Comments about ‘Motive for 'heinous' brochure with teen photo still unclear’

This is the reason the state in in so much economic downfall... D.A miller wasting tax payer money on such frivulus cases like this.

Johnson72, an adult aggressively harassing a child in a bizarre, extreme and irrational manner, especially in a very public way, is a cause for concern and hardly a frivolous case.

That anyone would feel that such a despicable act would be socially acceptable, and that prosecution of the person involved would be frivolous, is truly alarming. Even though Stark is entitled to be considered innocent until proven guilty, the act itself should be condemned in the harshest of terms by anyone who values fairness and justice.

johnson72:

You're either trolling, or defending the perp.
Pick one.

There's nothing frivulus [sic] about this.

I'm glad they're reporting what someone who said they were the victim's mother said, and what someone emailed in. That's some high quality journalism. If I say that I know both of them and that they both like the same boy, or that they were in competition for the final cheerleading spot, does that get reported? Maybe I say it's because the one girl ignored the other girl's friendship request on facebook...

Also, I agree. This is hardly a "frivulus" case... that's pretty serious stuff.

Sick and wrong in so many ways. Even if was two teenagers doing this to eachother, it is -- its child pornography/exploitation plus bestiality! In order to get worse than this it would have to be rape or murder.

Johnson72:

Was it brain freeze? You have a lot to learn about human decency, and life in general. May you find professional help in your return to socially acceptable main-stream thought. [sic] "Frivulus?"

The Utah law looks pretty clear.

And this wasn't pornography for mere profit; this was pornography for the most malicious and vicious of motivations.

It seems too that on the civil side, this qualifies as a textbook-perfect case of LIBEL.

I stand with Miller on this one and wish the girl justice in civil court as well.

Sick, sick, sick. Seriously sick :(

@ anti-liar. You have been reading the wrong textbook. Libel is not a crime, it is a tort. The consequences of libel is a retraction or money damages, not jail time. Do you really think that a statement from the perpetrator saying that the victim does not engage in bestiality with an award of $1 in damages is the proper result for this case?

Yup I still say it is Frivulous (sic)

@ Clinker: "Libel is not a crime, it is a tort."


If you would have read with a little more care, you would have noticed that I very clearly said, in my post, "on the civil side." Don't YOU know what "on the civil side" means?

Is not Libel a CIVIL matter? Hence my use of the word "civil."