Post: #1

Dad cleared in vibrator case

http://www.altoonamirror.com/page/conten...ml?nav=742

October 17, 2012
By Kay Stephens ([email protected]) , The Altoona Mirror
Save | Comments (44) | Post a comment | Bookmark and Share

HOLLIDAYSBURG - The Hollidaysburg-area father who told a jury that he bought a vibrator for his then-13-year-old daughter was cleared Tuesday of all criminal charges, including dissemination of sex material to a minor.

To reach a guilty verdict on that charge, the jury needed to conclude that the vibrator fit the legal definition of obscene material. After hearing Senior Judge Thomas G. Peoples read the applicable law for the second time, the jury concluded that it didn't.

"It was the right decision," defense attorney Mark Zearfaus said. "Sex toys are not illegal. It may not be advisable to buy one for a teenager, but it's not a crime."

The jury of seven women and five men also acquitted the father on a second charge of disseminating sex material to a minor, based on the daughter's accusation that they watched pornographic movies, and on additional charges of endangering the welfare of a child, corruption of minors and indecent assault.

The Mirror is not identifying the father and the daughter, now 16, to protect the girl's identity.

Assistant District Attorney Dan Kiss said the charges were based on the father's behavior which developed over several months after the daughter began staying with him on weekends in late 2009.

"This man groomed his young daughter to be sexually molested," Kiss said.

The father, he said, presented his daughter with pornography, allowed her to smoke cigarettes and marijuana, bought her a vibrator, then asked for oral sex. Their relationship ended, Kiss said, when the daughter rejected those advances.

The father, who took the witness stand Monday, denied his daughter's accusations. He said he purchased the vibrator after the daughter made repeated requests and told him she feared that she might resume cutting herself intentionally.

The father said he made the purchase after reading about a 2009 episode of "Oprah" where Dr. Laura Berman advised parents to consider purchasing vibrators for their teenagers.

Post: #2

Ultimate omega

Post: #3

If we limit this to just the purchase of the vibrator, I agree with the verdict. If he had purchased a dildo (fake phallus), he wouldn't have plausible deniability. Vibrators are used for non-sexual massage.

As for the rest of this, it's he-said, she-said. If he had actually made sexual advances on his daughter, let her smoke weed, and watched porn with her, he should be denied access to her until she's no longer a minor. It's possible this guy is a pervert, or the girl could be a manipulating bitch that made this up to get something she wanted from the dad, and when he said no, she could have threatened him with molestation charges. Who knows?

Post: #4

People do bizzare shit every day.

But this is just...weird.