Doctor heads to court after online se...

Doctor heads to court after online sex sting

There are 17457 comments on the Contra Costa Times story from Oct 13, 2006, titled Doctor heads to court after online sex sting. In it, Contra Costa Times reports that:

A prominent Piedmont doctor is scheduled to appear in court Nov. 2 to answer to felony charges stemming from his arrest in late August in Petaluma in a sting operation involving online sex crimes with children.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Contra Costa Times.

PSYCHO

San Jose, CA

#5422 Jul 4, 2008
on the 4th of july, MSNBC was having DATELINE to catch a predator marathon raw tapes. Its interesting.

shall I list SOME that I can catch convictions and what the sentences were???
wolin-tracker

Daly City, CA

#5423 Jul 4, 2008
dogstar wrote:
Hey wolin-tracker,
I'm curious as to why the judge rescheduled the discovery hearing to July 10th when the California Supreme court had already stated it needs to July 31st to rule on his case?
Also assuming the California Supreme Court rejects his appeal as two other courts have already done, won't Berk immediately appeal to the US Supreme Court, thus ensuring Wolin's trial date is put off yet again for several more months?
The California Supreme Court stated that it needed "up to and including July 30," implying that a decision could come at any time before that date.
And yes, I would expect that Berk will exercise every option including appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court to draw out this prosecution for as long as possible.
nulella pigelito winslet

Keansburg, NJ

#5424 Jul 4, 2008
PSYCHO wrote:
on the 4th of july, MSNBC was having DATELINE to catch a predator marathon raw tapes. Its interesting.
shall I list SOME that I can catch convictions and what the sentences were???
Yea , watching it as we speak, they are showing some of the outcomes of the predators caught
wolin-tracker

Daly City, CA

#5425 Jul 4, 2008
Shocked in SF wrote:
My friend got a bit of info while communicating with Wolin. till figuring out who he was His cell#, photo's, actual email address.... I passed them along to a local bay area reporter who is going to look in to this. He needs to stay off the internet- for the rest of his good for nothing, child molesting life.
I noticed tonight on TCAP that when arraigned, the judge ordered the predators to stay off the internet. So maybe Wolin too is restricted. Perhaps you should share your information with police authorities for investigation.
PSYCHO

San Jose, CA

#5426 Jul 4, 2008
nulella pigelito winslet wrote:
<quoted text>
Yea , watching it as we speak, they are showing some of the outcomes of the predators caught
oh yes. i tried to take pictures of the screen, with a digital camera, of the outcomes of some of the stuff...then I am videotaping the 'rest', so I can list here names and the outcomes. some were only sentenced to 30 days in jail and 3 years probation, and something else that I dont understand...
Shocked in SF

San Francisco, CA

#5427 Jul 5, 2008
here is one clue..... Wolin in a toupe uses the screen name BioInvest99.... then has the nerve/stupidity to post this comment on the QLTinc (THE COMPANY HE USED TO WORK FOR) message board....HMMMM like you cant figure out who posted this comment.

this is not my thoughts, Just quoting Bioinvest99.. back in NOV 2006

"Re: Maurice Wolin - I feel for his family2-Nov-06 09:22 am Could it be that the whole story hasn't been told? That perhaps the media, which setup this sting, hasn't told the entire story because that might hurt their ratings? The presumption of innocence appears to have been abandoned in favor of a lurid, roman-circus type spectacle. Why have a justice system when trial by television is much more satisfying? "
Joe - Nonce Mo Watch

Boechout, Belgium

#5428 Jul 5, 2008
Off topic:

No Birthday Kiss - 407 pages chat!

http://youtube.com/watch...

jbjb9402 (3 days ago)
This guy was sentenced on June 30th. He got five years in federal prison and supervised release for life. I'm sure when he was sentenced he said, "Oh Gawd...Boo Hoo Hoo!!!"

----

From all of us, with love: Happy Birthday Lorne Armstrong !!!

“Serenity Now!”

Since: May 07

York Township, OH

#5429 Jul 5, 2008
Joe - Nonce Mo Watch wrote:
Off topic:
No Birthday Kiss - 407 pages chat!
http://youtube.com/watch...
jbjb9402 (3 days ago)
This guy was sentenced on June 30th. He got five years in federal prison and supervised release for life. I'm sure when he was sentenced he said, "Oh Gawd...Boo Hoo Hoo!!!"
----
From all of us, with love: Happy Birthday Lorne Armstrong !!!
Yeah, that guy was really a pathetic case. Didn't he have anything better to do on his BIRTHDAY?

5 years though.....damn that's a big sentence. As Psycho pointed out (I can't believe I'm citing one of his posts), most of the guys in Ohio got around 30 to 60 days in jail plus only a couple years probation.

“Serenity Now!”

Since: May 07

York Township, OH

#5430 Jul 5, 2008
Off topic:

In regards to the Raw episode for the Ohio sting, at the end it said that each stingee's sentence was based on the individual circumstances of their cases -- which of course makes sense. But the one case that stuck out in my mind was Jeffrey Stacey.....he was the younger guy with the really high-pitched voice.("It's just a question!") He got six or seven months in jail, which was much more than most of the others in that sting. I wonder what was unique about his circumstances.....? Maybe a prior offense? Not sure if anyone has any info on him.....I couldn't find anything on the internet.
wolin-tracker

Daly City, CA

#5431 Jul 5, 2008
Shocked in SF wrote:
here is one clue..... Wolin in a toupe uses the screen name BioInvest99.... then has the nerve/stupidity to post this comment on the QLTinc (THE COMPANY HE USED TO WORK FOR) message board....HMMMM like you cant figure out who posted this comment.
this is not my thoughts, Just quoting Bioinvest99.. back in NOV 2006
"Re: Maurice Wolin - I feel for his family2-Nov-06 09:22 am Could it be that the whole story hasn't been told? That perhaps the media, which setup this sting, hasn't told the entire story because that might hurt their ratings? The presumption of innocence appears to have been abandoned in favor of a lurid, roman-circus type spectacle. Why have a justice system when trial by television is much more satisfying? "
Okay, now I am more persuaded to believe that it was Wolin who your friend was talking to. Please provide us the details of their internet conversation.

“Serenity Now!”

Since: May 07

York Township, OH

#5432 Jul 5, 2008
Shocked in SF wrote:
here is one clue..... Wolin in a toupe uses the screen name BioInvest99.... then has the nerve/stupidity to post this comment on the QLTinc (THE COMPANY HE USED TO WORK FOR) message board....HMMMM like you cant figure out who posted this comment.
this is not my thoughts, Just quoting Bioinvest99.. back in NOV 2006
"Re: Maurice Wolin - I feel for his family2-Nov-06 09:22 am Could it be that the whole story hasn't been told? That perhaps the media, which setup this sting, hasn't told the entire story because that might hurt their ratings? The presumption of innocence appears to have been abandoned in favor of a lurid, roman-circus type spectacle. Why have a justice system when trial by television is much more satisfying? "
Can you give us the link to the forum where this occurred?
PSYCHO

San Jose, CA

#5434 Jul 5, 2008
Joe - Nonce Mo Watch wrote:
Off topic:
No Birthday Kiss - 407 pages chat!
http://youtube.com/watch...
jbjb9402 (3 days ago)
This guy was sentenced on June 30th. He got five years in federal prison and supervised release for life. I'm sure when he was sentenced he said, "Oh Gawd...Boo Hoo Hoo!!!"
----
From all of us, with love: Happy Birthday Lorne Armstrong !!!
yes I saw things like that at the end of some of those PREDATOR RAW TAPES on MSNBC they did a marathon July 4th. Other episodes are planning on being shown (no marathons) so check your local listings. Because these offer a lot more than DATELINE regular does, especally the whole confrontation of that guy at McDonalds!!!
Bob

Tampa, FL

#5435 Jul 5, 2008
Bob Law wrote:
<quoted text>
wolin-tracker, it is not clear what you think a "legal technicality." The entrapment defense or the Fourth Amendment? Most citizens value both. Let us recap.
What is entrapment as a matter of California law? p205
http://www.topix.com/forum/city/petaluma-ca/T...
Entrapment in the chat p215
http://www.topix.com/forum/city/petaluma-ca/T...
Regulations in other decoy programs p232
http://www.topix.com/forum/city/petaluma-ca/T...
Berk's closing argument (just for fun) p222
http://www.topix.com/forum/city/petaluma-ca/T...
California Penal Code section 632.(a) Every person who, intentionally and without the consent of all parties to a confidential communication, by means of any electronic amplifying or recording device, eavesdrops upon or records the confidential communication, whether the communication is carried on among the parties in the presence of one another or by means of a telegraph, telephone, or other device, except a radio, shall be
punished by a fine not exceeding two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500), or imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding one year, or in the state prison, or by both that fine and imprisonment. If the person has previously been convicted of a violation of this section or Section 631, 632.5, 632.6, 632.7, or 636, the person shall be punished by a fine not exceeding ten thousand dollars ($10,000), by imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding one year, or in the state prison, or by both that fine and imprisonment.
(b) The term "person" includes an individual, business association, partnership, corporation, limited liability company, or other legal entity, and an individual acting or purporting to act for or on behalf of any government or subdivision thereof, whether federal, state, or local, but excludes an individual known by all parties to a confidential communication to be overhearing or recording the communication.
(c) The term "confidential communication" includes any communication carried on in circumstances as may reasonably indicate that any party to the communication desires it to be confined to the parties thereto, but excludes a communication made in a public gathering or in any legislative, judicial, executive or administrative proceeding open to the public, or in any other circumstance in which the parties to the communication may reasonably expect that the communication may be overheard or recorded.
(d) Except as proof in an action or prosecution for violation of this section, no evidence obtained as a result of eavesdropping upon or recording a confidential communication in violation of this section shall be admissible in any judicial, administrative, legislative, or other proceeding.
(e) This section does not apply (1) to any public utility engaged in the business of providing communications services and facilities, or to the officers, employees or agents thereof, where the acts otherwise prohibited by this section are for the purpose of construction, maintenance, conduct or operation of the services and facilities of the public utility, or (2) to the use of any instrument, equipment, facility, or service furnished and used
pursuant to the tariffs of a public utility, or (3) to any telephonic communication system used for communication exclusively within a state, county, city and county, or city correctional facility.
(f) This section does not apply to the use of hearing aids and similar devices, by persons afflicted with impaired hearing, for the purpose of overcoming the impairment to permit the hearing of sounds ordinarily audible to the human ear.
wolin-tracker

Long Beach, CA

#5436 Jul 5, 2008
You sound like a broken record. Three (soon to be four) separate courts have heard Berk's entrapment argument and have denied her motion to dismiss. Your entrapment defense is hopeless. Understand?
Shocked in SF

San Francisco, CA

#5437 Jul 5, 2008
Follow these steps if you want to see a small pic on yahoo.....google "bioinvest99" QLT message board comes up with the posting... if bioinvest99 is online, click on the link that say's "online now" located above the screen name... he needs to be online to be able to veiw the pic from yahoo beta messenger. It's a small pic a bit hard to view compared to the ones on the dating site.

“Serenity Now!”

Since: May 07

York Township, OH

#5438 Jul 5, 2008
According to this article, NBC has dropped the To Catch a Predator series.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/showtracker/2...

I hope one day they bring it back.....
Bubba

Germany

#5439 Jul 5, 2008
wolin-tracker wrote:
You sound like a broken record. Three (soon to be four) separate courts have heard Berk's entrapment argument and have denied her motion to dismiss. Your entrapment defense is hopeless. Understand?
You sound like someone trying to talk his way out of doing a year for recording a phone conversation.

Come to daddy. I'll give you zoo-zoos and wham-whams and protect you... for a week or two.
Treadhead

United States

#5440 Jul 5, 2008
Bubba wrote:
<quoted text>
You sound like someone trying to talk his way out of doing a year for recording a phone conversation.
Come to daddy. I'll give you zoo-zoos and wham-whams and protect you... for a week or two.
It wasn't a phone conversation. It wasn't eavesdropping. It was a sting operation carried out by law enforcement for the purpose of nailing potential predators before they had a chance to nail an actual child.

What a cafone! Sheesh!
Treadhead

United States

#5441 Jul 5, 2008
Bob wrote:
<quoted text>
California Penal Code section 632.
This does not apply to chatlogs. This does not apply to chatlogs. This does not apply to chatlogs. This does not apply to chatlogs.
This does not apply to chatlogs. This does not apply to chatlogs. This does not apply to chatlogs. This does not apply to chatlogs.
This does not apply to chatlogs. This does not apply to chatlogs. This does not apply to chatlogs. This does not apply to chatlogs.
This does not apply to chatlogs. This does not apply to chatlogs. This does not apply to chatlogs. This does not apply to chatlogs.
This does not apply to chatlogs. This does not apply to chatlogs. This does not apply to chatlogs. This does not apply to chatlogs.
This does not apply to chatlogs. This does not apply to chatlogs. This does not apply to chatlogs. This does not apply to chatlogs.
This does not apply to chatlogs. This does not apply to chatlogs. This does not apply to chatlogs. This does not apply to chatlogs.
This does not apply to chatlogs. This does not apply to chatlogs. This does not apply to chatlogs. This does not apply to chatlogs.
This does not apply to chatlogs. This does not apply to chatlogs. This does not apply to chatlogs. This does not apply to chatlogs.
This does not apply to chatlogs.
ButtBaby

United States

#5442 Jul 5, 2008
I wonder if this applies to chatlogs???

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

August Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Comcast is a horrible place to work (Jun '08) Fri Service techIII 152
News McDonald's restaurants honor police with Blue l... Jan 18 hey 3
What Happened to Orlando's Market??? (Mar '08) Jan 7 Linden guy 25
Nancy Pelosi (Jan '10) Jan 6 Wake up Ca 3
News Single Mother Facing Prison for Selling Homemad... Dec 30 robin clarke 3
News Navigating the Holidays in a Mixed-Faith Family Dec 23 Jesus Is 4
Stockton Becoming One of Black Murder Capitals ... (Oct '14) Dec '16 Concerned for us 5

August Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

August Mortgages