Crime Stormy Daniels arrested *UPDATE* charges dropped within 24 hours

AndroidRage said:
Oh, so he got impeached for sleeping with another woman? Infidelity is an impeachable crime? Or was it the fact that he lied about it? And then infidelity only counts while in office? Trump lies about his infidelity. He lies every fucking day about something. And he could be banging another chick on the side now for all we know but this one may be following the NDA he had her sign unlike Stormy who broke her NDA. What a scummy incel you are. Lmao.
Click to expand...
Impeached for lying under oath.
 
AndroidRage said:
Oh, so he got impeached for sleeping with another woman? Infidelity is an impeachable crime? Or was it the fact that he lied about it? And then infidelity only counts while in office? Trump lies about his infidelity. He lies every fucking day about something. And he could be banging another chick on the side now for all we know but this one may be following the NDA he had her sign unlike Stormy who broke her NDA. What a scummy incel you are. Lmao.
Click to expand...
Trump is too busy Making America Great to be banging side sluts. Besides, he’s got an 11 at home he can bang as often as he likes!
4334065.jpg


Now, go back to jerking it to Trump’s sloppy seconds...
072909stormydaniels.jpg
 
sangreporsangre said:
Hurt her drawing power?? I gotta think that it will do the complete opposite. I'm even putting on a tinfoil hat here and wondering if she blew the police chief in this town or something to have this all set up because it couldn't have worked out better for her.
Click to expand...


See, I told you. She has already changed her act and stopped touching people. Her act just got way less interesting.


Stormy Daniels danced — but she didn't touch — at an Ohio strip club a day after her arrest at another club for interacting too closely with patrons who turned out to be undercover police officers.

http://www.wbay.com/content/news/A-...aniels-dances-but-doesnt-touch-488100651.html

 
Cake4Breakfast said:
Cool story about your panic wrestling to change the subject away from your moronic statement about Avenatti being disbarred.
Click to expand...

What a nasty thing for you say, "Cake4Breakfast!" There's no reason to lash out. I'm trying to help you.
 
JonesBones said:
See, I told you. She has already changed her act and stopped touching people. Her act just got way less interesting.


Stormy Daniels danced — but she didn't touch — at an Ohio strip club a day after her arrest at another club for interacting too closely with patrons who turned out to be undercover police officers.

http://www.wbay.com/content/news/A-...aniels-dances-but-doesnt-touch-488100651.html
Click to expand...
Yeah, he's going after this income side hustle.

Everyone is getting what they deserve in this spat. All are terrible people: Trump, all his cronies, Stormy, and her lawyer. All are monstrously selfish people.
 
Stormy's lawyer is in London at the moment, mouthing off at the protest rally.
 
The law that Stormy Daniels was arrested under is 12 O.R.C. § 2907.40(C)(2), which provides:

No employee who regularly appears nude or seminude on the premises of a sexually oriented business, while on the premises of that sexually oriented business and while nude or seminude, shall knowingly touch a patron who is not a member of the employee's immediate family or another employee who is not a member of the employee's immediate family or the clothing of a patron who is not a member of the employee's immediate family or another employee who is not a member of the employee's immediate family or allow a patron who is not a member of the employee's immediate family or another employee who is not a member of the employee's immediate family to touch the employee or the clothing of the employee.
Click to expand...

Stormy's charges were dismissed by Zach Klein, the Columbus City Attorney, on grounds that Stormy wasn't a performer who "regularly appears" at that particular strip club. However, charges remain against the two other strippers who were cited along with Stormy for the same exact conduct, because they "regularly appear" at the club. If that seems arbitrary, that's because it is; the law is clearly aimed at outlawing lascivious touching by employees who "regularly appear[ ] nude or seminude" (i.e. strippers). Replace the phrase "employee who regularly appears nude or semi-nude" with "strippers" and the meaning is clear. The drafters obviously didn't intend to create an exception for guest strippers who do not "regularly appear" at a particular club. The Sixth Circuit even analyzed the same statute and noted that it "prohibits any performer who is nude or semi-nude from touching or being touched." Yet by adopting a strained construction which ignores the clear meaning of the statute, Klein was able justify giving Stormy a literal "get-out-of-jail-free card."

To be fair, the statute can be plausibly read to suggest that "regular appearance" is an element of the crime. However, that's an argument which I would expect a defense attorney to make (i.e., that the statute was vague as applied). It's rather rare that a prosecutor would adopt a criminal defense argument wholesale without otherwise being forced to do so. In this case, it's probably because Klein is a Democrat, and he recently won election by essentially campaigning against Donald Trump (“It’s my intent as the city attorney . . . to stand up for our values in the city of Columbus in the face of adversity from the Trump administration and Jeff Sessions’ justice department,” Klein said). In fact, Klein has used the Columbus City Attorney's Office for ostensibly partisan purposes, including joining a lawsuit over a census question which asks about immigration status (a matter which is none of his business, or the City's). Of course it would be disastrous for the Left if Stormy turned out to be a sleazy criminal – something Klein is undoubtedly aware of. For that reason, Mr. Klein put his thumb on the scale of justice to aid Stormy, and thus aid "the Resistance" against Donald Trump.

5893506921_954ceeb95f_b.jpg

images
7722135_orig.jpg


I've read speculation that perhaps Stormy will file a civil rights suit against the officers for "false arrest" or something like that. But Stormy has absolutely zero chance of succeeding in a civil rights suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. First of all, if she does file suit, the Court will be forced to slap down Klein's strained interpretation of the law, effectively declaring Stormy guilty. Simply put, there was probable cause to believe that Stormy Daniels violated the law. Second, there's something called "qualified immunity" which practically guarantees that the police in "close call" situations like this one will never be civilly liable for damages. At the end of the day, not getting prosecuted is the best Stormy can hope for.

So did Klein just legalize full-contact stripping for guest performers in Columbus, OH? Of course not. The purpose of the law is clear. This was a one-off gift to Stormy Daniels, because she's stormy Daniels, because she's a Liberal icon of resistance against Donald Trump. Klein basically used his office to do political favors for the Left, of which he is a part. Pretty shady IMO.

But in the Court of Public Opinion, Stormy Daniels, like O.J. Simpson, will always be GUILTY.
 
JamesRussler said:
To be fair, the statute can be plausibly read to suggest that "regular appearance" is an element of the crime. However, that's an argument which I would expect a defense attorney to make (i.e., that the statute was vague as applied). It's rather rare that a prosecutor would adopt a criminal defense argument wholesale without otherwise being forced to do so. In this case, it's probably because Klein is a Democrat,
Click to expand...

A defense attorney wouldn't argue that the statute is vague. He would just point out that by the plain language of the statute, Daniels is not guilty as she is not a "regular" performer (supposing that there was no issue with Daniels showing up a handful of times and us debating what constitutes "regular").

Prosecutors often drop cases that they feel they have no chance of winning. In this case, given the retarded amount of press anything pornstar who fucked trump is gonna get, Klein was clearly going to be asked about it by the media. So he gave an answer that was legally sound. It's not like he was running around championing Daniels all over the place.

It's retarded to attribute his very sensible position, to partisanship.
 
Madmick said:
Shot across the bow.

Notice Stormy hasn't issued a pubic statement. Smartest thing that lady has done so far. This was a wake-up call.
Click to expand...
Shot across the bow? So she's being warned she's a target? Seemed more like jumping the gun to me since she didn't actually break any laws.
 
Cake4Breakfast said:
She was a pornstar when he banged Skanky Daniels, without protection, cheating on his gumar McDougle, whom he was cheating on his wife with, all while Melania was home with his infant Barron. But no, Trump was not POTUS while he did that, but he is POTUS while he is lying about it. It's funny that he continues to say it didn't happen, but even his staunchest supporters just assume he lying and accept the fact that he fucked a pornstar as given<Lmaoo>
Click to expand...
Are you serious?

I'm sure no man in any office, ever banged a porn star

It's silly how worked up you tards get over a guy, fucking a woman
 
Darkballs said:
A defense attorney wouldn't argue that the statute is vague. He would just point out that by the plain language of the statute, Daniels is not guilty as she is not a "regular" performer (supposing that there was no issue with Daniels showing up a handful of times and us debating what constitutes "regular")
Click to expand...
.

...And then the judge says "no, counsel, your client is clearly an 'employee who regularly appears nude or seminude,' and I'm not construing the statute in a way that arbitrarily makes an exception for out-of-state guest strippers like your sleazy client." Or you could instead argue that it's vague as applied and perhaps win the motion.

Prosecutors often drop cases that they feel they have no chance of winning.
Click to expand...

Shyeah. Shows how much you know, pal. They may drop cases they don't care about. Otherwise, they don't file cases that don't think they can win, and they only drop cases that you make them drop.

In this case, given the retarded amount of press anything pornstar who fucked trump is gonna get, Klein was clearly going to be asked about it by the media. So he gave an answer that was legally sound. It's not like he was running around championing Daniels all over the place.
Click to expand...

No, he wanted to dismiss it because it's Stormy Daniels, and he doesn't want to give Trump anything to crow about. He thought he saw some ambiguity around the word "regular," so he used that as an excuse to dismiss the charge. He probably wouldn't catch too much shit for maintaining the charge, but he'll catch a ton shit if he throws his cops under the bus. Watch – he's not going to do anything that pisses off the local police union (e.g., recommend discipline, open them up to civil liability).

Read the statute using your common sense – there's no logical reason why it should matter if a stripper "regularly" works at a particular strip club. If that were the law, every strip club in town would just rotate through a steady stream of freelance strippers so they can legally give nude lap dances. In reality, the law "prohibits any performer who is nude or semi-nude from touching or being touched."

It's retarded to attribute his very sensible position, to partisanship.
Click to expand...

Listen to what this clown says. He ran as an anti-Trump candidate. He's an active member of the Resistance. And if he really goes through with that "internal investigation" he's yapping about, he'll be a one-termer guaranteed.
 
Darkballs said:
A defense attorney wouldn't argue that the statute is vague. He would just point out that by the plain language of the statute, Daniels is not guilty as she is not a "regular" performer . . .
Click to expand...

In addition to what I wrote above, read the immediately preceding provision at § 2907.40(C)(1):

(1) No patron who is not a member of the employee's immediate family shall knowingly touch any employee while that employee is nude or seminude or touch the clothing of any employee while that employee is nude or seminude.
Click to expand...

Now, why would the Ohio legislature place upon all strip club patrons an absolute prohibition on touching "any employee while that employee is nude or seminude?" Could it be that it only applies to "regular" strippers? If so, it's not mentioned in there. Or perhaps non-"regular" strippers (like Stromy Daniels) are allowed to touch patrons, but the patrons aren't allowed to touch them back? No, of course not – that would be silly. Section 2907.40(C)(2) is clearly supposed to be a reciprocal provision to section 2907.40(C)(1). Looks like Mr. Klein straight up misinterpreted the law in order to help Stormy Daniels. Boom.
 
BrotherClaudio said:
Are you serious?

I'm sure no man in any office, ever banged a porn star

It's silly how worked up you tards get over a guy, fucking a woman
Click to expand...

Any man that has unprotected sex with a pornstar is gross and is not allowed to use the bathroom in my house. <{clintugh}>
 
BrotherClaudio said:
Who says it was unprotected?
Click to expand...

Stormy did of course, and took a polygraph. Donald is still saying that he didn't bang her (which even his most adamant and bellicose supporters don't believe) or bang Karen McDougle (which even his most adamant and bellicose supporters don't believe).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

650lb Sumo
Law 61 year old Texas grandfather wrongly IDed for robbery by AI, gaoled for about a fortnight and gang raped, leaving permanent injuries.
3 4 5
Replies
95
Views
4K
Andy Capp
Andy Capp

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,237,577
Messages
55,500,962
Members
174,798
Latest member
Mattesson Gaucher

Share this page

Back
Top