Jack Schaap in court today in an orange Porter County Jail jumpsuit and leg irons

Not directly. But, the age of consent laws were batted around quite a bit ( much like they were with the Chuck Phelps mess). But they Grey issue was in his orb. It may have been before you were on SI, but we discussed it here in great length.

Roger, I wasn’t speaking to the age of consent issues. Though the Feds did get involved because the Federal age is lower. What made it a Federal crime was the transportation across state lines. As I understand the case, she was above the age of consent in the Indiana, Michigan, and Illinois. What he was pleading ignorance to was the Mann Act and its lower age. So, he learned the “lessons” from the Grey case (make sure your victim is above the age of consent), just not the Federal one.

[rogercarlson]

Not directly. But, the age of consent laws were batted around quite a bit ( much like they were with the Chuck Phelps mess). But they Grey issue was in his orb. It may have been before you were on SI, but we discussed it here in great length.

I see now. A couple of things. The Illinois law is 18 (that is my state). He pastored close to Illinois. A lesson to be learned (besides fleeing and fighting sin) is to know the laws in surrounding states. It helps us in reporting issues. Reporting is hard and ugly, but we have to do it.

From the mug shot in the OP, he’s not going to have any problems with hair checks for awhile.

Bogart in San Quentin

Hope he learns to listen carefully: What we’ve got here is (a) failure to communicate

1. Is this the result of genuine repentance?

Or

2. Did his lawyers calculate that he risked worse consequences if he went to trial?

Knowing that you were going away immediately, I would think one would want a trial, even if it only meant prolonging the inevitable.

Please see the link to the WSJ article up the thread.

In the Federal system, a plea bargain can take the uncertainty out of the sentencing. In this case, he plead guilty to a single charge in exchange for a ten year (the mandatory minimum under the Federal guidelines). If he had gone to trial, the Federal attorney was prepared to bring multiple counts bringing with them a possible life sentence. Also, the various states dropped their investigations, keeping him from bouncing from the Federal system to multiple state systems.

[Jonathan Charles]

1. Is this the result of genuine repentance?

Or

2. Did his lawyers calculate that he risked worse consequences if he went to trial?

Knowing that you were going away immediately, I would think one would want a trial, even if it only meant prolonging the inevitable.

[Jonathan Charles]

1. Is this the result of genuine repentance?

Or

2. Did his lawyers calculate that he risked worse consequences if he went to trial?

Knowing that you were going away immediately, I would think one would want a trial, even if it only meant prolonging the inevitable.

The WSJ article was in another thread … here’s the link again.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100008723963904435893045776376100972068…

Note the graphic called “Tough Odds”

The Feds had the goods on him. Better to cop a plea than expend limited financial resources going to trial where he would have gotten more than 10 if convicted.

I commented on this on another thread

Here:

http://sharperiron.org/comment/47579#comment-47579

Summary:

I’m skeptical that there is any correlation between the plea bargain and repentance. He and his lawyers looked at the case the government had against him and made the best of a bad situation. 10 years (if that is how it turns out) is better than 15. Cutting bait is better than protracted legal proceedings that would consume Schaap family financial resources. Bargaining with one legal entity (the Feds) is better than dealing with 4 (Indiana, Michigan, Illinois and the Federal government

I’m guessing he will go to FCI Pekin

[Jonathan Charles]

1. Is this the result of genuine repentance?

Or

2. Did his lawyers calculate that he risked worse consequences if he went to trial?

Knowing that you were going away immediately, I would think one would want a trial, even if it only meant prolonging the inevitable.

We got into that on another thread, but it certainly sounds like he avoided other charges by taking this plea agreement.

As for ‘genuine repentance’ - if he’s winking, shooting the thumbs up at people from the church and family, and the like, it doesn’t sound to me like the actions of someone who is truly repentant. Saying that “I know it’s a sin, but I didn’t know it was a crime” doesn’t sound like conviction or godly repentance to me.

Jim - I haven’t dealt with the Fed side of the criminal justice system, but my understanding is that the Feds don’t necessarily have to keep him in state, although that could be either a mitigating (family and friends in state) / extenuating (victim is a minor, Schaap has already traveled out of state) circumstance when it comes to the judge’s decision on where to send him.

My understanding is that whoever drove the girl to the adulterous liaisons COULD be legally liable as an accessory if they knew what they were doing and what was going on. If they didn’t suspect or were unaware, then that makes it different.

Of course, I would also argue that someone should have had enough sense to ask why this was necessary. But that’s a different matter from how the law works.

On a final note - this is why you call the cops or lawyers when this kind of stuff is suspected or occurring. I know a little bit about how the system works and am just trying to help answer questions, but I am not licensed to practice law or discuss courtroom proceedings with a high level of certainty.

The Federal prosecutors observed the actions in your first paragraph. So, while the Shaaps may be thinking Pekin, Illinois, I get a funny feeling he’s going to end up somewhere there’s no snow or frost line. Maybe Florida or Arizona.

[Jay]

SNIP

As for ‘genuine repentance’ - if he’s winking, shooting the thumbs up at people from the church and family, and the like, it doesn’t sound to me like the actions of someone who is truly repentant. Saying that “I know it’s a sin, but I didn’t know it was a crime” doesn’t sound like conviction or godly repentance to me.

Jim - I haven’t dealt with the Fed side of the criminal justice system, but my understanding is that the Feds don’t necessarily have to keep him in state, although that could be either a mitigating (family and friends in state) / extenuating (victim is a minor, Schaap has already traveled out of state) circumstance when it comes to the judge’s decision on where to send him.

[Rob Fall] The Federal prosecutors observed the actions in your first paragraph. So, while the Shaaps may be thinking Pekin, Illinois, I get a funny feeling he’s going to end up somewhere there’s no snow or frost line. Maybe Florida or Arizona.

The thing that Schaap and others have to learn is that they now have absolutely NO control over anything anymore. Schaap will find that out for sure when he gets put behind bars, and if he tries to manipulate the system to regain control, he’ll be a noncompliant prisoner and that will get noticed for sure. Prison officers and employees have a LOT of experience with people trying to manipulate them…comes with the job description.

With a sex crime on his record, I very highly doubt he’ll be going to any kind of minimum or rehab facility. It will be medium security or higher; there’s a listing of the types of prison classifications and security measures at this site.

I’ve got a feeling he’s heading far, far away too. I can’t explain it, but if I was the judge, I’d be sending him to Alaska, New York, California or somewhere like that…as far as he can go from Indiana.

Looked up the link in post 29.

My vote is for FCI (Medium) Victorville, CA (I or II).