Physician sex offender to be removed from sex offender list because

[Horse with no Name]

his lawyer says he shouldn't have been there.:wtf: Anyone venture to guess if this man was NOT a Doctor how successful he would have been?:sarcasm:
http://www.herald-democrat.com/articles/2007/06/28/local_news/news07.txt
>>>snip
In June of 2004, Judge Ray Grisham, now retired, sentenced Woods to four years probation after the doctor pleaded guilty to a charge of obscenity. The charge stemmed from an incident in which Woods videotaped naked young girls during a slumber party at his house. The children were visiting his children. Woods destroyed the tape the same night it was made and had the children “pinky swear” not to tell anyone about it. One of the children told her parents and the parents took the information to the police. In court on Wednesday, Woods’ attorney Bob Jarvis argued that his client had not broken any of the conditions of his probation in the last two years and has been released from care by several mental health professionals. Jarvis said his client even passed a lie detector test that asked him about his adherence to the rules of his probation.

>>>>snip
Ashmore disagreed. He said keeping Woods on probation would be justice for the little girls he videotaped. “Woods,” Ashmore said, “was sentenced to four years” and he should do four years.

One of the fathers of the girls testified that the families only agreed to the plea bargain because they thought it would spare their daughters a lengthy involvement with the criminal justice system. He said his daughter “is a strong girl” and is doing fine, but he wanted Woods kept on probation. He pointed out that people are sent to prison just for downloading and looking at pictures of child pornography, so the very least the doctor should do is serve out his probation.


>>>snip
Jarvis then asked to have his client removed from the sex offender case load at the Grayson County Adult Probation Department. Probationers in that department have to follow a much more stringent set of rules than those on other case loads, and Jarvis argued that his client should have never been placed in that category in the first place.

Entz ordered Woods removed from the sexual offenders caseload.

[varkam]

1. I would imagine it might have something to do with the fact that it was not a contact offense.

While it is clearly an offense, it doesn't seem that there was any hands-on activity. Perhaps that is why he was removed from that division.

[WinkyDink]

2. Neither is looking at computer child porn "hands on" the children. This is a bogus ruling.

[Spangle]

3. Peeing in public

Can get you on there. Having underage sex can get you on there. Unless the rules have changed, he belongs there.