One thing for sure, Alex Sherzer now knows who his friends really are.

For example, John Fernandez, who has repeatedly proclaimed himself to
be a friend of Sherzer, is difinately not his friend. Fernandez was
the first to blast the news of Sherzer's arrest all over the internet
and has been proclaiming since day-1 that Sherzer was guilty.

So, Fernandez is definitely one on the losing end of the Sherzer
verdict.

Other losers are Bruce Draney, who repeatedly declared that Sherzer
was guilty, and Tim Hanke who wrote that there was an 80% likelihood
that Sherzer would go to prison. Also on the list of losers is
drahmiel and several others.

On the other side of the isle are those who always said that Sherzer
was not guilty and would prevail. These include myself, Alan Fifield,
Paul Rubin, Larry Parr, Jerome Bibuld, Paul Truong, plus
"LeModernCaveman".

This is just a short list. Somebody should compile a complete list of
those who expressed an opinion for or against Alex Sherzer.

Sam Sloan

How typical of Sam. You are a "winner" if you argued for acquittal and a
"loser" if you did not. Nobody who posted an opinion actually had access to
all the evidence, testimony, or jury instructions. This was crystal ball
stuff, and for the first time in a long time, Sam gazed in and got it right.

Of course, even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

For the record, I expressed no opinion on whether or not Sherzer would be
found "not guilty." I did, in fact, suggest that he may win on the legal
point of entrapment. However, I also stated, and continue to hold the
opinion that if he is found not guilty, he is far from innocent.

Randy Bauer

"Sam Sloan" wrote in message
...
One thing for sure, Alex Sherzer now knows who his friends really are.

For example, John Fernandez, who has repeatedly proclaimed himself to
be a friend of Sherzer, is difinately not his friend. Fernandez was
the first to blast the news of Sherzer's arrest all over the internet
and has been proclaiming since day-1 that Sherzer was guilty.

So, Fernandez is definitely one on the losing end of the Sherzer
verdict.

Other losers are Bruce Draney, who repeatedly declared that Sherzer
was guilty, and Tim Hanke who wrote that there was an 80% likelihood
that Sherzer would go to prison. Also on the list of losers is
drahmiel and several others.

On the other side of the isle are those who always said that Sherzer
was not guilty and would prevail. These include myself, Alan Fifield,
Paul Rubin, Larry Parr, Jerome Bibuld, Paul Truong, plus
"LeModernCaveman".

This is just a short list. Somebody should compile a complete list of
those who expressed an opinion for or against Alex Sherzer.

Sam Sloan

However, I also stated, and continue to hold the opinion that if he is
found not guilty, he is far from innocent

Yes....

"Randy Bauer" writes:
How typical of Sam. You are a "winner" if you argued for acquittal and a
"loser" if you did not. Nobody who posted an opinion actually had access to
all the evidence, testimony, or jury instructions. This was crystal ball
stuff, and for the first time in a long time, Sam gazed in and got it right.

The jury instruction about the definition of entrapment was in one of
the newspaper articles posted to the ng. Once it was posted it was
completely obvious (to me, anyway) that Sherzer had slam-dunk
entrapment defense. The prosecution had to prove beyond a reasonable
doubt that before the FBI got involved, Sherzer was already ready and
willing to have sex with Jane Doe. And there was no proof of that and
it probably wasn't true. I was surprised and concerned that the jury
deliberated for more than 2 minutes before acquitting Sherzer.

However, I don't think I ever predicted an acquittal; I felt Sherzer
should be acquitted, but was not too optimistic about it.

Randy,
you are absolutely correct that we did not have the evidence that the jury
saw. All we had to go by was the newspaper articles that were displayed on
the internet. However, I'd like to point out that things could have been
done a little different. With the benefit of knowing what the veredict was
these are my comments:

1. I don't believe it was right for a 32-year-old male to be communicating
via email with a 15-year-old girl in the manner in which Sherzer did (even
before he was planning to see her to have sex with her). He did not commit a
crime before the FBI got involved, but he certainly made the mother of the
daughter quite upset.

2. Once the mother found out about the internet relationship, rather than go
to the FBI, she could have handled the matter directly and contacted
Sherzer, telling him in no uncertain terms that she did not approve of the
language he used in communicating with her daughter. This should have ended
the relationship.

3. The FBI did not have to try to lure Sherzer into action. They could have
also told him, "hey buster, we're watching you as a potential pedophile, so
stop it!" and that would have probably been the end of it.

4. I was leaning more towards finding Sherzer guilty than not guilty. The
jury found the entrapment defense to be plausible. I probably would have
gone the other way simply because the tempting words that the FBI used were
more subtle than a direct invitation to have sex. I think the FBI provided
more provocative language, but that's about it. But this is all besides the
point now, as the veredict is in. I think one of the reasons the jury
acquited Sherzer was because in the real relationship (which lasted several
months) Sherzer did not push for sex, while after the FBI got involved,
Sherzer reacted [dare I say, predictably] in a way that he offered to have
sex with her.

5. Even after having been acquitted, there are no real winners here. Sherzer
may walk free, but his reputation is tarnished with the general public. He's
shown a pedophiliac propensity, even if he didn't carry out the act. The
girl, unknown to all of us, is no winner either. This is another traumatic
event in her already troubled life.



"Randy Bauer" wrote in message
news:PtNcb.579637$YN5.417714@sccrnsc01...
How typical of Sam. You are a "winner" if you argued for acquittal and a
"loser" if you did not. Nobody who posted an opinion actually had access
to
all the evidence, testimony, or jury instructions. This was crystal ball
stuff, and for the first time in a long time, Sam gazed in and got it
right.

Of course, even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

For the record, I expressed no opinion on whether or not Sherzer would be
found "not guilty." I did, in fact, suggest that he may win on the legal
point of entrapment. However, I also stated, and continue to hold the
opinion that if he is found not guilty, he is far from innocent.

Randy Bauer

"Sam Sloan" wrote in message
...
One thing for sure, Alex Sherzer now knows who his friends really are.

For example, John Fernandez, who has repeatedly proclaimed himself to
be a friend of Sherzer, is difinately not his friend. Fernandez was
the first to blast the news of Sherzer's arrest all over the internet
and has been proclaiming since day-1 that Sherzer was guilty.

So, Fernandez is definitely one on the losing end of the Sherzer
verdict.

Other losers are Bruce Draney, who repeatedly declared that Sherzer
was guilty, and Tim Hanke who wrote that there was an 80% likelihood
that Sherzer would go to prison. Also on the list of losers is
drahmiel and several others.

On the other side of the isle are those who always said that Sherzer
was not guilty and would prevail. These include myself, Alan Fifield,
Paul Rubin, Larry Parr, Jerome Bibuld, Paul Truong, plus
"LeModernCaveman".

This is just a short list. Somebody should compile a complete list of
those who expressed an opinion for or against Alex Sherzer.

Sam Sloan

Yours is one of the more reasoned and reasonable posts I have seen on this
topic.

"garrubal" wrote in message
news:koOcb.5775$Rd4.2142@fed1read07...
Randy,
you are absolutely correct that we did not have the evidence that the jury
saw. All we had to go by was the newspaper articles that were displayed on
the internet. However, I'd like to point out that things could have been
done a little different. With the benefit of knowing what the veredict was
these are my comments:

1. I don't believe it was right for a 32-year-old male to be communicating
via email with a 15-year-old girl in the manner in which Sherzer did (even
before he was planning to see her to have sex with her). He did not commit
a
crime before the FBI got involved, but he certainly made the mother of the
daughter quite upset.

2. Once the mother found out about the internet relationship, rather than
go
to the FBI, she could have handled the matter directly and contacted
Sherzer, telling him in no uncertain terms that she did not approve of the
language he used in communicating with her daughter. This should have
ended
the relationship.

3. The FBI did not have to try to lure Sherzer into action. They could
have
also told him, "hey buster, we're watching you as a potential pedophile,
so
stop it!" and that would have probably been the end of it.

4. I was leaning more towards finding Sherzer guilty than not guilty. The
jury found the entrapment defense to be plausible. I probably would have
gone the other way simply because the tempting words that the FBI used
were
more subtle than a direct invitation to have sex. I think the FBI provided
more provocative language, but that's about it. But this is all besides
the
point now, as the veredict is in. I think one of the reasons the jury
acquited Sherzer was because in the real relationship (which lasted
several
months) Sherzer did not push for sex, while after the FBI got involved,
Sherzer reacted [dare I say, predictably] in a way that he offered to have
sex with her.

5. Even after having been acquitted, there are no real winners here.
Sherzer
may walk free, but his reputation is tarnished with the general public.
He's
shown a pedophiliac propensity, even if he didn't carry out the act. The
girl, unknown to all of us, is no winner either. This is another traumatic
event in her already troubled life.



"Randy Bauer" wrote in message
news:PtNcb.579637$YN5.417714@sccrnsc01...
How typical of Sam. You are a "winner" if you argued for acquittal and
a
"loser" if you did not. Nobody who posted an opinion actually had
access
to
all the evidence, testimony, or jury instructions. This was crystal
ball
stuff, and for the first time in a long time, Sam gazed in and got it
right.

Of course, even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

For the record, I expressed no opinion on whether or not Sherzer would
be
found "not guilty." I did, in fact, suggest that he may win on the
legal
point of entrapment. However, I also stated, and continue to hold the
opinion that if he is found not guilty, he is far from innocent.

Randy Bauer

"Sam Sloan" wrote in message
...
One thing for sure, Alex Sherzer now knows who his friends really are.

For example, John Fernandez, who has repeatedly proclaimed himself to
be a friend of Sherzer, is difinately not his friend. Fernandez was
the first to blast the news of Sherzer's arrest all over the internet
and has been proclaiming since day-1 that Sherzer was guilty.

So, Fernandez is definitely one on the losing end of the Sherzer
verdict.

Other losers are Bruce Draney, who repeatedly declared that Sherzer
was guilty, and Tim Hanke who wrote that there was an 80% likelihood
that Sherzer would go to prison. Also on the list of losers is
drahmiel and several others.

On the other side of the isle are those who always said that Sherzer
was not guilty and would prevail. These include myself, Alan Fifield,
Paul Rubin, Larry Parr, Jerome Bibuld, Paul Truong, plus
"LeModernCaveman".

This is just a short list. Somebody should compile a complete list of
those who expressed an opinion for or against Alex Sherzer.

Sam Sloan

Slimey Sammy writes in part:

Other losers are Bruce Draney, who repeatedly declared that Sherzer
was guilty, and Tim Hanke who wrote that there was an 80% likelihood
that Sherzer would go to prison. Also on the list of losers is
drahmiel and several others.


You can never quite get anything right can you? I did not "declare that
he was guilty". I quoted from his own testimony where he admitted what
he did was wrong, and why he had come to Alabama. I predicted that I
thought he would be found guilty, by a jury in a conservative southern
state. This is of course up to your normal standards of accuracy,
which is none too surprising.

If my hunch that he would be convicted by an Alabama jury after he
testified and admitted what he had done, makes me a "loser", it's a
burden I'm willing to bear.

If Mr. Sherzer is a "winner", then I'd just as soon be a "loser" rather
than a "winner" by that rather strange definition of the two terms.

I am surprised that he was acquitted. I thought there was a chance he
might get away with a hung jury, but I will admit I was surprised at a
unanimous verdict of not-guilty.

In my opinion Mr. Sherzer will be a scarred man for many years to come.
Maybe not forever, depending upon where he goes and what he does to
rehabilitate his damaged reputation.

I will say, that in a way, I am glad that he won't have to do hard time
for this, because I have a strong dislike for law enforcement trolling
which is what I think this came awfully close to.

Mr. Sherzer in my opinion needs to seek some help. If he believes it is
normal behavior to strike up e-mail relationships with troubled 15 year
olds, when he is in his 30's, I don't believe that he is completely
normal.

I am glad this matter is over, that he can try to pick up the pieces of
his life, and that we can start discussing chess matters, rather than
the prurient stuff that most of your posts are made of, here on RGCP.

Best Regards,

Bruce

From: (Sam Sloan)

Other losers are Bruce Draney, who repeatedly declared that Sherzer
was guilty, and Tim Hanke who wrote that there was an 80% likelihood
that Sherzer would go to prison. Also on the list of losers is
drahmiel and several others.


I only lose the next time an internet predator goes free and gets a chance to
lure my sister or my friend's daughter to some quiet location where he can rape
and kill her, at which point Parr and Gordo and their ilk will no doubt
rejoicing at another "victory for freedom"

drahmiel wrote:

From: (Sam Sloan)

Other losers are Bruce Draney, who repeatedly declared that Sherzer
was guilty, and Tim Hanke who wrote that there was an 80% likelihood
that Sherzer would go to prison. Also on the list of losers is
drahmiel and several others.


I only lose the next time an internet predator goes free and gets a chance to
lure my sister or my friend's daughter to some quiet location where he can rape
and kill her, at which point Parr and Gordo and their ilk will no doubt
rejoicing at another "victory for freedom"

If you're really worried about this and not just engaging in hyperbole,
I'd suggest that it might be better for you to have a serious talk with
your sister or your friend's daughter about the dangers of having
intimate conversations with unknown males online. I view this as being
similar to accepting candy or a ride from a stranger. How many times
did our parents warn us about this? Yet in today's world, many parents
have the attitude that their child talking online with a total stranger
is no big deal. I think it's bizarre for 15 year old females to be
posting their photos on the internet and talking to total strangers
about their personal feelings, lives and desires.

I don't think people that dislike the law enforcement tactics used in
this case, like rapists and murderers. I think they feel that there are
less intrusive methods of capturing internet predators than by
suggesting that they perpetrate lascivious actions, and then arresting
them for meeting with someone to follow through.

I feel that Sherzer has a problem if he thinks what he did was
"normal". I also think it is pretty clear in this case anyway that the
law enforcement officials need to find proper ways to protect children,
prevent rapes and murders to the extent that they are able, and to
capture predators that are clearly dangerous to others, and not just
troll the internet with baited hooks to plant ideas in people's minds.

Best Regards,

Bruce

"Somebody should compile a complete list of those who expressed an opinion for
or against Alex Sherzer.

Sam Sloan
-------------------------
Just what a future EB needs, a guy who wants to draw up lists perhaps to carry
out a vendetta.

PhilDPage