By Paul Daquilante • Staff Writer • 

Victim, relatives stand by child porn offender

Only online subscribers may access this article.

One-day subscriptions available for just $2. Subscribe online by clicking here.

Already a subscriber, please .

Comments

Lulu

"When I first heard 70 months, I wondered why?"
I simply lose hope when I read about these perverted twisted people and the judges who enable them to destroy children.

When I first heard 70 months, I wondered why not longer?

TTT

Rosevear groomed his victims well enough that they now defend him. Classic predator.

Deputy DA Lisl Miller whom is running for judge won't be getting my vote.

Her website even states "Why I’m running… it’s about our safety".

Ms. Miller please tell us how this outcome, driven partially by your recommendation, creates safety for children in our community?

Bizzyditchaz

Groomed to the point of being complacent. Not a good message to be sending!
Miller will not be getting my vote!
Perverts are the best at manipulation and the worst for recommitting their crimes! He'll just search outside his inner circle now.

Lulu

These cold-blooded plea agreements actually help me: I can now totally eliminate Lisl Miller, along with Lawrence, from my vote consideration.
Plant a hundred million pinwheels, and so what? These perverts and their backwoods families are offered outrageous deals by our alleged Yamhill County justices. You know who the law hits most swiftly and hardest? People who hunt/fish out of season or without licenses or receive food stamps because they under-reported their actual income. Why the difference? Because the government has been milked, and revenge will follow pronto.
Here's an idea: why not let both Rosevear and John Hanson Jr., the deviant creep who violated his probation about 30 minutes after Collins cut him loose, pay their debt by opening a day care center? One absolutely free of charge to the families--much like the St. Jude philosophy. They can offer refreshments, show movies, teach anatomy, play hide-and-seek and the very exciting button, button, who's got the button game. I'm positive, from their past behavior, they both have multiple lessons to teach.

T.W.S.

TTT, Bizzy & Lulu...you three clearly have no understanding of how the criminal justice system works; and basing one case's outcome as a blanket hasty generalization (logical fallacy) to not vote for DDA Miller is beyond defensible. There are things that are beyond a prosecutors control. Those factors weigh heavily in the decision to proceed to trial or plea a case out. The victim clearly exhibits a version of Stockholm Syndrome, favoring her abuser. That FACT makes the state's case harder to argue, especially when the other family supports the abuser as well. As you three just demonstrated, emotive knee jerk reactions tend to lead to irrational and undereducated decisions. Same emotive problem plays into the prosecutors mind as well. All it takes is one juror, and given today's climate it would not surprise me if a few jurors fell for the victim's and family's bleeding hearts and sided with them. Getting 70 months is better than an acquittal (even if by jury nullification); not to say that would happen, but it is within the realm of possibility. OR the jury could find him not guilt on the more serious offenses and guilty on lesser included offenses which would result in less time than 70 months. Bottom line, there are variables that none of you three will ever be privy to to understanding both DDA Miller's decision and agreement with Defense Counsel who worked to get the best agreement in the best interests of his client. Bottom line, he is going to prison where he belongs. Perhaps a little more (poetic) justice will be received there. Either way, you three have education/knowledge in the criminal justice system and need to consider that fact before making such ignorant emotive knee-jerk reactions about a case you know nothing about whereas the inner workings are concerned.

T.W.S.

CORRECTION: Either way, you three have *NO*
education/knowledge in the criminal justice system and need to consider that fact before making such ignorant emotive knee-jerk reactions about a case you know nothing about whereas the inner workings are concerned.
04:47 pm - Thu, April 19 2018

Lulu

"Whereas the inner workings are concerned"???
I'm supposed to agree with someone who makes that statement?
Call me knee-jerky and emotive, but you've cornered the ignorance market.

TTT

T.W.S. I find it troubling how much you assume to know about me based upon four short sentences of text.

I've experienced enough in life to understand I shouldn't just trust the government therefore as I've stated above I'm asking for clarification. Perhaps a bit more transparency into the decision would provide those reading the article further understanding of the decision.

T.W.S.

Lulu - Of everything I said, that quoted out of context fallacy you did is your sole basis for justifying such an absurd position as "i'm supposed to agree with something who makes that statement?" *facepalm* that speaks volumes about you and your obvious lack of knowledge of the criminal justice system, Thanks for proving my point! *hand clap* And you accuse me of corning the "ignorance market." *roll eyes* Clearly you are the ignorant one, incapable of defending your original position with such a trolling retort like that. Ignore ALL the FACTS I outlined in my original comment (OC) and cherry pick an innocuous comment and turn it into a straw man fallacy. Genius. Well, not really.

T.W.S.

TTT - I never assume, I presume based on empirical data. That data is your words. Words can be interpreted via the context, syntax and in the semantics they are given. In other words, you tell me all that I need to know about your position, not you personally, about the topic at hand.

Yamhill County isn't just 'the government,' it is a tiny part of a bigger concept. Such a hasty generalization begs the need to question your so-called "life experience." That in and of itself opens a can of worms, but I will leave that for later.

Transparency, do a FOIA request if you want to understand the inner workings of the process that lead to that ultimate and final decision in this case. Either way, being critical of the DDA let alone the DAs office on one case such as this is not a well-informed decision. It is a naive and ignorant decision. Fact.

Lulu

Well, facepalm, hand clap and roll eyes. I love reading and receiving the stage directions simultaneously, not to mention the mixed metaphors.
"The fascist octopus has sung its swan song."

T.W.S.

lulu - your banality is not amusing, and neither is your continued demonstrated ignorance and intellectual cowardice in addressing the message rather than the messenger.

Lulu

I believe in your malignant rage you transposed "message" and "messenger."
*upchuck sound*

T.W.S.

Lulu - You took the bate hook line and sinker! Thanks for proving what an uninformed voter you will be, and as such, a detriment where "the inner workings [of the voting intent and process] are concerned" And you're still an intellectual coward.

Lulu

I'll bet you admired Joe McCarthy.
He liked to bait, too.

T.W.S.

Wasn’t even born/alive to know McCarthy. Try again, intellectual coward.

Lulu

Well, if you weren't alive at the time, I guess Tail-Gunner Joe never existed. You might check out the documentary "Point of Order."

How on earth did you develop such a poisonous personality, Ms. T.W.S.?

T.W.S.

Lulu - still being the intellectual coward, addressing me and not the topic at hand. You're one to talk about poisonous personality *face palm* Do you even read what you write/submit for comment?

Web Design & Web Development by LVSYS