If found guilty ( it looks like he will ) I wonder how many years in prison
Alex will have to practice his Chess game ?

http://www.heraldtribune.com/apps/pb...02/APN/3070207
28

Federal judge will close courtroom to shield teen sex victim

The Associated Press

MOBILE, Ala. --
A federal judge has granted a prosecutor's request for some closed-door
testimony in the trial of a 32-year-old Maryland chess star accused of
crossing state lines to have sex with a 15-year-old girl in Alabama.

Chief U.S. District Judge Ginny Granade's order Monday could bar the public
from the courtroom during any testimony even related to the young victim.

"Any testimony elicited at trial in which there is reason to anticipate that
the name of the child victim or any other information concerning the child
victim may be divulged in that testimony, shall be taken in a closed
courtroom," Granade wrote.

The defendant, Alex Sherzer, remains free on bail with electronic monitoring
while living in Shreveport, La. Jury selection is set for Aug. 4, but could
be delayed. A trial date hasn't been set and Sherzer's attorney filed a
motion June 25 seeking to delay it.

Sherzer, a world-class chess player, completed his medical studies in
Hungary and was living in Baltimore until this spring. He met the girl over
the Internet and had numerous e-mail conversations with her over the span of
several months, according to an affidavit in the case.

Sherzer arranged to pick her up in Mobile for a weekend of sex at the beach,
according to printouts of some of the chats that were said to have taken
place between the two.

The legal threshold for closing a courtroom during any proceeding is
historically high, due to the 6th Amendment's guarantee of "a speedy and
public trial."

But the language of Granade's ruling echoed the wording of the prosecutors'
motion, which in turn followed the phrasing of a 1994 federal law designed
to protect child victims and witnesses.

"Sounds like Congress set that one up, unfortunately," said Dennis Bailey,
an Alabama Press Association lawyer in Birmingham. "That statute was passed
in a well-intentioned manner, and these are the consequences."

Neither Assistant U.S. Attorney Gina Vann nor co-prosecutor Steven Butler
would elaborate on what type of testimony they expected the public to be
allowed to see at trial. Vann said they had not discussed the particulars
with Granade.

Sherzer's lawyer, public defender Carlos Williams, was in court Wednesday
and could not be reached for comment on the effect of Granade's order.

Sherzer was arrested May 9 outside Strickland Youth Center in Mobile, where
he believed the 15-year-old girl was staying in custody of juvenile
authorities, but had a weekend pass, the affidavit states.

Sherzer, an International Chess Grand Master since 18, is ranked 24th in the
country in the U.S. Chess Federation's May listings. He was on a chess
scholarship at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County until the first
week of May.

He had moved to Louisiana for a new job at LSU Medical Center, Shreveport,
but hospital spokesman Elaine King said Wednesday he was never hired.

http://www.heraldtribune.com/apps/pb.../APN/307020728

Link broken in first post, Sorry !

Sam Sloan wrote:
On Wed, 02 Jul 2003 23:52:19 GMT, "Gunny Bunny"

wrote:

"Any testimony elicited at trial in which there is reason
to anticipate that
the name of the child victim or any other information
concerning the child
victim may be divulged in that testimony, shall be taken in a closed
courtroom," Granade wrote.

Wait until Judge Granade finds out that there is no child
victim; just
a male adult FBI agent pretending to be a child.

Sam Sloan
________________________
There was a child. The evidence will show whether or not there was a
"child victim." You are assuming that there was no wrong done to the
child with whom GM Sherzer was communicating before the FBI stepped into
her shoes. I'd imagine that the gov't will have to introduce the
child's testimony, and if that happens, it must be in a closed
courtroom.

KidDon
--
Posted via http://web2news.com the faster web2news on the web

(Sam Sloan) wrote in message ...
On Wed, 02 Jul 2003 23:52:19 GMT, "Gunny Bunny"
wrote:

"Any testimony elicited at trial in which there is reason to anticipate that
the name of the child victim or any other information concerning the child
victim may be divulged in that testimony, shall be taken in a closed
courtroom," Granade wrote.

Wait until Judge Granade finds out that there is no child victim; just
a male adult FBI agent pretending to be a child.

Sam Sloan

Every day, there are police officers that pretend to be prosititutes,
drug deals and the like to catch criminals. What's your point?

The deciding factor in criminal proceedings like this are intentions.
What were his intentions? If his intention was to have sex with a 15
year old girl and went through all these actions to do so (drove to
her juvenile detention center, rented hotel room), then he's guilty.
Regardless of whether or not the person he actually talked to was 15
or 45.

Besides, why else would he he rent a hotel room with a hottub,
complete with condoms and sex toy? I guess he wanted to show her his
`Dragon`!

If what has been reported is true, then I'd say Alex is screwed. And
he deserves to rot in Prison.

"Roger" wrote ...
(Sam Sloan) wrote ...

Wait until Judge Granade finds out that there is no child victim; just
a male adult FBI agent pretending to be a child.

The deciding factor in criminal proceedings like this are intentions.
What were his intentions? If his intention was to have sex with a 15
year old girl and went through all these actions to do so (drove to
her juvenile detention center, rented hotel room), then he's guilty.
Regardless of whether or not the person he actually talked to was 15
or 45.

Roger,

I'm with Sam Sloan on this one. To me, this is a clear case of entrapment,
in the common-sense meaning of the word--I can't speak to the legal meaning,
not being a lawyer.

All the arrangements for the meeting seem to have been handled by a law
enforcement officer, not the girl; by that time the girl was long gone from
the conversations with Sherzer.

We can't know how the conversations would have gone if they had actually
been between Sherzer and the girl. We do know how they went, with a law
enforcement officer leading on Sherzer.

My question is: How can it be a good thing for a law enforcement officer to
lead on an otherwise law-abiding individual to commit a crime? I can see the
purpose in setting up a known drug dealer or a known Mafioso or some other
known bad guy, but we have no indication here that Sherzer was a known
sexual predator who needed to be nabbed and locked up for the safety of the
community. Rather, we have a law-enforcement officer that apparently enticed
Sherzer to do something he had never done before.

And frankly, 15 isn't that young. When I was a college freshman and barely
18, I knew a pretty 16-year-old freshman girl who later became my
girlfriend. What if I had slept with her freshman year when she was 16?
Hell, I would have if I could. Should I have been locked up too? Give me a
break.

Tim Hanke

Sam Sloan wrote:
On Wed, 02 Jul 2003 23:52:19 GMT, "Gunny Bunny"

wrote:

"Any testimony elicited at trial in which there is reason
to anticipate that
the name of the child victim or any other information
concerning the child
victim may be divulged in that testimony, shall be taken in a closed
courtroom," Granade wrote.

Wait until Judge Granade finds out that there is no child
victim; just
a male adult FBI agent pretending to be a child.

Sam Sloan

Sam,

It does not matter. The courts are full of rejected appeals on tha
basis.

The applicable law that Mr Sherzer is charged under does not require an
underage victim. Although in this case there was a minor involved
initially.

Section 2423(b). Interstate or Foreign Travel with Intent to Engage in a
Sexual Act with a Juvenile

Whoever knowingly travels or conspires to do so in interstate or foreign
commerce, or in any Territory or Possession of the United States, with
the intent to engage in any sexual activity with a person under 18 years
of age for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense.

================================================== ======================

The law is written so that as long as someone travels or conspires to so
with the intent to engage in sex with underage person is guilty. In
other words, as long as he he/she believes he is dealing with a person
underage , he/she is guilty - even if the other side is a 6" 4' male FBI
agent. I like this law a lot as it is getting a lot of creeps locked
up.

relevant link:

http://csmail.law.pace.edu/lawlib/le...-circuit/test3
/99-1759.html

================================================== ======================

With your known self profess desire to engage in sex with as many people
as you can before you die, you probably should be aware of that little
known law.

--
Posted via http://web2news.com the faster web2news on the web

In rec.games.chess.computer Michael Byrne wrote:
Sam Sloan wrote:
On Wed, 02 Jul 2003 23:52:19 GMT, "Gunny Bunny"

wrote:

"Any testimony elicited at trial in which there is reason
to anticipate that
the name of the child victim or any other information
concerning the child
victim may be divulged in that testimony, shall be taken in a closed
courtroom," Granade wrote.

Wait until Judge Granade finds out that there is no child
victim; just
a male adult FBI agent pretending to be a child.

Sam Sloan

Sam,

It does not matter. The courts are full of rejected appeals on tha
basis.

The applicable law that Mr Sherzer is charged under does not require an
underage victim. Although in this case there was a minor involved
initially.

Section 2423(b). Interstate or Foreign Travel with Intent to Engage in a
Sexual Act with a Juvenile

Whoever knowingly travels or conspires to do so in interstate or foreign
commerce, or in any Territory or Possession of the United States, with
the intent to engage in any sexual activity with a person under 18 years
of age for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense.

================================================== ======================

The law is written so that as long as someone travels or conspires to so
with the intent to engage in sex with underage person is guilty. In
other words, as long as he he/she believes he is dealing with a person
underage , he/she is guilty - even if the other side is a 6" 4' male FBI
agent. I like this law a lot as it is getting a lot of creeps locked
up.

relevant link:

http://csmail.law.pace.edu/lawlib/le...-circuit/test3
/99-1759.html

================================================== ======================

With your known self profess desire to engage in sex with as many people
as you can before you die, you probably should be aware of that little
known law.

Too bad giving instructions on how to rape an underage girl isn't
against that same law. Perhaps a certain taxi driver would
be driving a jail cell instead.



--
Posted via http://web2news.com the faster web2news on the web

--
Robert Hyatt Computer and Information Sciences
University of Alabama at Birmingham
(205) 934-2213 115A Campbell Hall, UAB Station
(205) 934-5473 FAX Birmingham, AL 35294-1170

"Robert Hyatt" wrote in message
...

Too bad giving instructions on how to rape an underage girl isn't
against that same law. Perhaps a certain taxi driver would
be driving a jail cell instead.



--
Posted via http://web2news.com the faster web2news on the web

--
Robert Hyatt Computer and Information Sciences
University of Alabama at Birmingham
(205) 934-2213 115A Campbell Hall, UAB Station
(205) 934-5473 FAX Birmingham, AL 35294-1170

That is funny Bob !

Reminds me of a client referred to me by the court, for counseling --
after he shot a gun at his brother. "I don't understand the fuss at
all," he protested in all innocence, "after all, I MISSED him."

I suppose his legal involvement would have been different, had he been
a better shot. Even so, I think there was still reason for there to
have been at least some "fuss."

Likewise, if I try to sell you a bale of mj, and get busted in the
process, I probably can't miss _all_ the "fuss" by claiming "joke's on
you, man, I was gonna stiff you twice - it's a pound light, and it's
just oregano."

That said, the question of "entrapment" should - and likely will - be
raised and assessed in Sherzer's case; and I don't know that there's
enough information at large about the specifics of the case for me to
decide how significant it will be.

For example, Case A: it all goes down between Alex and the girl, but,
as she steps into the hotel lobby, just before she meets her Romeo,
she's swept aside and an undercover cop makes the meet. Setup?

Case B: the on-line "romance" continues to the point where Mommy says
"I've seen this movie, and I know how it ends" and pulls Juliet
off-line. Undercover cop signs in, says "would you repeat that
suggestion, Big Guy?" and we're off to the races.

Case C: Sherzer is _so_ tired of analyzing the exchange Slav,
recommended strongly by his internet Juliet, when he is shocked -
shocked, I say! - to read "Have I got an opening for you, Baby" and,
rushing off to save a lost soul from the evils that lurk for 1.d4
players, runs (carrying NCO and Fritz8 on a laptop) into the arms of a
smirking undercover cop with bad breath and a 5 o'clock shadow.

Now THAT's entrapment.

Rick


Wait until Judge Granade finds out that there is no child victim; just
a male adult FBI agent pretending to be a child.

Sam Sloan

"Michael Byrne" wrote in message
...

he/she is guilty - even if the other side is a 6" 4' male FBI
agent. I like this law a lot as it is getting a lot of creeps locked
up.




Wow. 6 inch 4 foot. Very imposing.