Ex-ACLU official to plead in porn case

[Ban Hammer 13,340]

McLEAN, Va. - A former president of the Virginia chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union is expected to plead guilty to criminal charges stemming from his arrest in February on child pornography possession charges, according to court records.

A judge in U.S. District Court in Alexandria on Wednesday scheduled a June 1 plea agreement hearing for Charles Rust-Tierney, 51, of Arlington. It was not clear what charges would be included in the plea agreement.

A grand jury indicted Rust-Tierney this month on one count each of receipt and possession of child pornography. A conviction at trial on both counts could have resulted in a prison sentence of 11 to 14 years, according to federal sentencing guidelines.

Rust-Tierney, who also coached Little League baseball in Arlington, has been in jail since his arrest. At pretrial hearings, two judges refused to grant bail, describing the pornography in question as some of the most sickening they had ever encountered.

Among the items found on Rust-Tierney's computer was a six-minute video that prosecutors described as "a compilation of some of the worst child torture and rape scenes" that police have seen in their various investigations of child exploitation, all set to music by the rock band Nine Inch Nails.

Prosecutors said in court documents that Rust-Tierney spent nearly $1,000 between March 2005 and October 2006 on child pornography ordered over the Internet.

His lawyer did not return calls seeking comment.

Rust-Tierney was president of the ACLU's Virginia chapter from 2002 through 2005, according to the organization's newsletters. Court records state that Rust-Tierney had been working in the D.C. public defender's office and that he served one year as president of Arlington Little League.

link

[Fandango 1,439]

Oh my God that is really horrific!

What a sick b@stard. I feel like vomiting

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

How is it ironic?

The guy committed the crime, not the institution he worked for.

[Alex+R 0]

Charles, do you know the definition of irony?

This guy is just a sick **, and not everything can be exploited to fit your political interests.

[Fandango 1,439]

I guess what Charles was saying that it's ironic that this sick ** was working to defend civil liberties, all the while ordering rape montages of children.

What about their liberties?

This doesn't change my view of the ACLU tho, I always thought they were cherry-picking a$$hats.

[Alex+R 0]

I guess what Charles was saying that it's ironic that this sick ** was working to defend civil liberties, all the while ordering rape montages of children.

What about their liberties?

This doesn't change my view of the ACLU tho, I always thought they were cherry-picking a$$hats.

Rey just informed me the other day that he is now a card-carrying member.

[Ban Hammer 13,340]

How is it ironic?

The guy committed the crime, not the institution he worked for.

you do remember the aclu defended nambla.........

Charles, do you know the definition of irony?

yes, see my reply to erekose <---snarky wink just for you

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

How is it ironic?

The guy committed the crime, not the institution he worked for.

you do remember the aclu defended nambla.........

Yes - but as I recall they defended their right to "free speech", which isn't really the same as endorsing a criminally deviant lifestyle.

I'm wondering if we can make a distinction between the individual and the entity/organisation they work for. Its not like the ACLU has covered up for this guy to keep him in his job - which is exactly what the The Catholic Church did; and they ended embroiled in a massive lawsuit resulting in large damages payments - because the organisation made itself the accessory to crimes committed by certain of its members. That would seem to be a fairly important distinction...

[Ban Hammer 13,340]

How is it ironic?

The guy committed the crime, not the institution he worked for.

you do remember the aclu defended nambla.........

Yes - but as I recall they defended their right to "free speech", which isn't really the same as endorsing a criminally deviant lifestyle.

I'm wondering if we can make a distinction between the individual and the entity/organisation they work for. Its not like the ACLU has covered up for this guy to keep him in his job - which is exactly what the The Catholic Church did; and they ended embroiled in a massive lawsuit resulting in large damages payments - because the organisation made itself the accessory to crimes committed by certain of its members. That would seem to be a fairly important distinction...

still, it makes me wonder about anyone who works there

[Fandango 1,439]

My problem with the ACLU was that they didn't stand up for Terri Schiavo. Now I believe in right-to-die, but she wasn't just allowed to peacefully go, she had a court ordered starvation & dehydration. Fine, feeing tube is out...but she actually had the police making sure that her parents didn't put anything in her mouth. And I cannot believe that that happened in today's times. I cannot believe the ACLU failed her because NOWHERE does it say a court can order you not to be fed.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

My problem with the ACLU was that they didn't stand up for Terri Schiavo. Now I believe in right-to-die, but she wasn't just allowed to peacefully go, she had a court ordered starvation & dehydration. Fine, feeing tube is out...but she actually had the police making sure that her parents didn't put anything in her mouth. And I cannot believe that that happened in today's times. I cannot believe the ACLU failed her because NOWHERE does it say a court can order you not to be fed.

That whole case was a big mess. Not least because of the constitutional issues stemming from how it was handled by the courts and local/national government. The courts ruled a decision which its agents (the police) were legally obliged to uphold. Jeb Bush comes along threatening to take her into custody in direct violation of that.

Having law enforcement officials, representing different branches of government face off against each other with conflicting objectives - is about as threatening to constitutional democracy as you can get.

[Fandango 1,439]

My problem with the ACLU was that they didn't stand up for Terri Schiavo. Now I believe in right-to-die, but she wasn't just allowed to peacefully go, she had a court ordered starvation & dehydration. Fine, feeing tube is out...but she actually had the police making sure that her parents didn't put anything in her mouth. And I cannot believe that that happened in today's times. I cannot believe the ACLU failed her because NOWHERE does it say a court can order you not to be fed.

That whole case was a big mess. Not least because of the constitutional issues stemming from how it was handled by the courts and local/national government. The courts ruled a decision which its agents (the police) were legally obliged to uphold. Jeb Bush comes along threatening to take her into custody in direct violation of that.

Having law enforcement officials, representing different branches of government face off against each other with conflicting objectives - is about as threatening to constitutional democracy as you can get.

I was very active with the TS campaign...the things that went on were astounding. Aside from the whole 'is MS a b@stard or not' the bottom line is that the judge (among TONS of overlooking tons of illegal stuff like medicare fraud and guardianship legal issues, perjury, etc)...the judge ordered it against the law to feed her. Against the law to put a washcloth with orange juice up to her lips. Can you imagine? A brain damaged but aware woman with no food, no water slowly being executed for over 2 weeks. The HORROR of it all!

Ok, pull out the tube...but that doesn't mean it's anyone's right to STARVE her if she's able to take by mouth. And if she tried, but choked and died....well, hell, that woulda been more humane.

Jeb Bush FAILED Terri too...he should have gotten her. Someone should have stood up and said, 'hey, this is America, we wouldn't starve OBL to death, much less an innocent who needs our protection' No, it was pandered by ALL politicians on both sides, exploiting her to emotionall charge the issue and to get THEIR politics across....they are all nothing but horrible horrible b@stards & honestly, I don't think I'll ever get over what happened.

Ok, I'm going to stop cos I could ramble on and on all day over this.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

As far as feeding tubes go - with euthanasia being illegal and legislation to that effect constantly shouted down by "right to life" campaigners and conservative religious types, it is legal to terminate care, by switching off life-support systems. A feeding tube, might or might not fall outside of that definition (which I'm guessing usually refers to ventilators and other paraphenalia that regulate bodily functions) - its hard to say.

The big irony there of course, was GWB making himself out to be champion of the "right to life", when a few short years before - as Texas Governor he passed a "futile care" bill, which did the exact opposite. Allowing hospitals and healthcare providers to essentially make decisions on behalf of the patient - even to the extent of disregarding the explicit wishes of next of kin. In fact when the Terry Schiavo story was all over the news - a few similar stories were reported from Texas, where several people had their care "terminated" under that law. So as far as government intervention went - I'm not convinced they (the government) involved themselves in that issue for the right reasons - and were simply pandering to their supporters in that part of the country.

Its all hypothetical of course, but it would have been interesting if Terry had been in a hospital in Texas, rather than Florida. Would it have been handled in the same way?

[Fandango 1,439]

As far as feeding tubes go - with euthanasia being illegal and legislation to that effect constantly shouted down by "right to life" campaigners and conservative religious types, it is legal to terminate care, by switching off life-support systems. A feeding tube, might or might not fall outside of that definition (which I'm guessing usually refers to ventilators and other paraphenalia that regulate bodily functions) - its hard to say.

The big irony there of course, was GWB making himself out to be champion of the "right to life", when a few short years before - as Texas Governor he passed a "futile care" bill, which did the exact opposite. Allowing hospitals and healthcare providers to essentially make decisions on behalf of the patient - even to the extent of disregarding the explicit wishes of next of kin. In fact when the Terry Schiavo story was all over the news - a few similar stories were reported from Texas, where several people had their care "terminated" under that law. So as far as government intervention went - I'm not convinced they (the government) involved themselves in that issue for the right reasons - and were simply pandering to their supporters in that part of the country.

Its all hypothetical of course, but it would have been interesting if Terry had been in a hospital in Texas, rather than Florida. Would it have been handled in the same way?

But that's the point. Ok, so let's assume a feeding tube was 'life support' Let's equate this to a ventillator.

If you disconnect a patient from a vent, and the patient starts breathing on her own, that doesn't give anyone a right to put a pillow over her head and smother her.

Which is essentially what happened. They disco'd the ft, but then made it illegal for her to receive anything by mouth. Can you imagine dehydrating and starving IN A HOSPITAL for over two weeks?

I'll bring one more thing into this...MS contended her 'cortex was liquified' yet the only tests which can successfully determine HOW much brain damage is done...well those tests were NEVER ORDERED. In fact, he fought the tests. Her parents were willing to let her go if they saw some PROOF that she was too far gone. MS said there was no money for tests, doctors offered to do them for free, and as her next of kin, he still refused.

Ok, so you're the judge, you're going to order the removal of a feeding tube...then you're going to make it illegal for anyone to feed her, or even give her enough so that she's comfortable.

Dont ya think that before ya do that, you order the damn tests to see whether she actually IS a cabbage or not? She was awake, alert, grunted, followed things with her eyes, cried every month when she got her menses, etc. Before we torture an individual, shouldn't we have seen whether or not she was actually able to feel pain?

MS contended that no, she didn't feel pain....oh, and the court ordered morphine for her. Why are we giving a supposed brain dead woman pain killers?

Many people failed Terri Schiavo. And the ACLU is among the top. I can't think of a case more deserving of someone stepping in to fight for her civil liberties...to be allowed a sip of water or maybe some pudding. Needing a court order to receive Last Rites and Holy Communion? Come on now! WHERE THE HELL WAS THE ACLU?

This was not 'right to life'...this was government sanctioned murder and torture. Don't confuse the issue.

Edited May 25, 2007 by LisaD

[Saddle Bronc 124]

As far as feeding tubes go - with euthanasia being illegal and legislation to that effect constantly shouted down by "right to life" campaigners and conservative religious types, it is legal to terminate care, by switching off life-support systems. A feeding tube, might or might not fall outside of that definition (which I'm guessing usually refers to ventilators and other paraphenalia that regulate bodily functions) - its hard to say.

The big irony there of course, was GWB making himself out to be champion of the "right to life", when a few short years before - as Texas Governor he passed a "futile care" bill, which did the exact opposite. Allowing hospitals and healthcare providers to essentially make decisions on behalf of the patient - even to the extent of disregarding the explicit wishes of next of kin. In fact when the Terry Schiavo story was all over the news - a few similar stories were reported from Texas, where several people had their care "terminated" under that law. So as far as government intervention went - I'm not convinced they (the government) involved themselves in that issue for the right reasons - and were simply pandering to their supporters in that part of the country.

Its all hypothetical of course, but it would have been interesting if Terry had been in a hospital in Texas, rather than Florida. Would it have been handled in the same way?

But that's the point. Ok, so let's assume a feeding tube was 'life support' Let's equate this to a ventillator.

If you disconnect a patient from a vent, and the patient starts breathing on her own, that doesn't give anyone a right to put a pillow over her head and smother her.

Which is essentially what happened. They disco'd the ft, but then made it illegal for her to receive anything by mouth. Can you imagine dehydrating and starving IN A HOSPITAL for over two weeks?

I'll bring one more thing into this...MS contended her 'cortex was liquified' yet the only tests which can successfully determine HOW much brain damage is done...well those tests were NEVER ORDERED. In fact, he fought the tests. Her parents were willing to let her go if they saw some PROOF that she was too far gone. MS said there was no money for tests, doctors offered to do them for free, and as her next of kin, he still refused.

Ok, so you're the judge, you're going to order the removal of a feeding tube...then you're going to make it illegal for anyone to feed her, or even give her enough so that she's comfortable.

Dont ya think that before ya do that, you order the damn tests to see whether she actually IS a cabbage or not? She was awake, alert, grunted, followed things with her eyes, cried every month when she got her menses, etc. Before we torture an individual, shouldn't we have seen whether or not she was actually able to feel pain?

MS contended that no, she didn't feel pain....oh, and the court ordered morphine for her. Why are we giving a supposed brain dead woman pain killers?

Many people failed Terri Schiavo. And the ACLU is among the top. I can't think of a case more deserving of someone stepping in to fight for her civil liberties...to be allowed a sip of water or maybe some pudding. Needing a court order to receive Last Rites and Holy Communion? Come on now! WHERE THE HELL WAS THE ACLU?

This was not 'right to life'...this was government sanctioned murder and torture. Don't confuse the issue.

Lisa, the Terry Schiavo case was actually a dowry-murder using the court to do the crime.

It is quite notable that Michael started the fight for having his wife euthanised IMMEDIATELY AFTER her insurance paid out lump-sum.