should know his status.
I will be visiting The Clerk of Courts office soon to get all relevant PUBLIC info and post it here and write a letter to the editor.
People like the one UP2 has blogged about and this out and about pedophile on Facebook DESERVE more punishment than they have received.
Stay tuned cause I do not like Pedophiles or anybody that harms children. I am going to take this guy down in a very public way.
I do not know what I can do about the judge that let the rapist loose after 15 days in Up2's blog. But, I, JimmyMack aka Jimmy Darsey do know what to do about a home grown pedophile on Facebook.
Good for you Jimmy! Do you know what area of Hinesville he lives in? I have kids and would like to know if he is anywhere near my home.
Amen! I have children as well and would like to know as much as possible. I look at the Sheriff's site where they show where they live, but if it as you say, that's only half the battle. Good Luck and THANK YOU!!
I understand everyones concerns and will be in the Clerk of Courts Office to complete the task tomorrow. I want to dump it all out at once rather than piecemeal. I will provide all documentation numbers along with court and sentencing info.
I already have his name, street address, his release date and where he served his time. Accuracy of the utmost is required in this matter, but I assure you all I will complete the task in short order.
Be careful JM, the system doesn't support those trying to do right. Make sure your ducks are in a row and you do not expose yourself legally. When someone is cornered they strike back brother, be safe.
If anyone is interested, an update on the case. http://news.msn.com/crime-justice/jud...
HMJC: I am being very meticulous and am only going to report what is established as Legal Public Knowledge. Appreciate your concern.
Hi UP2: yea I saw that this morning and knew you would be on top of it. Seems to be mounting public pressure for the judge to resign. If that doesn't work, as it says in your link, riled up folks will try to vote him out of office in 2014.
Well there will be more to come as the court case on this pedophile has been digitalized and is stored in the records building on Memorial drive. It will be available to me Tues or Wednesday according to the Asst. Clerk of Courts. I will have more specifics on him but for now: It is PUBLIC KNOWLEDGE that Robert Edward Weil, or Bobby Weil as his Facebook page lists him, Liberty County Court records affirm was charged and convicted of Six counts of aggravated Child molestation in 1988. His Court Case Record is listed as #1988-R 5415. Since the Sex Offender Registry did not come into being until 1996 and Bobby, as he likes to be called, was sentenced to 20 years in 1989 but paroled in 1993. That's why you cannot look him up in the sex offender registry. So he is flying under the public radar and likes to have sex with kids!
His current address appears to be 110 Cherrydale St. Hinesville Ga. His MO is befriending single parent homes headed by women with small children. He befriends the mother in order to get to the child.
Some may ask why am I doing this now? As I indicated above this man is on FACEBOOK UNDER BOBBY WEIL. As you might can guess he does not describe himself as a convicted child molester, which is one of the reasons I do not like Facebook. You can paint yourself anyway you wish. In this case, a Pedophile paints a rather benign picture of himself, and most sickeningly as a Church goer.
I did not want to wait til Tuesday til I get the hard copy of the case to inform anyone about this man. If you got children, and are a single mom with kids, go look at him on FACEBOOK before he gets wind of this and takes his page down.
If he doesn't remove it, further action will be needed. He needs to be outed now! Facebook should shut him down. I assure you that I will followup. But you can go now to FACEBOOK and get a good look at him.
I will when I have the hard copy in front of me.
May sue then if.....Bobby has found access to child via their domain.
Go look at him at FACEBOOK...NOW...SEE HIS FACE. He touts himself as or Bobby.
Pedophile;convict is his true self.
or up2 if you want to get in the trenches, feel free to contact FACEBOOK.
Bobby Weil in Hinesville was convicted of AGRAVATED CHILD MOLESTATION. ON 6 COUNTS.
tHEY never quit after doing just ONE.
He HAS to be removed from FB. We MUST confront these monsters.
Wow I remember his parents.
He should be removed from that site.
I did not know that he had returned to his childhood home.
TOT: He had a wonderful mom and great step dad. Good people. He also, as you probably know has a younger brother who is a fine man. As I have said earlier, Bobby has flown under the radar for a long time due to the start date of the Registered Sex Offender Act which took effect in 1996 in GEorgia. Bobby was paroled in 93. The Sex Offender Registry was NOT retroactive. To my knowledge he has been in Hinesville almost ever since his release. He wears baseball caps and shades when in public. He DOES attend Westside Baptist Church. Probably for reasons you can imagine. To get a good look at him you can see him on his FACEBOOK page under Bobby Weil.
I'm not a facebooker. Is this the same guy?
If this comes up right this is Bobby:
Yep! I successfully cut and pasted it here. That is Robert Edward Weil, aka Bobby, Bob, Bob-o. Very charming individual in conversation, but don't leave your children with him.
On further review of his facebook page, it looks like Romney got the pedophile vote last November.....
JimmyMack please explain why you want to heap scorn on Bobby Weil while you at the same time think there is something wrong with me and those like me who are not tolerant of homosexuality.
Pedophiles are usually homosexual, as is the one of whom you speak. Is that not correct?
Gee TOT, I thought we had a cease fire going on here between the two of us!!??
But, Tot,...once I get thru recovering from my astonishment of such an absurd question
I will tell you my thoughts: For one obvious reason TOT: CHILDREN CANNOT legally consent to sex with an adult. It is AGAINST THE LAW to have sex with a minor be it homosexual or heterosexual Tot!!! You did not know that? AND Tot: I am AGAINST anyone bringing harm to children. Bob Weil is a convicted pedophile. Wherein lies your conflict?
Sex between consenting ADULTS be it hetero or homosexual sex is between them. What Adults do with each other in their bedrooms ain't none of our business.
Sure, Tot, you can disagree on your own moral grounds, but legally there is no argument.
Heterosexual molestation is as evil as Homosexual molestation! In other words Tot, adults of any sexual persuasion having sex with a child is wrong, morally and legally! Can you not see that???
I do not understand your confusion on this subject and am quite astonished truth be told!
Thanks UP2. I have also asked Sebe and Funk to come here and help explain Homosexuality, Heterosexuality, and Pedophilia to Tot. Since I am a Liberal, Tot maynot think much of my explanation.
"Pedophiles are usually homosexual, as is the one of whom you speak. Is that not correct?"
Not necessarily. In addition to up2's links, read these:
On the other side, there are these:
To me, there appears to be opposing agendas at work throughout our culture regarding the question you ask. There are some for whom it seems it is important for their agenda that homosexuality and pedophilia NOT be connected (mainly the LGBT community - including apparently Mr. Kort). On the other side are the Family Research Council and people like Steve Baldwin.)
Part of the Family Research Council item at the above link - IMHO - makes an important connection:
"MALE HOMOSEXUALS COMMIT A DISPROPORTIONATE NUMBER OF CHILD SEX ABUSE CASES
Homosexual apologists admit that some homosexuals sexually molest children, but they deny that homosexuals are more likely to commit such offenses. After all, they argue, the majority of child molestation cases are heterosexual in nature. While this is correct in terms of absolute numbers, this argument ignores the fact that homosexuals comprise only a very small percentage of the population.
The evidence indicates that homosexual men molest boys at rates grossly disproportionate to the rates at which heterosexual men molest girls. To demonstrate this it is necessary to connect several statistics related to the problem of child sex abuse: 1) men are almost always the perpetrator; 2) up to one-third or more of child sex abuse cases are committed against boys; 3) less than three percent of the population are homosexuals. Thus, a tiny percentage of the population (homosexual men), commit one-third or more of the cases of child sexual molestation."
While this doesn't validate the statement that "Pedophiles are usually homosexual," it does indicate that a disproportionate number of child molestation cases involve "men on boys" situations.
None of the above, however, explains why TOT has chosen to chastise Jimmy for performing what most of us consider to be a community service in this instance.
"The global prevalence of child sexual abuse has been estimated at 19.7% for females and 7.9% for males, according to a 2009 study published in Clinical Psychology Review that examined 65 studies from 22 countries. Using the available data, the highest prevalence rate of child sexual abuse geographically was found in Africa (34.4%), primarily because of high rates in South Africa; Europe showed the lowest prevalence rate (9.2%); America and Asia had prevalence rates between 10.1% and 23.9%. In the past, other research has concluded similarly that in North America, for example, approximately 15% to 25% of women and 5% to 15% of men were sexually abused when they were children. Most sexual abuse offenders are acquainted with their victims; approximately 30% are relatives of the child, most often brothers, fathers, uncles or cousins; around 60% are other acquaintances such as 'friends' of the family, babysitters, or neighbors; strangers are the offenders in approximately 10% of child sexual abuse cases. Most child sexual abuse is committed by men; studies show that women commit 14% to 40% of offenses reported against boys and 6% of offenses reported against girls. Some sources report that most offenders who sexually abuse prepubescent children are pedophiles, but some offenders do not meet the clinical diagnosis standards for pedophilia."
...and don't forget this part - up2s latest link:
"The term "pedophilia" refers to persistent feelings of attraction in an adult or older adolescent toward prepubescent children, whether the attraction is acted upon or not. A person with this attraction is called a "pedophile".
In law enforcement, the term "pedophile" is generally used to describe those accused or convicted of child sexual abuse under sociolegal definitions of child (including both prepubescent children and adolescents younger than the local age of consent); however, not all child sexual offenders are pedophiles and not all pedophiles engage in sexual abuse of children.
Law enforcement and legal professionals have begun to use the term predatory pedophile, a phrase coined by children's attorney Andrew Vachss, to refer specifically to pedophiles who engage in sexual activity with minors. The term emphasizes that child sexual abuse consists of conduct chosen by the perpetrator."
Thanks Up2 and Sebe. I have sent TWO emails to FACEBOOK via their FEEDBACK channel. Have not heard anything back from them. On the last one I sent I cautioned them about any potential victims Bobby might produce as a result of his FACEBOOK page. Liability and all that.
Appreciate any and all suggestions. I may just have to open my own account in order to shut Bobby down, then jump off the FACEBOOK train. Bobby is a prime example of this tech-no medium and the danger that is out there.
I disagree Sebekm. A "predatory" pedophile by your definition engages "in sexual activity with minors," but I argue that the pedophile who does nothing but looks at child porn does the same amount of damage as the person who actually lays hands on the child.
Deviants and perverts---- are all the same-----Just slightly removed from one another.
The perpraters are QUEER.
No ToT, I have to stand against you on them. I see Perps as not being Hereto or Homo. They are in a class by themselves. Yes, some males are attracted to boys, some to girls and for some, both. But being a man and liking men does not equal liking boys anymore than being a man who likes women also likes little girls. I am sorry that through your pain you can't see the difference, but believe me, there is one. Now whether or not you see the homosexual population as "deviants and perverts" is another discussion.
Perpetrators or whatever. The ones who advocate unnatural sex are worshiping the devil.
Just my opinion.
Sorry Tot, I don't see anyone here advocating anything. You're knee jerk reaction to anyone not agreeing with you is they're in league with the devil is sophomoric and beneath you.
So Tot, in essence you are saying that consensual sex between two forty year old men is the SAME as a forty year old man having sex with a twelve year old male? I just want to understand where you are coming from.
"I disagree Sebekm. A "predatory" pedophile by your definition engages "in sexual activity with minors," but I argue that the pedophile who does nothing but looks at child porn does the same amount of damage as the person who actually lays hands on the child."
up2: That is not "my definition" - I cut and pasted it from YOUR cited link. I think if you give credibility to part of a cited link, you're stuck with EVERYTHING that link puts forth as fact unless you specifically disagree with it and say so. No? If that's what you're doing now - great; but in any case, it's not MY definition - it's Wikipedia's definition.
"The perpraters are QUEER."
Queer as defined by Webster is:
"differing in some odd way from what is usual or normal"
Using that definition, the perps are - in fact - "queer."
TOT- Somehow the hate in your heart towards homosexuals has clouded your head. Homosexuals and child molesters are NOT the same thing. I can almost understand why the liberal community hates and distrusts the conservative community, if that is the kind of garbage being spewed. SHAME
I appreciate all of the comments.
It will take me a while to view and attempt to digest all of the links you all have provided.
Eyes if you had the experience of having to fight one off of you at the ripe old age of 16 on multiple occasions you just might see a little more clearly why I feel the way I do.
So because of your experience with a homosexual molester, you will say homosexuals worship the devil and are all child molesters. Same thing as saying "well a black guy robbed me, so all blacks are criminals". Bigot.
It is truly amazing, Eyes, is it not? Truly amazing. So much lack of insight, such broad and damning generalizations, such an astounding display of self-righteousness and certainty of belief.
To me, it is a scary thing to behold.
So if I were raped, I should hold all men accountable...on principle. Guilt or innocence not applicable.
Yes UP2. According to TOT's logic.
Unfortunately such is the mindset of many on the right.
I am just totally amazed that TOT posts his misguided judgements here for all to see. And he does it with un-throttled blind personal conviction.
You can respond to the message if you have something meaningful to say.
If not then you might choose to attack the messenger if you gain satisfaction from that.
Personally I find attacking the messenger to be childish,
To each his own.
Tot: I am very hard to work with you on these discussions. For the record, I respect what you have done by establishing a tremendous business that helps many and provides on-going employment. You pull your own weight and you are a good provider.
I am just speaking for myself here regarding your equating Pedophilia with homosexuality. Did you read the comments made by Sebe, Up2, Eyes and go to the links they provided and read them? In politics some Liberals and some Conservatives do and say outright stupid things. Yet that does not mean ALL Liberals and ALL Conservative are stupid or just plain wrong.
Sex between consenting adults, be it Heterosexual or Homosexuals is LEGAL in the eyes of the law. You have every right to have a moral disagreement view of these things but that is as far as it goes. Pedophilia is an Adult having sex with a minor is wrong LEGALLY and MORALLY.
Hetero sex with a child is just as bad as homosexual sex with a child and creates many problems for children that are abused in this manner. Both psychologically and many times physically. Tot you must recognize this. You can have a moral disagreement here, but you are incorrect in having a legal disagreement.
I pray and hope you can one day understand this.
correction above in first sentence:
Tot: I am TRYING very hard to work with you on these discussions.
No one is asking you to can your belief system concerning Homosexuals. The only thing I am trying to say is Homosexual is not the same thing as Pedophilia. That's all.
Same here, up2. It would acknowledge an enlightenment to Tot's frame of reference regarding such matters which would be good thing to happen. I am putting forth considerable effort in finding common ground with him, but it almost seems that I am talking to a lamp post.
Tot, for the most part displays a certainty of thought and a commitment to those views. Admirable traits for one to possess unless those views are flawed as are those being put forth by ToT regarding homosexuality being equated to Pedophilia. And to make matters worse Tot refuses to budge from his position no matter the references and studies put before him showing otherwise.
I, personally find that astonishing and a wee bit scary.
I am well aware that pedophilia is not the same as homosexuality.
They are both sinful.
They are both unnatural.
They are both acts of disregarding the teachings of the Bible.
They are the result of a lack of discipline.
The moral rot continues.
My friend Sebe's Independence; can find common ground with Tot's Conservatism and my Liberalism.
Tot: homosexuality is NOT against the law. Practicing pedophilic acts IS AGAINST THE LAW.
You are entitled to your moral views regarding Homosexuality and Pedophilia. But Tot, you have NO legal argument against Homosexuality in and of itself.
"homosexuality is not against the law"
No but it once was against the law.
The liberals urged and were able to get the law changed.
You are serving the devil if you support homosexual affairs.
Have it your way.
So much for a cease fire, I guess. Now I am the Devil's Servant? Is that what you are now saying, Tot? Liberals, including me, are doing Satan's work for not opposing Homosexual relationships between consenting adults? Is this what you believe and are now lending words too?
It is not up to any of us to judge TOT. A sin is a sin,,,let the one that has not sinned cast that first stone. If you are going to use the Bible in your arguments at least follow ALL of it and make sure your own house is clean.
"homosexuality is not against the law"
No - not in THIS country. But it sure is in a whole lot of other places on this planet. Can get one stoned or worse in some places. And as those on the left often say, it is not up to US to judge their culture.
Further - those of us who think it OUGHT to be against the law still have the right to say so.
And to paraphrase the medium in "Poltergeist":
MY house is cleaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaannnn.....
Eyes, Your comment above is probably totally correct.
I doubt there are many if any of us who are without sin of some sort.
I suspect that the only human who could ever have claimed to be free of sin was Jesus Christ.
I have sinned and I have asked for God's forgiveness.
I have never said that I hate the homosexual.
What I've repeatedly said is that I don't approve of homosexuality.
If one posts blogs, writes letters to the editor or makes bold statements in support of homosexuality then that one is glorifying the ways of the devil.
If you advocate the acceptance of openly gay marriage and homosexual relations then you are in fact and advocate for the ways of the devil.
If you happen to be of that persuasion and you are displeased with those who disagree with you that is your right.
If the shoe fits then wear it.
I guess the so called cease fire meant that I could no longer voice my opinion about liberals and they could no longer voice their opinion about conservatives.
If that were the case all sides should remain silent.
I don't plan to remain silent as long as this remains a free country and I still have the right of free speech.
Well Tot: you appear to be an unsalvageable lunatic. I tried to find a way to talk to you but I have failed. It comes down to HOW one parses their words. Your method is slash and burn. You have called me an accessory to murder and now you say I work for Satan.
Unbelievable, simply unbelievable.
So, Tot, in summation I, JimmyMack, aka Jimmy Darsey, do hereby declare and make forth the statement that you, Tot, aka Mr. Padrick, are a cold-hearted, bitter, self-marginalized old man carrying around a lot of hate in your being. Your bigot cup runneth over.
"So you do not sin, sebekm? Nobody's house is clean. That is the point i am trying to make."
Uh, no - not any more. What's the point in it? When you get older, sin doesn't have the same lure as it used to. As for "casting the first stone," they do that a lot in countries where homosexuality carries a death sentence. As the left likes to say - who are we to judge another country's culture?
I agree - and in this case, who's to say they're not CORRECT and our culture is the one that's in ERROR?
Further, the example you cite ("let he who is without sin..." is a BIBLICAL reference.
Since that phrase has meaning for you (if it didn't I wouldn't think you'd use it), remember that the Bible also has a strong opinion on homosexuality. Despite all the "revisionist" propaganda by the LGBT community and their supporters, I tend to agree with the ex-homosexual who has expressed a very strong opinion on the topic here:
And then there's the "hate the sin; love the sinner" philosophy. Calling out homosexuality can fairly be viewed as casting a stone at (i.e, "hating") the SIN. To remain mum on the topic only presents the appearance of acquiescence or support of the lifestyle.
(first link above:
....but speaking of rape - it seems to be "catching on" at Harvard:
Yo Sebe: re: homosexuality legality...I am just talking about America. No need to bring in backward third world countries to claim illegality. Hell, Iran DENIES that it even exists in that country.
We call them "backward third world countries," they call our "progressive society" The Great Satan.
And those third world countries (i.e., primarily Muslim) are growing by leaps and bounds while our population (except for immigrants) is stagnating and even falling. Before long the third world - like Sherwin-Williams - will cover the Earth. When that happens, their "history" will replace our "history."
It has happened before. It will happen again.
To demonize Tot because his religious views do not match the majority is wrong. He has a right to his belief system. Neither I nor anyone else has to agree with him, but we do need to respect his POV. God doesn't care if we are Liberal, Conservative or Independent. WHAT does matter is how we treat each other. If the old timers here can't be respectful and tolerant of each other, how can we expect the rest of the world to be?
You can't legislate morals. Unless it is infringing on other people's rights, the law has no right to tell someone who they can have a sexual relationship with...ie...there are laws against pedophilia, because a child can't defend themselves against adults. When you criminalize homosexuality, you are actually taking away their free will...which was endowed by our Creator. It is up to the individual to willingly choose what path they walk. In the end..it is between them and God, and we were given no authority by God to take their choice away. Let God do his job and you do yours. Last time I checked, he did not appoint any of us judge.
JM if you have something meaningful to say then do so.
Your dark side is showing.
up2 thanks for your usual evenhanded commentary.
If we all agreed on all issues this would be a dull world.
"You can't legislate morals."
But that's EXACTLY what societies with laws do - no? Thou shalt not kill, steal, etc., are part of a moral code that has been translated into laws for the good order and discipline of a society. What gets debated is WHICH activities are morally "right or wrong" in a particular society.
All societies DO legislate morality. An opinion that they can't or don't or shouldn't is one which has been fostered by an "anything goes" mentality which is ultimately SELF-DESTRUCTIVE.
No, consensual homosexuality infringes on the rights of nobody. They are two consenting adults doing what they choose to do. Just because you don't agree with it, does not mean it should be against the law. However,killing, stealing, and a multitude of other examples...DOES infringe on the rights of others. It is two separate things.
Eyes, I personally don't care what two adults do in the privacy of their own home.
If it is thrown in my face I have a right to decline to praise the act.
It is not natural.
To glorify sinful acts is to serve the Devil.
EOH: It's not a matter of "rights," it's a matter of the moral foundation of a society. Two consenting adults can agree to beat the stuffings out of each other, but that's not legal. Why not? Because it is behavior that society has proscribed. That's it. That's all it takes. A society can ban (and has down through the ages) ANY behavior or conduct that it believes is not conducive to the health of the society.
Homosexuality is aberrant behavior which adds nothing to a society. Personal gratification is not a justification for something to be permitted in a society. If that were the case, there would be NO proscribed behavior or conduct.
The proponents of homosexuality and homosexual marriages ignore and have no regard for the effects of their activities on society as a whole. One big problem is that these relationships undermine the family structure in times where the family is ALREADY under attack in numerous other ways.
This article outlines one of the biggest arguments against homosexuality - and homosexual unions:
So it's not just a matter of "rights" - it is the common good that is at stake.
It is legal for two consenting adults to beat each other up. Its called boxing or that really violent wrestling/boxing stuff (I forget the name). When two adults beat up each other and no one files charges, nothing happens. It was consensual.
As for homosexuality not contributing to society and should not be permitted...
We are talking about personal sex choices between adults. I am too old to have anymore children.. should I stop having sex because my sex life no longer contributes to society? Not happening.
I am not a proponent of gay marriage, or homosexuality in general. I do not support measures to make gay marriage legal. However, my belief is that GOD will handle it. He gave everyone the opportunity to CHOOSE to follow him. He does not want us to be forced to follow him. He wants us to choose him. It is so much better to to love and worship freely, than to have the LAW mandate that you do.
Sebekm- I appreciate this discussion with you. You debate very well!
You. too. But as to fighting: It's not legal outside the ring - in "normal society." And it's only legal in the ring because society permits it for "entertainment" purposes. But that's my point: society makes the rules. I believe that we should do so based upon what is good for the health of our society. Absent a moral compass, "personal choices" are just as likely to be dangerous and unhealthy as not. That's what laws are designed to do - to reinforce a society's moral compass. Down through the ages, when a society lost its moral compass, it disintegrated.
Homosexuality and its associated activities do NOTHING to support the moral compass of a society, and in fact undermine the traditional family structure upon which a healthy societal structure is based.