Chad Curtis-pedaphile?

[tycobb420]

http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2012/05/former_major_leaguer_chad_curt.html

 

[hellifino]

lol he plays with different balls now.

 

[Mitchrapp]

I hope he's innocent but if not sick bastard.

 

[tonyballs]

Must have been the haircut.

 

[jimrice]

I like one of the comments.... "I wouldn't let a NY Yankee near my children"

 

[Thumb]

The article does not say if it's male or female students.

Probably tougher for a male kid to come forwards about stuff like that, and probably more traumatic.

 

[tigersofjustice]

Innocent until proven guilty. I have to say, as a matter of policy, I have a real problem with these types of 'investigations' getting out before there is a formal charge. Even then, I would prefer defendants remain anonymous until a guilty verdict. Fact is you can pretty much tarnish anybody's good name permanently by just associating them with something like this, true or untrue.

 

[tycobb420]

Innocent until proven guilty. I have to say, as a matter of policy, I have a real problem with these types of 'investigations' getting out before there is a formal charge. Even then, I would prefer defendants remain anonymous until a guilty verdict. Fact is you can pretty much tarnish anybody's good name permanently by just associating them with something like this, true or untrue.

Very true.

 

[tomdalton22]

Innocent until proven guilty. I have to say, as a matter of policy, I have a real problem with these types of 'investigations' getting out before there is a formal charge. Even then, I would prefer defendants remain anonymous until a guilty verdict. Fact is you can pretty much tarnish anybody's good name permanently by just associating them with something like this, true or untrue.

I disagree. I think the way our legal system is set up many guilty people get off becuase we don't want any innocent people getting convicted of a crime they didn't commit. If a teacher where my son goes to school goes to trial for doing someting inappropriate but gets off I want to know about it even if he gets off. There is still a chance that he did it and will do it again.

 

[Rebbiv]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...priately-touching-FOUR-high-school-girls.html

 

[tycobb420]

Well, it was girls afterall...the Brits are on it.

 

[tomdalton22]

Fired from another school district. My guess this isn't the first time he touched young girls.

 

[tigersofjustice]

I disagree. I think the way our legal system is set up many guilty people get off becuase we don't want any innocent people getting convicted of a crime they didn't commit. If a teacher where my son goes to school goes to trial for doing someting inappropriate but gets off I want to know about it even if he gets off. There is still a chance that he did it and will do it again.

Ok but then Tom, you are essentially becoming judge jury and executioner are you not? You want to be able to civilly punish this man for something he 'may' have done and you're going to do so without any facts to even make an accurate determination of that? Doesn't that sound more than a bit ridiculous?

Your way of thinking seems to be, just punish everyone and we'll get the guilty people to. I understand that to an extent if your kids are nearby but just because you are biased for that reason doesn't make it right. What your point basically comes down to at that point is "Destroy this others guy's life rather than risk my kids harm". Obviously your kids are more important to you, but why should your kids be more important to society than this other person?

 

[tomdalton22]

Ok but then Tom, you are essentially becoming judge jury and executioner are you not? You want to be able to civilly punish this man for something he 'may' have done and you're going to do so without any facts to even make an accurate determination of that? Doesn't that sound more than a bit ridiculous?

Your way of thinking seems to be, just punish everyone and we'll get the guilty people to. I understand that to an extent if your kids are nearby but just because you are biased for that reason doesn't make it right. What your point basically comes down to at that point is "Destroy this others guy's life rather than risk my kids harm". Obviously your kids are more important to you, but why should your kids be more important to society than this other person?

Letting the public know he went to trial but was cleared is not punishing him for something he may or may not have done. It's informing the public that there may have been a problem but he was not found guilty. At that point I am free to make my own assumptions as long as I don't infringe on his rights. What if it comes out that he was fired from his old job because someone accused him of doing the same thing but it was never made public?

 

[zonietigerfan]

I hear you Tom, but all I have to say is this: McMartin. In case one doesn't remember this tawdry tale, here it is: http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/mcmartin/mcmartinaccount.html
$15 mil the friendly useful idiot California folks paid out to prosecute innocent people, refusing to believe adults while 'coaching' youngsters. Can you say Inquisition?
Don't get me wrong: IF Curtis is guilty he needs to spend prison time. And - as a retired teacher - might I add that he & everyone called on the carpet for inappropriate behavior does indeed cast a black eye on folks in education, especially males. Just comes with the territory. What I do find troubling is that he may well be a serial offender and that's quite scary.