<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.18928">
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV>Perhaps you missed this two times:</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff>"A Moscow man who <STRONG>pleaded guilty</STRONG> to
enticing a child over the Internet..."</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff>"Kendall W. Heustis, 40, <STRONG>pleaded
guilty</STRONG> to the charge in Latah County District Court in
mid-April."</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff>'"It's been a long two years," Heustis said. "I've
learned a lot from it. <STRONG>A lot of things happened because of what I did on
the computer</STRONG>, and I'm paying the price for it."'</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV style="TEXT-ALIGN: justify; LINE-HEIGHT: 12pt; PADDING-TOP: 9pt"><SPAN
style="TEXT-TRANSFORM: uppercase; FONT-FAMILY: Courier New"
class=f11s>18-1509A.Enticing of children over the internet -- Penalties --
Jurisdiction. </SPAN><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: Courier New" class=f11s>(1)
A person aged eighteen (18) years or older shall be guilty of a felony if he or
she knowingly uses the internet to solicit, seduce, lure, persuade or entice by
words or actions, or both, a minor child under the age of sixteen (16) years
<STRONG><FONT size=3>or </FONT><FONT size=5>a person the defendant believes to
be a minor child under the age of sixteen (16) years</FONT></STRONG> to engage
in any sexual act with or against the child where such act is a violation of
chapter 15, 61 or 66, <SPAN style="COLOR: blue; TEXT-DECORATION: underline"><A
href="http://www.legislature.idaho.gov/idstat/Title18/T18.htm">title
18</A></SPAN>, Idaho Code.</SPAN></DIV></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>There was no claim by Heustis that he thought other than he was
communicating with a 13 year old child. He pled guilty, meeting the
elements of I.C. 18-1509A (1).</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>W.</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT: 10pt arial; BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=godshatter@yahoo.com href="mailto:godshatter@yahoo.com">Paul
Rumelhart</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=deco@moscow.com
href="mailto:deco@moscow.com">Art Deco</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Cc:</B> <A title=vision2020@moscow.com
href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com">Vision 2020</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, June 20, 2010 9:30 PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [Vision2020] Sentence
Appropriate?</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV><BR>The question of the legality of this defense in this case
aside, how is <BR>this not thought crime? If the defendant
claimed that they did not <BR>believe that the person they were corresponding
with was really a <BR>13-year old girl but decided to "go along with it" for
the excitement <BR>such a fantasy might give him, how would they be able to
determine <BR>otherwise?<BR><BR>Paul<BR><BR>Art Deco wrote:<BR>> "A Moscow
man who *pleaded guilty* to enticing a child over the <BR>>
Internet..."<BR>> <BR>> Heustis was represented by Chuck Kovis, a
very able trial/defense <BR>> attorney. If the argument you presented
given the evidence presented <BR>> at court really raised a reasonable
doubt, it is highly probable that <BR>> Kovis would have earned a not
guilty plea.<BR>> <BR>> Here is the statute:<BR>>
<BR>> 18-1509A.Enticing of children over the internet -- Penalties --
<BR>> Jurisdiction. (1) A person aged eighteen (18) years or older shall be
<BR>> guilty of a felony if he or she knowingly uses the internet to
<BR>> solicit, seduce, lure, persuade or entice by words or actions, or
<BR>> both, a minor child under the age of sixteen (16) years *or a person
<BR>> the defendant believes to be a minor child under the age of sixteen
<BR>> (16) years* to engage in any sexual act with or against the child
<BR>> where such act is a violation of chapter 15, 61 or 66, title 18
<BR>> <<A
href="http://www.legislature.idaho.gov/idstat/Title18/T18.htm">http://www.legislature.idaho.gov/idstat/Title18/T18.htm</A>>,
Idaho Code.<BR>> (2) Every person who is convicted of a violation of
this section <BR>> shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison
for a period not <BR>> to exceed fifteen (15) years.<BR>> (3) It
shall not constitute a defense against any charge or violation <BR>> of
this section that a law enforcement officer, peace officer, or <BR>> other
person working at the direction of law enforcement was involved <BR>> in
the detection or investigation of a violation of this section.<BR>>
(4) The offense is committed in the state of Idaho for purposes of
<BR>> determining jurisdiction if the transmission that constitutes the
<BR>> offense either originates in or is received in the state of
Idaho.<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> I think this matter of virtuality
has been before an appellate court <BR>> before and has withstood a
challenge.<BR>> <BR>> Notice in my comment I said "attempting to
entice a *virtual *13 <BR>> year-old girl"<BR>> <BR>>
W.<BR>><BR>> ----- Original Message
-----<BR>> *From:* Paul Rumelhart <<A
href="mailto:godshatter@yahoo.com">mailto:godshatter@yahoo.com</A>><BR>>
*To:* Art Deco <<A
href="mailto:deco@moscow.com">mailto:deco@moscow.com</A>><BR>>
*Cc:* Vision 2020 <<A
href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com">mailto:vision2020@moscow.com</A>><BR>>
*Sent:* Sunday, June 20, 2010 5:35 PM<BR>>
*Subject:* Re: [Vision2020] Sentence
Appropriate?<BR>><BR>><BR>> I don't know what
to think about this. If "enticing a
child"<BR>> means
that<BR>> he was setting up a time and place to
have sex with a person he<BR>>
thought<BR>> was 13, then I'm glad they caught
him. But there is an interesting<BR>> twist
to this, though. What he was charged with doesn't
sound<BR>> like it<BR>>
would be a crime if there was no minor involved. Since
there<BR>> wasn't
an<BR>> actual minor involved, then this means that
they are charging him for<BR>> thinking that there
was a 13-year old on the other end of the<BR>>
wire. Did<BR>> they just cross over into
thought crime territory? I don't know. <BR>>
Did<BR>> he really believe she was 13? People
lie about their age and gender<BR>> online all the
time. What if he thought he or she was
someone<BR>> pretending to be 13 and that thought
excited him? Does "enticing a<BR>> child"
cover other aspects that don't involve actual meetings
for<BR>> sex? <BR>> In
other words, were they just "talking dirty" to each
other?<BR>><BR>> Anyway, I just thought that was
an interesting aspect of this<BR>> case.
You<BR>> guys can go back to bashing Judge Stegner
now.<BR>><BR>>
Paul<BR>><BR>> Art Deco
wrote:<BR>> > When are we going to get a
district court judge that takes sexual<BR>> >
crimes against children seriously enough to give sentences
that<BR>> > promote deterrence and demonstrates
to the community that sexual<BR>> > crimes
against children are not to be tolerated?<BR>> >
<BR>> > Thirty days soft jail time and five
years of basically meaningless<BR>> > probation
is hardly an appropriate sentence for attempting
to<BR>> entice a<BR>>
> virtual 13 year-old girl into a sexual
encounter.<BR>> >
<BR>> > Who is the greater threat to the well
being of the community? A<BR>> > single
offense offender or a judge that gives many
lenient<BR>>
sentences?<BR>> >
<BR>> > Wayne A.
Fox<BR>> > 1009 Karen
Lane<BR>> > PO Box
9421<BR>> > Moscow, ID
83843<BR>> > <BR>>
> <A href="mailto:waf@moscow.com">waf@moscow.com</A> <<A
href="mailto:waf@moscow.com">mailto:waf@moscow.com</A>> <<A
href="mailto:waf@moscow.com">mailto:waf@moscow.com</A>><BR>>
> 208 882-7975<BR>>
><BR>> ><BR>>
> Man gets jail time in Internet crime
case<BR>> ><BR>>
><BR>> >
Heustis sentenced to five years probation, 30 days in
jail<BR>> ><BR>> >
By Christina Lords Daily News staff writer<BR>>
><BR>> > Posted on: Saturday, June 19,
2010<BR>> ><BR>> >
A Moscow man who pleaded guilty to enticing a child over
the<BR>> Internet<BR>>
> was sentenced by 2nd District Court Judge John Stegner to
30<BR>> days in<BR>>
> jail and five years probation Friday.<BR>>
><BR>> > Kendall W. Heustis, 40, pleaded
guilty to the charge in Latah<BR>>
County<BR>> > District Court in
mid-April.<BR>>
><BR>> > He faced a maximum sentence of 15
years in prison and a fine of<BR>>
$50,000.<BR>> ><BR>>
> The charge was in relation to an undercover law enforcement
sting<BR>> > conducted by the Washington County
Sheriff's Office in Oregon<BR>>
between<BR>> > April and July 2008. The
investigating officer was a member of<BR>> >
Oregon's Internet Crimes Against Children Task
Force.<BR>> ><BR>>
> The officer posed as a 13-year-old girl from Oregon, and
Heustis<BR>> > exchanged explicit information
through chat rooms and Web<BR>> cameras
with<BR>> > the undercover officer during that
time.<BR>> ><BR>>
> "It's been a long two years," Heustis said. "I've learned a
lot<BR>> from<BR>> >
it. A lot of things happened because of what I did on the
computer,<BR>> > and I'm paying the price for
it."<BR>> ><BR>> >
During the sentencing, Michelle Evans, senior deputy
prosecuting<BR>> > attorney for Latah County,
asked for 10 years probation and a<BR>>
90-day<BR>> > jail
sentence.<BR>> ><BR>>
> "I think that it's appropriate to impress upon Mr. Heustis ...
the<BR>> > seriousness of what he did," she
said.<BR>> ><BR>>
> Evans said it was fortunate Heustis was chatting with an
undercover<BR>> > detective instead of an actual
victim during the incidents.<BR>>
><BR>> > Heustis must register as a sex
offender and complete sex offender<BR>> >
treatment at Valley Treatment Specialties in
Clarkston.<BR>>
><BR>> > The computer he used during the
enticement incidents, which is<BR>> in
the<BR>> > possession of the Moscow Police
Department, must be forfeited,<BR>> and
he<BR>> > is not allowed to use the Internet
except for purposes congruent<BR>>
with<BR>> > this probation
requirements.<BR>>
><BR>> > Under the terms of his probation, he
is not allowed to be alone<BR>>
with<BR>> > anyone under the age of 18 and
cannot frequent any city parks or<BR>> > schools
where children may be present.<BR>>
><BR>> > Heustis is prohibited from consuming
alcohol, but Stegner said<BR>>
Heustis<BR>> > would still be allowed to enter
some bars to be able to continue<BR>> > playing
drums in his band.<BR>>
><BR>> > He was sentenced to pay $100 in
court costs.<BR>>
><BR>> > Latah County has never pursued an
enticement case like this before,<BR>> > Evans
said.<BR>> ><BR>>
> *Christina Lords *can be reached at (208) 882-5561, ext. 301, or
by<BR>> > e-mail to <A
href="mailto:clords@dnews.com">clords@dnews.com</A> <<A
href="mailto:clords@dnews.com">mailto:clords@dnews.com</A>><BR>>
<<A
href="mailto:clords@dnews.com">mailto:clords@dnews.com</A>>.<BR>>
><BR>> ><BR>>
------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>>
><BR>> >
=======================================================<BR>>
> List services made available by First Step
Internet,<BR>> > serving the communities
of the Palouse since 1994. <BR>>
>
<A
href="http://www.fsr.net">http://www.fsr.net</A>
<BR>>
> <A
href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com</A><BR>>
>
=======================================================<BR>><BR>><BR>>
------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>><BR>>
=======================================================<BR>> List
services made available by First Step Internet, <BR>> serving the
communities of the Palouse since 1994.
<BR>>
<A
href="http://www.fsr.net">http://www.fsr.net</A>
<BR>> <A
href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com</A><BR>>
=======================================================<BR><BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>