Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Soros-backed DA George Gascón Considers Prosecuting 26-year-old as Juvenile


el midgetron
 Share

Recommended Posts

Quote

Critics are furious that Los Angeles County District Attorney George Gascón is considering prosecuting a 26-year-old transgender woman for assaulting a 10-year-old girl in 2014 as a juvenile because the accused was just short of 18 at the time.

Hannah Tubbs, who is biologically male, has pleaded guilty to choking the girl in a bathroom stall, shoving her hands into the girl’s pants and sexually assaulting her.

https://www.breitbart.com/crime/2022/01/17/critics-fume-as-soros-backed-da-george-gascon-considers-prosecuting-26-year-old-as-juvenile/
 

WT ever loving F ????

  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some details....

Tubbs was 17 at the time. Why not charged then? Why is this happening like 9 years later? 

The perpetrator was not transgender at the time of the crime. Apparently this is a development since then. The judge thinks he would be assaulted for his choice and is why the transgender angle is being paraded. Understandably, people are challenging the conclusion. The child he assaulted had no such luxury.

How did a make sneak into the female toilet? 

This seems to be an ongoing mental health issue. 

Definitely a crime, should probably go to a padded room or isolation. Probably wouldn't live long in jail. 

Judge needs to be evaluated by peers with the likelihood of losing his credentials. Poor call judge. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah yeah, some fruitcake molests a kid in the bathroom…. and the priority is making sure to note the sexual assault of a child happened before the fruitcake was trans. I thought people were born that way but whatever…. blah blah blah
 

What I was expressing outrage at was Breitbart using “her” to refer to a biological male.  

8 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

Some details....

Tubbs was 17 at the time. Why not charged then? Why is this happening like 9 years later? 

The perpetrator was not transgender at the time of the crime. Apparently this is a development since then. The judge thinks he would be assaulted for his choice and is why the transgender angle is being paraded. Understandably, people are challenging the conclusion. The child he assaulted had no such luxury.

What choice are you talking exactly about?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, el midgetron said:

Yeah yeah, some fruitcake molests a kid in the bathroom…. and the priority is making sure to note the sexual assault of a child happened before the fruitcake was trans. I thought people were born that way but whatever…. blah blah blah
 

We don't know what the case is with this individual. You're too quick to stereotype. At the time of the assault, this person identified as male. It is was an be assault by a male socially identifying as male.

The fault lies with the judge. 

14 minutes ago, el midgetron said:

What I was expressing outrage at was Breitbart using “her” to refer to a biological male.  

Apparently that's the requested current situation. 

Looks like Breitbart have gone woke huh.

14 minutes ago, el midgetron said:

What choice are you talking exactly about?

The choice to decide to become transgender in the meantime. 

Edited by psyche101
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

We don't know what the case is with this individual. You're too quick to stereotype. At the time of the assault, this person identified as male. It is was an be assault by a male socially identifying as male.

I stereotyped them as a fruitcake. He molested a 10 year old girl in a public restroom. In my book that constitutes a fruitcake.  Do you disagree?
 

Quote

The choice to decide to become transgender in the meantime. 

It’s a “choice” ??? A “decision” ???

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, el midgetron said:

I stereotyped them as a fruitcake. He molested a 10 year old girl in a public restroom. In my book that constitutes a fruitcake.  Do you disagree?

Yes, we don't know. Could be mental, could just be a bad person. All I know is a crime had been committed by a person who was male by birth and choice. The transgender angle is connected to the judges decision only. 

57 minutes ago, el midgetron said:

It’s a “choice” ??? A “decision” ???

He identified as male at the time of the crime didn't he? That changed. So yes, a decision was made there wasn't it? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure if you noticed, but Soros is also involved in the Loudoun case. Soros invested in the election of the prosecutor in that rape case by almost $1 million. The prosecutor is accused of going easy on criminals especially those who hurt women.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, psyche101 said:

Yes, we don't know. Could be mental, could just be a bad person. All I know is a crime had been committed by a person who was male by birth and choice. The transgender angle is connected to the judges decision only. 

He identified as male at the time of the crime didn't he? That changed. So yes, a decision was made there wasn't it? 

Do you mean he chose to start identifying as trans or that he chose to be trans? 
 

I was under the impression trans-gender was an innate identity trait.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, el midgetron said:

WT ever loving F ????

33 minutes ago, Myles said:

He should be sent to a male prison for certain.

Come on guys, admit it: any one of us, up in court on such a serious charge, would take every measure to sway a jury in our favour.  Some hire articulate lawyers, others try bribery or threats.  This is my approach:

Picture1.thumb.jpg.0c286b479b561cef1ff0edb304bd3a7e.jpg

although to be honest - it doesn't always work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, el midgetron said:

Do you mean he chose to start identifying as trans or that he chose to be trans? 
 

Obviously he did.

He wasn't before, says he is now.

What's so hard to grasp? The situation has changed.

1 minute ago, el midgetron said:

I was under the impression trans-gender was an innate identity trait.  

Of course. 

You think every situation is identical. You even think I should listen to left wing political music because I'm not right wing. Outside a stereotype, you struggle. Life's not a stereotype.

You have a great deal to learn about people and choices. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So how do you know who is trans and who isn’t? I know a 17 year old girl who came out as trans and has been identifying as a male for the past couple years? Are they now really trans? Are trans people just incapable of sexual offenses?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, el midgetron said:

Do you mean he chose to start identifying as trans or that he chose to be trans?  I was under the impression trans-gender was an innate identity trait.  

As far as I can gather - the very fact that you don't know the answer implies you're not trans, but boring, conservative, ol'-fashioned cis.  Therefore you have:

  1. no right to ask the question
  2. no right to know the answer
  3. no right to ask or know if there even is an answer
  4. no right to question the rights or decisions of anyone who self-declares themselves trans (or any of the 237.5 other genders currently identified)
  5. no right to question if a self-declared individual should be restricted from certain areas or refused certain privileges
  6. no business even thinking about these matters, except to say "I entirely agree with (insert this week's woke soundbite here) "
  7. a duty to ignore, cancel or attack anyone who attempts to challenge points 1 - 6

Cynicism aside, I have no problem whatsoever with an individual claiming to identify as whatever suits them emotionally, socially, intellectually, whatever.  But declaring you've changed gender does not make it so!  Having a dozen ops to change your body and genitalia does not make you a new sex.  Even intense hormone treatment from birth will not change your sex because that's programmed into every cell in you and you're stuck with it.

This is a new and growing issue; one that impacts on some aspects of our collective society and is worthy of an open, intelligent, adult conversation.  However it appears that at least one side is not yet ready to engage in meaningful debate.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, el midgetron said:

So how do you know who is trans and who isn’t? I know a 17 year old girl who came out as trans and has been identifying as a male for the past couple years? Are they now really trans? Are trans people just incapable of sexual offenses?

https://transcrimeuk.com/

Edited by itsnotoutthere
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Tom1200 said:

As far as I can gather - the very fact that you don't know the answer implies you're not trans, but boring, conservative, ol'-fashioned cis.  Therefore you have:

  1. no right to ask the question
  2. no right to know the answer
  3. no right to ask or know if there even is an answer
  4. no right to question the rights or decisions of anyone who self-declares themselves trans (or any of the 237.5 other genders currently identified)
  5. no right to question if a self-declared individual should be restricted from certain areas or refused certain privileges
  6. no business even thinking about these matters, except to say "I entirely agree with (insert this week's woke soundbite here) "
  7. a duty to ignore, cancel or attack anyone who attempts to challenge points 1 - 6

Cynicism aside, I have no problem whatsoever with an individual claiming to identify as whatever suits them emotionally, socially, intellectually, whatever.  But declaring you've changed gender does not make it so!  Having a dozen ops to change your body and genitalia does not make you a new sex.  Even intense hormone treatment from birth will not change your sex because that's programmed into every cell in you and you're stuck with it.

This is a new and growing issue; one that impacts on some aspects of our collective society and is worthy of an open, intelligent, adult conversation.  However it appears that at least one side is not yet ready to engage in meaningful debate.

Stop speaking total sense.....we'll not have that around here.

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Tom1200 Your cynical comment fall short of being satirical because that’s what really what these people believe. Matt Walsh appeared on the Dr. Phil Show last week and asked a couple trans advocates to define what a woman is. They told him they couldn’t define what a woman is because they don’t identify as a woman. They claim “A woman is something different to everyone”. 

On one hand they can’t even say what a woman is because they don’t identify as a woman BUT on the other hand, the bearded-biological-female who identifies as a man apparently knows enough about what a woman is to know she isn’t a woman. 

Later on his own show, Matt Walsh made the point that these Trans activists on the Dr. Phil show didn’t have an answer for what a woman is because they had never had their beliefs challenged before.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, itsnotoutthere said:

Wowzers, trans people in the UK really don’t take flattering mug-shots….

This lady reminds me of Jack Nicholson -

F0F01C60-2A92-4A77-B25C-E1DE07CC0641.jpeg.c393f2814110085a37a57e894588db1c.jpeg

 

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, el midgetron said:

Wowzers, trans people in the UK really don’t take flattering mug-shots….

This lady reminds me of Jack Nicholson -

F0F01C60-2A92-4A77-B25C-E1DE07CC0641.jpeg.c393f2814110085a37a57e894588db1c.jpeg

 

Yes, a little bit of lipstick at least. :-*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...If they where seventeen at the time the crime was committed, then they should be tried at the age they where at when it happened. Why is this controversial? This isn't minority report. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Autochthon1990 said:

...If they where seventeen at the time the crime was committed, then they should be tried at the age they where at when it happened. Why is this controversial? This isn't minority report. 

Juveniles are tried as adults all the time usually depending on the seriousness of the crime. The crime of molesting a 10 year old should be one such crime.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been astonished at how many times I’ve seen kids much younger than 17 get tried as an adult. Usually depending on the nature of the crime. I’m normally against it, when they are 14-15 ish. They are a kid. No way around it. 17 though? With the nature of the crime being so horrific?
 

No way should this person not be tried as an adult. Not when younger kids face the full weight of the law all the time. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Buzz_Light_Year said:

Juveniles are tried as adults all the time usually depending on the seriousness of the crime. The crime of molesting a 10 year old should be one such crime.

I didn’t read this before posting. You said it all for me. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What does "Soros backed" mean?  I assume Soros donated to his campaign because he liked his politics, but I won't assume he and Soros have some kind of working relationship beyond that.

But the thought of trying the person as a juvenile is ridiculous since you can't lock them up with a bunch of minors.  That's just asking for children to be raped. 

Edited by OverSword
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doesn't juvie let them out when they turn eighteen? They can't keep adults in there so essentially no jail time.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, el midgetron said:

@Tom1200 Your cynical comment fall short of being satirical because that’s what really what these people believe.

7 hours ago, itsnotoutthere said:

Stop speaking total sense.....we'll not have that around here.

I'm being guarded in what I say because... I haven't really thought this issue through too well, and I'm genuinely not trying to cause offence here.1  I suspect that the large majority of trans-people, of all styles and fashions, want little to do with extreme activists who latch on to any right-on cause to further their obscure and absurd political goals.  I suspect that most trans people would agree with prevalent wisdoms such as:

  • men (who call themselves women) are generally bigger and stronger than women, more aggressive, less willing to compromise, louder and more intimidating.  Just like men (who call themselves men). 
  • men (who call themselves women) should not automatically have access to 'women-only' spaces like changing rooms, showers, rape/domestic abuse shelters, convents, segregated trains/buses (do those still exist anywhere?), girls' schools, etc.
  • men (who call themselves women) should not automatically be entitled to compete against women in sports; nor should records they set be recognised as genuinely comparable with or superior to women's achievements.
  • men (who call themselves women) should not automatically be entitled to preferential treatment if they commit offences: they should not automatically avoid men's prison, or prison entirely, just because of the way they claim to identify.
  • women (who identify as lesbians) should not feel obliged to explain their reluctance to have sex with men (who call themselves women then declare themselves lesbians).
  • etc.

I further suspect that a trans person who dares to defend any of these points would be slammed by self-righteous woke extremists as disgusting, ungrateful JKRowling-sellouts, and their already-difficult lives would be made living hell by those pretending to be on their side and defending their rights.

As I understand it - the simple fact that I'm expressing a view that some people might disagree with is, in itself, offensive to them.  Those are the sorts of people you can never discuss anything with, so quite honestly b******s to their feelings.

 

Edited by Tiggs
Please don't circumvent the profanity filter.
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.