Monthly Archives: July 2008

Congressional Candidate Crybaby in Colorado

George Lilly, a Republican candidate for congress in Colorado’s First District makes this following lofty statement on his

The oath of office to uphold and defend the Constitution is a sacred oath, and will not be violated by me under any circumstances. Compromising on principle is unacceptable to me under any circumstances! A candidate with principles is hard to find and they are few and far between. You have a chance to vote for one now if you’re tired of all of this corrupt non-sense going on in Washington D.C.

Sadly enough, the man hasn’t even been elected yet, and he is already violating his oath.

On June 9, 2008, the
href=””>Rocky Mountain Right
(RMR) blog carried an announcement that the RMR was endorsing Charles Crain, Lilly’s rival in the Republican primary. In delivering that endorsement, the RMR said that while it remained neutral in most primaries, George Lilly was not worthy of such hands-off treatment by a blog that identifies itself as “Colorado’s Conservative Grassroots.” The endorsement of Crain said, in pertinent part:

George Lilly converted to the Republican Party last year from the Constitution Party for the express reason of running for Congress. At his public appearances at Denver County GOP events he has launched tirades against the Schaffer and McCain campaigns and has made it clear that he will not support the Republican ticket in November. Supporters of Lilly’s were responsible for many of the pointless disruptions of the Colorado Republican Convention several weeks ago. His supporters made clear they would not support John McCain or Bob Schaffer and pulled several stunts that included parading around in Uncle Sam outfits while screaming at Dick Wadhams at the podium.

George Lilly is no Republican. While it is doubtful we can win this seat, George Lilly’s presence on the ticket could be disruptive enough to harm other Republican candidates running statewide.

Vote Charles Crain in the Republican CD-1 Primary. Tell George Lilly to go back to the Constitution Party.(source)

That sent Mr. Lilly running for the phone to call the waaaambulance.

Mr. Lilly may not be fully aware of this, (but my readers are) the First Amendment is part of the Constitution — accordingly I guess that it is a damn good thing that Mr. Lilly won’t be taking that oath of office after all. The most sacred of all First Amendment rights is the right to free speech on matters of political importance. Even Robert Bork agrees with that! However, Mr.
Lilly seems more inspired by
href=””>Lee Kuan Yew than Thomas Jefferson. He issued this threat to the publisher of the RMR:

You have libeled me with your blog. I have contributed money to Bob Schaffer on two ocasions for his Senatorial bid, and I have spoken well of him on many occasions and told people like Ryan Call (State Republican Legal Counsel for the Republican Party) as well as others, that I support Bob. I have known Bob for close to twenty years, and I think he is an excellent person and legislator. He is also friendly with Ron Paul, and thinks very highly of him as do I. I recommend that you print an immediate retraction of your false allegations against me and issue an apology, or I will seek legal redress against you.

I have made a copy of your blog which I am keepiing on file, and I am sending this email to my supporters, so that you may get a “heads up” from someone other than myself.

Lilly identifies himself as a “Ron Paul Republican.” As such, I have a natural affinity for him. However, his actions have revealed him as not only a phony, but a hypocrite with absolutely no right to hold office of any kind. It isn’t as if he was qualified in the first place. See his TTT resume here.

The Republican party has already conceded that it can’t win Colorado’s First District. I encourage any Republicans in that district to write in Charles Crain or vote for a third-party candidate. A person like George Lilly deserves nothing better than a humiliating and crushing defeat at the hands of his own party.

Oh, and by the way Lilly, I dare you to send me a cease and desist
— or better yet, file a lawsuit against me. I promise you a good old fashioned in-court pimp slappin’ in response.

Special thanks to Marc J. Randazza for contributing this blog. The Legal Satyracon

Florida Supreme Court Approves Porn for Sex Offender

Heard about this from my law partner Lia Fazzone, on the Defense Zzone.  I always find these decisions interesting. I’ve reprinted her blog below.

The Miami Herald is reporting that

Florida sex offenders on probation can possess pornography so long as it does not relate to an offender’s ”particular deviant behavior pattern,” the state’s Supreme Court ruled Thursday. (Source)

The 5-2 decision overturned a 2006 Third District Court of Appeal ruling on a Miami case in which the appellate court said offenders cannot have any sexually explicit material.

Factually, the Petitioner, Donald Kasischke, pled guilty to three counts each of lewd or lascivious battery and exhibition on a child under age sixteen. He was sentenced to 364 days in prison, followed by two years of community control and eight years of probation. Florida law requires that courts impose several conditions on sexual offenders receiving probation or community control. For example, defendants are subject to a curfew; they cannot live within 1000 feet of certain places, such as schools, where children congregate; and they must successfully complete a sexual offender treatment program. Another condition that must be imposed—the one relevant in this case —is the following:

Unless otherwise indicated in the treatment plan provided by the sexual offender treatment program, a prohibition on viewing, owning, or possessing any obscene, pornographic, or sexually stimulating visual or auditory material, including telephone, electronic media, computer programs, or computer services that are relevant to the offender’s deviant behavior pattern.

The Petitioner’s plea agreement included such a condition. After, he had been released from prison, and while he was serving his community control, a search of his home revealed allegedly “obscene, pornographic, or sexually stimulating” photographs, as well as a pornographic videotape. His community control was revoked and he was ordered incarcerated.

The Florida Supreme Court held that the phrase “relevant to the offender’s deviant behavior pattern” qualifies each of the prohibitions in section 948.03(5)(a)(7), Florida Statutes (1999). An offender does not violate this condition unless the “obscene, pornographic, or sexually stimulating” material at issue is relevant to the “deviant behavior pattern.”

Read the Miami Herald Article Here

Read the Florida Supreme Court Opinion Here