Golden goes to jail

sheesh...why did that take so freakin long? This was way back in 2005 that he did this.

http://www.winnipegsun.com/News/Winnipeg/2008/11/04/7295266-sun.html

The swift sword of justice!!

But justice indeed. There was considerable talk about alternative sentencing (read serving the sentence at home). I like it that this knob will spend time in jail.

And between the time he was caught and now how many countless other young people has he managed to hurt?

Sex offenders won't be getting anymore house arrest. The law was changed so that it is automatic prison time.

too bad he wont be in open custody whilst in Jail.

Deank wrote:sheesh...why did that take so freakin long? This was way back in 2005 that he did this.

http://www.winnipegsun.com/News/Winnipeg/2008/11/04/7295266-sun.html

sentenced to 30 months in prison for Internet luring and producing child pornography.

Does this mean he wasn't charged for statutory rape or whatever they call sex with a minor?

At that time sex with a 14 yr old was considered legal. It's now 16.

the law when he was nabbed had the age of consent being much lower then 16. Thank the conservatives for trying to fix that stupid law, too bad the NDP and Liberals ham strung many of thier law reforms.

they call it sex with a minor.

Deank wrote:the law when he was nabbed had the age of consent being much lower then 16. Thank the conservatives for trying to fix that stupid law, too bad the NDP and Liberals ham strung many of thier law reforms.

they call it sex with a minor.

So, its OK to have sex with a lumberjack??

Just think, if he was caught in the USA he would be facing 10 to 30 years.

I hope he goes to Stony Mountain for part of his sentence. Might do him some good.

Freeman wrote:

Deank wrote:the law when he was nabbed had the age of consent being much lower then 16. Thank the conservatives for trying to fix that stupid law, too bad the NDP and Liberals ham strung many of thier law reforms.

they call it sex with a minor.

So, its OK to have sex with a lumberjack??

In the bush.. everything is legal

I think the real crime was perpetrated on Golden!!

He was way overcharged at $1000, don't you think?

He should have had a low esteem discount, perhaps?
How young were these girls? They were out at 4AM! Where were their parents? $1000 is unbelievable!

I didn't follow the story much, so I can only go by what was said in the article and on here.

I'll assume the lumberjacks have nothing to do with the story .

Personally, I think the parents should be fined in this story too...for negligence and/or providing an environment where harm can come to a child.

Something to not only punish the parents for their incompetence, but also to send a message to other parents, that they will be held responsible for the actions of their children.

Conceivably, the kids should be put on probation, for violation of curfew and for participating in illegal acts.

You can argue all you want about how the kids are traumatized, and how the parents have had enough issues...but these girls knew what they were doing...even if they weren't mature enough to understand the consequences. The parents were incompetent...if they allowed their kids to be online chatting with ANYONE at 4am...let alone a perfect stranger.

Basically, 14 years olds are stupid. That's why there's a law to protect them.

As for the parents...I don't know the whole story so I'll not pass judgement....but 14 year olds have been know to sneak out of the house... just sayn'....

AGEsAces wrote:I didn't follow the story much, so I can only go by what was said in the article and on here.

I'll assume the lumberjacks have nothing to do with the story .

Personally, I think the parents should be fined in this story too...for negligence and/or providing an environment where harm can come to a child.

Something to not only punish the parents for their incompetence, but also to send a message to other parents, that they will be held responsible for the actions of their children.

Conceivably, the kids should be put on probation, for violation of curfew and for participating in illegal acts.

You can argue all you want about how the kids are traumatized, and how the parents have had enough issues...but these girls knew what they were doing...even if they weren't mature enough to understand the consequences. The parents were incompetent...if they allowed their kids to be online chatting with ANYONE at 4am...let alone a perfect stranger.

Have you ever had a child that rebelled? I am going to assume not. Because if you had, you wouldn't have wrote what you just did. My sister rebelled and our parents weren't imcompetent. But they should have been punished according to your logic.

I do agree with your statement that the girls knew what they were doing. My sister knew she shouldn't have been doing the thigns she did, but did them anyway.

Have I as a parent? No.

Have I had a sibling who did? and watched as my parents' struggles with what to do? yes.

Have I seen other families who have? yes.

And I have a child, who is only 3, and I anticipate at some point she may try to rebel. It doesn't change the fact that I am (one of) her parents...and that I am responsible for not only her health & safety, but her actions and education as well. That she will develop and make choices based on guidelines and information I can provide, and the best I can do is provide a good role model and some discipline.

ALL children rebel at some point...in their own ways. Some find outlets in music (TURN DOWN THAT RADIO)...some in cutting their hair off, some in piercings, some in drugs...but they ALL have their own rebellion so they can feel they are their own person...and not a robot or offshoot of their parents. It's normal to have some..it's normal to want to rebel...it's a parent's responsibility if that rebellion goes too far.

So...would I say it again? Absolutely.

I'd be willing to bet that the chatting Golden did with the girls was either not the first time, or progressed over a few hours in order to get them to leave their home at 4am. So where were the parents? If it wasn't the first time...then the parents were not monitoring their girls properly...they should know every chat session that occurs...it's all logged in the computer (and if it's been turned off, THAT should make the parent suspicious).

If it was the first time...why were they up chatting on the computer for so many hours without a parent popping a head in and seeing what's happening? It can be done without being intrusive...just a simple sit-down and say "hi" and "what's got you up so late" is all that's usually required.

I'm not trying to defend Golden here...he's obviously got problems...and should be punished and if they're not going to give him a needle...then monitor him forever. But the parents and the girls here have a large responsibility too...and should be held accountable for their part of the incident.

Remember...Shakespeare is revered in history as an artist and genius. His most famous play, Romeo & Juliet revolves around two young lovers...and Juliet was only 14 according to most scholars. And we all know how that story turned out.

I'm sorry but I don't think responsible parents should be punished b/c they have teenage children that will not listen or repsect parental authority.

I am a parent of 3 adult children, all of whom have rebelled in some way through experimenting with drugs, drinking under age, and 2 have tattoos and piercings.  But all three graduated from high school and all have good paying jobs.  One thing both my partner and I would not allow was a computer in the bed room. The computer had to be in a room on the main floor that was visible at all times and I was the administrator of that computer and monitored the web sites and chat rooms, etc that each of them entered. I am not saying that my children are perfect as they each have their own set of problems and have rebelled in their own way but none of them have been in trouble with the law.  When someone in my house is on the house computer and now that they have laptop computers and they log on through wireless it is my name on that IP address so I am responsible for the actions and sites that are visited so I have to monitor and adjust the security on the wireless connection. That is not to say that sites such as p*&n have not been accessed through my IP connection but when I found those sites, the security was changed and consequences were handed out to all 3, not just one (so peer pressure was also involved).  And no I can't control what happens at their friend's homes but as a parent if I have done a good job then they will know that they should be leaving the room if they see something that is wrong.

So in the case of the young girls involved with Golden, the parents should take some responsibility in what happened as they allowed their girls to visit these sites and chat with people they did not know and the parents never took interest nor did they take actions to protect the girls by putting up better security on the IP connection.  The parents also made the mistake of allowing a computer into a child's room where anything can go on.  What is wrong with a curfew time on the intenet connection and disconnecting it, like a light switch that only the parent's control. Parents all complain that their kids don't want to spend any time with them but then they turn aroud and buy them tv's, video games and computers for their rooms and then send them there to be out of their hair and be quiet.  What is wrong with spending family time in the living room watching tv or playing video games together as a family?  What is wrong with a little bit of the values and morals that were in place when we grew up and family was important?

Good Night John Boy  

What you're talking about holly is accountability and responsibility. Something many of today's parents are abdicating. I believe this is a generational thing that started changing in the 50's and grew by leaps and bounds to what we see today.

Time to go back to the basics: Where adults demand and show respect for one another; Where rules and laws mean something; Where there are real consequences for one's actions.

Let's simplify things. Please and thank you. Yes sir. No ma'am. After you. What do you want? What can "I" do for you?

/end holier than thou rant...

My husband and I were just talking about respect. I remember when I was a teenager and taking the bus, if an elderly person or pregnant woman got on that bus and there were no seats I always gave mine up. When I was pregnant I had to take the bus downtown and the bus was packed and no one offered a seat to me, I had to stand the whole ride. Some of today's youth have zero respect...and who can we blame? I blame the parents.

Far to many parents pay no attention to their children's surfing habits or give them to much credit for smarts they don't have or have developed yet.
We need to give parents the right to be in charge and not as afraid of the child screaming abuse or crying that they are to authorities

Pavolo wrote:We need to give parents the right to be in charge and not as afraid of the child screaming abuse or crying that they are to authorities

They have the right...they just don't know it...because they hear of the ridiculous cases like the one in Montreal. If it was me out there, I would've appealed immediately, and filed a suit against the Judge calling for her to be taken off the bench.

One of my brothers was a very rebellious kid. Quick tempered, finding trouble everywhere. He did something (I don't remember what)...my dad went after him with a belt and my brother yells "If you hit me with that thing, I'm calling the police for child abuse!!!"....my dad literally through him through the wall...head first.

After my brother regained consciousness, my dad was sitting there and calmly said..."you can go use the phone now...call whoever you want...but no matter what they do, you'll be back sometime to fix the hole in that wall."

Al Golden, I believe is a businessman who has obviously failed his son!

$1000 for whatever in Winnipeg is way out of line, considering the market in Winnipeg! Even though he got 2 or 3 for that price!
When I encountered that streetwalker, way back in August,in the Northend, I do not think that that much money would have been required! I did not ask!
perhaps the area has something to do with the fee?? Anyone out there that can explain it??

oh for christ sake.. he is out on bail while he appeals his sentance.
http://www.winnipegsun.com/News/Winnipeg/2008/11/13/7404501.html

WHAT A JOKE!!!..
He has been found guilty.. why praytell can he not stay in jail while appealing his sentance...hmm.. letsee.. appeals court wont hear his case until after Christmas... I wonder why he is out? Seems to me this is special favour big time.