In South Carolina, U.S. Senate candidate Alvin Greene has been hit with a felony indictment for showing pornography to a South Carolina college student. The grand jury issued the indictment for disseminating, procuring or promoting obscenity. As expressed earlier, I have serious reservations about this charge. He was also given a misdemeanor charge of communicating obscene materials to a person without consent.
The facts of this incident remain a bit sketchy, though it remains great news for Incumbent Sen. Jim DeMint. 
Greene, an unemployed veteran who lives with his parents, was a surprise winner in the primary over former four-term state lawmaker Vic Rawl, 64. He was arrested in November and charged with showing obscene Internet photos to a University of South Carolina student. If convicted, he could be sentenced to up to five years in prison.
He has refused to comment on the charges, though he reportedly showed the woman the pictures and wanted to go up to her room. I am quite surprised to see such a matter result in a formal criminal charge, let alone a felony. If the individual is not distributing pornography or making threats, prosecutors usually treat this as creepy or boorish behavior. Obscenity remains an often ambiguous concept in criminal codes. Reports indicate that Camille McCoy, a 19-year-old rising sophomore, said that Greene sat down next to her in a computer lab and asked her to look at his screen which showed a porn site. That is usually not enough for a criminal charge. Moreover, it is hard to imagine that the police could show for sure which image was showing on the screen at the time. There are often complaints of people watching pornography on airplanes or college computer labs. Such conduct can result in expulsion from a public area or even a school, but rarely rises to the level of a criminal charge.
It is not clear how they will prove the specific image shown on the computer, though they can likely show what images will viewed on the given computer during that period. If he did in fact invite the person to look at the images, there is a question of presumed consent. The person had to actively turn to look at the image. This would appear to be the type of case the defense counsel warn their clients about in terms of publicity: one week on the cover of Time, next week doing Time. Publicity in such a matter can draw prosecutors to a case that would be ordinarily dropped. I believe he would have some strong defenses at both trial and, if needed, on appeal to such a charge.
Source: CNN
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/08/clyburn-im-not-going-to-vote-for-alvin-greene.php?ref=fpb
Aw, shucks. I reckon I was just tryin’ to set the record straight and all.
Yissil
1, August 14, 2010 at 2:14 pm
Blouise
1, August 13, 2010 at 10:49 pm
Yissil
1, August 13, 2010 at 10:40 pm
God we are all so old …
==================================================
Shut up
==================================================
Oh I didn’t mean *you*!
=============================================================
In that case, you are now the wisest poster on the block!
Blouise
1, August 13, 2010 at 10:49 pm
Yissil
1, August 13, 2010 at 10:40 pm
God we are all so old …
==================================================
Shut up
==================================================
Oh I didn’t mean *you*!
A Kentucky federal jury convicted judges and other election officials of throwing elections for years with electronic voting machines.
http://blogdredd.blogspot.com/2010/03/election-conspiracy-theory-confirmed.html
Yissil,
The point of “voting” in Greene was to grease the wheels for the Republican incumbent, Sen. DeMint. The other stuff was just icing on the cake for the Republicants. I may be old, but I still can remember my 20’s!
Yissil
1, August 13, 2010 at 10:40 pm
God we are all so old …
==================================================
Shut up 8)
God we are all so old …
rafflaw
I agree, but what was the point of getting a mentally disturbed barely articulate black guy who was facing degrading sexual charges on the ballot in the first place? Especially in a race where the dems have no chance? It has no practical effect. It’s a racist joke.
And maybe a test of the technology. And of the will of the Dems and the feds to investigate.
Yissil,
As a person who actually admits to have worked on Nixon’s campaign, yes it was a family thing. My folks are pretty much all Repugnant Republicans. I know what you are saying first hand. It was in Tyler, Texas, a lot of oil money for him. My vested interest was he said he’d stop the Vietnam War. I was near draft age, was not something I wanted to do. I would have asked for a deferment if I had gotten the number. …….
Yissil,
I made a study of Watergate and I remember Segretti. CREEP was indeed just that. I’m surprised at myself for failing to even see the dots in this case.