blogger interrupted

So Pat O’Malley plead guilty to one felony count of “obscenity”.  Here’s what his attorney claims happened.

 O’Malley’s lawyer, Ian Friedman, declined to detail the computer images that led to O’Malley’s guilty plea. He stressed they did not include child pornography.

Friedman said O’Malley’s computer contained images of adult pornography that jurors may have considered legally obscene.

“There is certain material that crosses the line,” Friedman said. “I can’t comment on the exact nature. I think it will be debated at sentencing.” 

Bullshit.  Just fucking bullshit.  O’Malley’s computer was seized in November of 2004, this case has been going on for four years, and we’re supposed to believe that all this case turned up was some “obscenity” involving adults?   What is this, The People vs. Larry Flynt?

O’Malley is out on $100,000 bond.  ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS.  What on earth could be so “legally obscene” that O’Malley’s bond is set at that level?  When I was arrested, my bond was $15,000.   How is O’Malley’s “obscenity” case so much worse than mine that his bond is almost TEN TIMES HIGHER if there is only some adult related “obscenity”?

As for his plea deal - what prosecutor agrees to a one count “obscenity” plea after a FOUR YEAR investigation of a defendant whose bond is set at SIX FIGURES?  That is some deal.  It’s like being arrested for armed robbery and pleading down to disorderly conduct.  

Bill Mason has some explaining to do.  

Popularity: 30% [?]