Jackson Jambalaya

So he'll be headed to a different kind of "law and order room".

So how much time is Former WLBT Meteorologist Eric Law looking at?

Of course, I didn't realize his full name was "Former WLBT Meteorologist Eric Law", either. That's all WLBT has referred to him as for ages now.

should be in the teens....up to eighteen hahahaha

Don't be too surprised if some type of plea deal has been reached which includes no time behind bars.

whatever is turns out to be, for sex offenders its day for day, no parole or any kind of early release. that's assuming the sentence includes time in custody.

Does this strato-cumulus have a silver lining?

If the prosecutor is passing to the files multiple counts of statutory rape, then he is being awfully lenient to let Eric Law plead to -- and be sentenced for -- one count of sexual battery.
And when Mr. Law is released, he is 90% likely to become a repeat offender (unless he is converted and surrenders to The Law-Giver.)

@3:18- please cite the evidence for your claim that he (or another) is likely to offend again.

The prosecutor may have allowed him to plead guilty to sexual battery so that the victim would not have to testify.

Seeing that he apparently no longer lives in Mississippi, I doubt his plea carries any jail time - http://www.linkedin.com/in/tvmeteorologist

(unless he is converted and surrenders to The Law-Giver.)

What the hell could that possibly mean?

3:18 Who told you that those who "convert to The Law-Giver don't commit sexual offenses? The Catholic Church hierarchy?

And 4:27 - sex offenders have about a 90% recidivism rate. Look it up yourself.

@7:14. I HAVE looked it up. Have YOU? The actual recidivism rate, according to the DOJ is less than 10%. And that number includes second offenses that are not sex related offenses. Same report says that people convicted for robbery are more likely to reoffend by committing a sex offense than are those who are first convicted for a sex offense. Furthermore, of that small percentage that does reoffend, the vast majority are those who target young (Pre-teen) boys. Bottom line, Eric Law is no threat.

@8:41. He is a threat. He will always be a threat. Does really it matter if he's 10% or 85% more likely to commit another sex crime? Keeping in mind this is the first time he was caught. How many offenses occurred before this? How many will occur after his release?

Let me ask you this.... If you have children how would you feel if one of them became a victim? Oh yeah, i forgot you said he is no threat.

I cannot believe you actually are arguing his side of this. He did it and is pleading guilty to it. When he gets out how bout you let your children have spend-the-night parties at his house.... after all he isn't a threat right?

@10:46- I have children and one of them was subjected to sexual activity that was inappropriate for her age. I was the victim of attempted rape when I was 15. So you can forgo the lecture. It was my own personal experiences that promoted me to research the subject of sex offenders, sex offender treatment, and recidivism of formerly incarcerated offenders. The FIRST thing to learn is that "sex offenses" covers a HUGE range of activities with widely varying definitions from one state to another. So, when it comes to measuring recidivism, it is difficult to even determine which category an offender belong to. What may be a felony in one state is only a misdemeanor in another. And it MATTERS because people like YOU keep perpetuating myths that cause our society to waste time, energy & resources in attempt to protect our children against virtually non-existent threats while simultaneous ignoring the REAL threats to their safety & well being. Case in point: how many children in our immediate area have been shot in the last three weeks? Now, compare that to the COUNTRYWIDE number of children harmed in any way by registered sex offenders. If we had even 1/2 as much interest in punishing thugs as we do in persecuting ex-sex offenders, we might actually accomplish something.

I don't see 8:41 as 'arguing his side of this'. He cited statistical facts. If Law were a pedophile, I'd agree with the outrage of Steve @ 10:46; however, that's not the case and Steve has presented nothing other than fallacy-laden speculation and opinion stoked with the flames of emotion.

And it's not WLBT that you hear referring to Law as "Former WLBT meteriologist Eric Law" so much as it is other media outlets. WLBT wishes to hell this would have gone away a year ago.

Sex offenders are also 4 times more likely to re-offend with another sex crime.

How the researcher defines " re-offending" is important.

Research in Canada found that sex offenders re-offended 86% of the time.

First of all, the reassuring statistics cited by 7:41pm require being convicted of another sex offense. Sex crimes are too often " he said/she said" and difficult to prosecute. There are seldom witnesses to the crime nor can evidence be gathered in a timely manner. Victims often stay silent out of fear or refuse to testify.

Nor are prior accusations that didn't lead to convictions considered. Think of the priest or Sandusky scandal.

Juvenile records were not included.

A conviction with multiple counts is counted as one offense.

The confessions in prison by murderers who also sexually abused their victims was not counted. Think of Jeffery Dalhmer. He is in the serial killer category, not the sex offender category.

Nor were the prison/treatment confessions of sexual offenders during incarceration/therapy counted.

Child abuse hotline unconfirmed reports were not included.

And, then there is the possibility that sex offenders learn not to leave behind a live victim. The daily numbers of the missing and never found are staggering. Over 50000 dead bodies have gone unidentified in our nation's morgues and many of those are children.

It should be obvious that it's illogical to compare crimes where physical evidence and eye witnesses abound and stolen property recovered to sex crimes.

Steve, where was your outrage regarding the legislative actions of Senator John Horhn.

November 22, 2013 at 8:07 AM = no link providing smack talker

@8:07 please identify the study you reference. The only Canadian study I can find (by the Canadian DOJ) mirrors the results of the US DOJ study which clearly demonstrates that bank robbers are more likely to reoffend with a sex crime than a former sex offender. And those allegations that therapy is ineffective are nothing more than an inability to understand that a 100% improvement in a miniscule number is still a miniscule number. Bottom line- there is ZERO truth to the myth that sex offenders will almost always reoffend. And the miniscule number that MIGHT are easily identified through psychological exam. Besides, THEY are likely to ever be released because they are the ones who kill their victims. And to further demonstrate the idiocy of it all, we prosecute them for the SEX OFFENSE instead of the MURDER because the sex offense carries a stiffer penalty.... than MURDER!! A murderer can serve 1/2 his sentence then walk away a free man while a sex offender must serve every single day of his jail sentence then spend the rest of his life wearing a brand and being refused a job & decent housing. After all, having consensual sex with a 17 1/2 year old girl is much worse than killing a 5 year old, fight?

8:21 pm Besides the fact that ONE link would not give you this information, you have to have some reading comprehension skills and education on the subject. I can't read books for you.

You have to have enough basic knowledge and intellectual curiosity to ask " what are the data definitions used to arrive at this conclusion?" You have to be able compare research models.

You have to look at how the research is done by the DOJ.

You have to identify any bias on the part of the researcher. Who financed the research and does that person, for example, make a living as an expert witness for attorneys who represent offenders?

9:12 pm Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice 2006.

But, good grief, use you heads,people. Jerry Sandusky is not statistically a re-offender by DOJ definitions unless and until, after release , he tries again and is reported.

The research you cite is ONLY of those who were convicted imprisoned on sex crimes charge(s) and who are then are arrested and CONVICTED again on a sex crime charge(s).

You can also compare these statistics to statistics gathered on how many people in our society have been sexually abused.

You have to also look at how many child abuse convictions involve sexual abuse.

And, 9:12 pm your claim that sex offenses carry more time than murder only speaks to ignorance of the justice system as it currently exists. I could cite the recent case of the admitted rape of a minor in Colorado by an adult who got NO time.

I suspect 8:21 pm and 9:12 pm are the same person and have personal experience with someone convicted of a sex offense or are the sex offender. If justice wasn't served in your case, I'm sorry but your anecdotal experience doesn't speak to the risk sex offenders pose but rather to the justice system.

November 23, 2013 at 8:21 AM = bullshit artist of the highest order

10:58 pm you can't point to a single inaccuracy because there isn't one.
All you can do is name call because you are ignorant on both the subject and research models. I am being kind not to suggest you are stupid.

Like it or not, the sex with Law and the girl was consensual, although illegal. She wasn't raped, he didn't stalk her, she's not a girl on a tricycle....

Not by any means supporting Law or what he did. However, what he did has little possibility of being repeated by him even if he were back on the streets tomorrow. No doubt pedophiles and psycho-rapists are likely to re-offend.

I always suspected the boy was, ah, swishy.

The fact that he's 'out of state', if that is true, has no bearing on whether he actually serves time in Mississippi.

8:33 pm The girl was not old enough to give consent and Law was old enough to know it.
You'd " get" it if it were a boy of the same age or your daughter.
In either case, it'd not be about sex but about power and control.
Sexual attraction starts between your ears in your brain. If your brain is telling you not only that children are fair game, but also ignores the negative consequences, then something is wrong with your brain.
A child cannot give consent because they can be easily manipulated by adults and the law recognizes, thank the Lord, that fact even if you don't.

There's no dispute that Eric Law should have known better but a 15 year old is hardly a child. She clearly was one within our legal framework but biologically she was not. It may have been about "power and control" for Law but more likely it was about being plain old dumb ass stupid.

9:48 am You know her biology from , what?, looking at her?
How about her level of emotional maturity? Can you " see" that , too?
How many 15 year old girls do you know well?
Have daughters?
Been a 15 year old girl?
I'll agree with you that the law is arbitrary and some 18 year old girls are emotionally immature.
But, what this is really about is whether or not an ADULT MALE ought to KNOW that a teenage girl is off limits to him.
This isn't about the girl or how " sexy" she appeared or whether or not she had a " crush" or didn't have a positive male in her life so was driven to see out a " daddy" figure. It has to do with Law's lack of judgment and inability to control his " urges"! Not screwing an underage girl is hardly something a man doesn't know even if he's too stupid to understand the harm it does the girl! And, while he may not go this young again, if he shares your attitudes, he'll become the guy who trades women in when they get to be 40 for another " sweet young thing" ie a sexually immature male his whole life who sees women ONLY as sex objects!

And, while he may not go this young again, if he shares your attitudes, he'll become the guy who trades women in when they get to be 40 for another " sweet young thing" ie a sexually immature male his whole life who sees women ONLY as sex objects!

You've got a problem 11:51. Seek help.

12:05 pm I'm sure it will come as a surprise to you that I've been happily married for over 50 years to the same person.

It just keeps getting better...ALL of it!

We are now in a minority of those who will every know love truly does grow and that growing old together is a wonderful thing.

I , however, am not blind to the changes in our society that are not for the better.

And, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that the inability to postpone immediate gratification for long term gains or to recognize that your wants are not primary in the larger scheme of things is contributing to our decline.

It doesn't take a very high IQ to realize the excuses for bad behaviors have flourished and become accepted.

This absurd myth that men are unable to resist arousal to either keep out of jail for statutory rape or to keep from destroying the security of their children anytime an attractive woman plays on their ego is what is , in essence , what is suggested by the Law apologist.

Men should be insulted to have it suggested they have so little will power.

You implied that the girl was not " really" a child. You implied that her youth and the age difference is a matter of meaningless legality . You implied that Law simply had the " opportunity" thrust at him.

I see the acceptance of sexual immaturity these days whether in males or females as encouraging sexual predators whether their predatory behavior has become socially accepted or not.



I'm not surprised that you are so threatened by the notion that there are things in life more important than your ego gratification.

November 24, 2013 at 5:59 PM = married 50 years to eunuch

11:51 = 5:59 = weekend psychologist practicing without license or facts. She also shops at Mistletoe, gardens and enjoys Dogwood. Did I mention dressing up on Sundays to keep her usual seat of judgment on the sixth row near the window?