DuckSouth.com

ShotgunSP wrote:Here's the thing- guilty or not- this guy was in a position of trust. He goes to schools educating children on weather and has access to children of all ages. When you are in his role, you NEVER put yourself in the position that he did. He privately communicated with a 15 year old over Facebook and had her in his home alone. Both of those are being reported as fact. Those two facts alone should NEVER happen this day in age, as it sets you up for this kind of situation. He crossed a MAJOR line, and now is going to deal with the repercussions for a long time- even if he is innocent of the abuse charges.

I majored in broadcast meteorolgy and teach middle school now. YOU NEVER FRIEND STUDENTS ON FACEBOOK, HANG OUT WITH THEM, LET THEM COME TO YOUR HOUSE, ETC. If a female student is in my class making up a test during my planning period I make sure the door is open and I'm visible. You never know if or when somebody is gonna "get back at you" for a grade or some other crap. It just goes with the job.

For the record anybody messing with a kid thats 16 and your a grown man needs to be shot. They are still little kids even when 17-18.

Forecast for tonight...it's going into the terms


Jackson jambalaya's site has some more details on it as well as page of Eric law pick up lines.

It's amazing how times change. It's very likely that most of you have grandmothers and great grandmothers who were married and had borne children by the time they were 15 years old. Now, such a thing is considered criminal and socially unacceptable, with some referring to 18 year olds and even 31 year olds as "kids".

With regard to these types of accusations, it's generally wisest to withhold judgment until all the facts have been determined or there is an admission. Innocent until proven guilty is not just a sound bite. It's the cornerstone of our criminal justice system.

Unfortunately, our society has become more like, "innocent until proven guilty or unless we don't agree with the "not guilty" verdict"...

On record standing firmly behind my original post. The MF is lucky it wasn't my daughter!
The police report is proof enough for me. No need in spending a dime of taxpayers money on that sick sob.
Bash away all you innocent until proven guilty believers!

The police report for the arrest of Eric Law was obtained through a public records request. Madison police arrested Eric Law for sexual battery and gratification of lust involving a minor. A Rankin County Sheriff's Deputy discovered the contacts and reported them to Madison PD. The report states:

"She advised she had been looking into a case involving juvenile female ***** and 32 year old Eric Law. Investigator Tucker advised she had viewed many Facebook messages between Eric Law and ***** which had been turned over to the Rankin County Sheriff's Department. After reviewing these Facebook messages which indicated the two have had sexual contact, Investigator Sheila Tucker interviewed **** and ***** did confirm she and Eric had been intimate. ..(redacted)... advised these incidents all took place at Eric Law's residence located at Belle Rose Circle, Madison, MS when she had been spending the night with Law. **** **** stated she and Eric would go to the "law and order room" ********** and this is when they would engage in sexual behavior."

Mr. Law is free on $200,000 bond. The victim was 15 when the report issued.

Thats fine as long as you don't mind the same treatment when your name ends up in a police report. Prepare the gallows! We have a police report!

Look I am not defending this guy. Chances are that he is guilty, but I sure as hell don't want to be drawn and quarter based on a police report. I want my constitutional right for trail by jury of peers. This guy has the same right.

If we are going to convict based on the fact that there is a police report then we have surely gotten to the point where this country has strayed from the principals of our founding fathers. That's the sort of thing the revolution was fought for. Another thing that bothers me is that anybody who has said we need to wait for a trial and let a jury decide is all of a sudden “defending” the guy. Nobody is “defending” anyone least of all me. I'm just saying let the process work.

I'll give an example where I could have very easily have ended up in prison. As mentioned earlier I helped my wife with preschool Sunday school. The classrooms had a bathroom between the two classrooms. If a little boy needed to go it was my job to handle it but I made sure that the door was open and my wife witnessed it and knocked on the adjoining door and asked one of their teachers to witness it. They always said, “We know you just handle it.”, but I insisted. One day a little boy went to pee and he didn't reach down and make sure his pee went into the toilet so he ended up peeing all over his pants, shoes, underwear, socks, shoes, everything. Did I reach down and make sure it went into the toilet, HELL NO. Even though that was my first impression I knew better. When the mother came, who we knew us by the way and was a family friend, I explained what happened with my wife and witness present. She laughed it off and said I should have just handled it. As everyone knows I have four girls and am ignorant as far as raising sons.

Now, let's say the child's mother was the one who raised Hell while visiting. Let's also say I subscribed to the thought that everyone knew me and everything would be fine and didn't leave but one door open. That door being the one to our room where my wife watched. I have no doubt this mother would have raised Hell and that no explanation I offered would have appeased her. The fact that my wife watched would have been spun into her knowing I had a “problem” and she was complicit. The police report would have said I admitted to touching the child's genitals and leaving off the part about why. If I had drawn a DA who was bent on making a name for himself, the Duke lacrosse DA comes to mind, then I'm totally screwed.

So based on the scenario I've given above, you will have me lynched and swinging from the tallest tree at the courthouse by sundown because the police report “said” I did something.

Again, I'm not defending this guy. Let the system work before making snap judgments.

You've completely over analyzed what I'm saying Seymore as well as given a scenario that is not even in the same book, much less the same page.

To spell it out in detail of what I’m actually saying is that if an “investigator viewed many (or one for that matter) facebook messages between” you & my 15 year old daughter & indicated in the police report that the two of you had sexual contact, I would not have you lynched and swinging from the tallest tree at the courthouse by sundown as you say. However; I would gag & secure you in the of my attic behind a trap door so there would be no way for anyone to locate you. And every day when I got home from work, I’d visit you in the attic. We could call it the “law & order room” just for giggles.
If this is not clear enough, I can go into details of what I would do to you during those visits, but hopefully we won’t have to go that far.

I really don't think I over analyzed anything though you are not the first to accuse me of that. Your statement was the police report said it, that was enough for you. If you would like to qualify that statement now, that's fine. The example I gave was just a good example of how something can be taken out of context and take on a life of it's on. I am speaking in generalities here and not relating that to the Eric Law case in anyway. Yes, it's apples and oranges.

Look, I'm not defending the guy. I've got 4 girls of my own. But I do think he, as does everyone accused of a crime, deserves their day in court with a fair an impartial jury.

my statement was “qualified” in the post before yours when i showed what the report said.
obviously you only read the first 2 lines. we'll call that under analyzing.

This boils down to two basic questions. Try to temper your emotions and hostility for just a second and consider them openly and honestly.

1) Do you or do you not believe every one is entitled to a trial by an impartial jury.

2) If you were selected to be in the jury pool would you or would you not answer voir dire that you have already formed your opinion and couldn't not serve as a juror in an impartial manner.

Everyone is entitled to have an opinion and a person is entitled to form an opinion about the guilt or innocence of an individual prior to that a person having a trial. However, that person should be no where near the legal process in determining the guilt or innocence of an individual.

Seymore and EsJay:

I know both you guys and can see where each of you is coming from. I agree with Seymore that we wouldn't rush to conclusions because police reports are not investigations and can be misleading. And I also sympathize with EsJay's protective instinct. I think we all agree that if the guy is guilty he should get it and if he isn't he should be cleared of wrongdoing.

JDgator wrote:Seymore and EsJay:

I know both you guys and can see where each of you is coming from. I agree with Seymore that we wouldn't rush to conclusions because police reports are not investigations and can be misleading. And I also sympathize with EsJay's protective instinct. I think we all agree that if the guy is guilty he should get it and if he isn't he should be cleared of wrongdoing.

well put and that should be the end of it.

like jdgator said, i think i can speak for all of us by saying that if he is guilty then he should pay the consequences and if he is innocent his name should be cleared.

Thats just it.

Even if relieved of all wrong doing.


His name is MUDD!¡!!!!!







Just the way the south works.