If you’re doing something wrong, or you look suspicious, hold on tight, because you’re going to the okay corral…

A 2 year old is unable to rape a baby, or hit someone so forcefully that it would be considered blunt force trauma.

Robert is an idiot, and the fact that he flaunted that he was incarcerated with this creep just goes to tell you what kind of criminal he was/is, because I doubt this douchetard wasn’t hanging with the general population. He was looking for a payday.

“CP-02-CR-0000336-2008
Arrest Dt: 11/19/2007
Proc Status: Sentenced/Penalty Imposed DC No: OTN:G4153214
Disp Date: 04/23/2010 Disp Judge: Borkowski, Edward J.
Def Atty: Patarini, Christopher – (PD)
Seq No Statute Grade Description Disposition
Sentence Dt. Sentence Type Program Period Sentence Length
1 18 § 2502 H1 Murder Of The First Degree Guilty Plea
04/23/2010 Confinement Life
Invol. Deviate Sexual Intercourse
W/Child
2 18 § 3123 F1 Withdrawn
Invol. Deviate Sexual Intercourse
W/Child
3 18 § 3123 F1 Withdrawn
Endangering Welfare of Children -
Parent/Guardian/Other Commits
Offense
4 18 § 4304 M1 Guilty Plea
04/23/2010 No Further Penalty”

The Constitution requires a fair judicial process for everyone, you, me and Clinton Smith. The laws are written to establish what is and isn’t allowed in America.

Ouch, this shows where you’re actually entirely wrong. The laws are written to allow for a judicial process that allows the State to determine how criminal proceedings continue. They do not and should not have the ability to control the speech being demonstrated here. You’re overreaching, and you should be aware of it.

There are multiple layers here. If Clinton Smith is responsible for the child’s death, he should, as is his duty as an American citizen and human being, admit to the crime for which he is guilty. He cannot be compelled to admit to guilt, but he should have the moral and ethical fortitude to admit to his crimes and submit to punishment. The aggravation of the judicial process is not merely one where the justice system including the DA’s judges, jury and police have abused the rights of man, they are an evolution where a lack of personal responsibility, character and citizenship has engineered a criminal element that are resistant to personal responsibility. You have been convicted of crimes, some of which you claim not to be responsible for. If this is true, you were wronged, but did you not commit some crime that you fully accept responsibility for?

A child is dead. That’s something the family, neighbors and any human being should rightfully feel grief for.
This child was a prospective American citizen, a minor and unable to defend herself. Any American citizen and in fact the US military are required by oath to defend her rights.
The accused, is accused of killing her with his penis and lust. This is a despicable act that should be treated with revulsion as one of the most disgusting things a human being can do to another. We’re responding appropriately. The question is why you’re instead hiding behind the Constitution when you should reasonably concede that as it stands your argument is simply that it cannot be proven that Clinton Smith raped a baby into a critical medical condition, which later resulted in her death. Is it perhaps because that last sentence would be a very, very hard pill to swallow?

Honestly Jason, if you were in Smith’s shoes and your rights were violated, wouldn’t you try to fight for that?

if(!guilty && stillcharged)
I’d fight the charges,
else
I’d plead guilty

Let me translate the logic above:
If, I am not guilty AND I’m still charged, I’d fight the charges. But otherwise I’d plead guilty.

I have had my rights violated by Police a few times.

I was subjected to a checkpoint field sobriety test because I was traveling north on a particular street last night. My dinner was cold when I got home because of it! I was inconvenienced, my rights were not violated, because after a few silly games I was released back on the road as sober as a church mouse–the way I started the evening.

My defense lawyers didn’t do anything about it but let me get convicted of crimes I wasn’t guilty of.

Alright here, here’s your chance to get it off your chest then. What did you actually do, and what should be the charges you are convicted of. Don’t think of the judicial system as a game, explain what you did do and then clearly explain what you should have been convicted of instead.

To say that Clinton Smith is a baby killer and baby rapist because the Police and Doctors said so is ignorant.

Incorrect, the police are considered experts on crime in the State of Pennsylvania as much as they are in North Carolina where I live. To suggest that the police are uniformly wrong about crime is ignorant and unbecoming of your profession. There is a persistent belief among some that police officers do not properly follow the law and procedure and anecdotal evidence to prove some do not, but you’ve admitted to a prejudice against the police and their case. I am evaluating your opinion based upon the pre-trial discovery motion (the only discovery document available even to Smith, let alone the public(which does not yet have access)) and your opinion of this document as you shared it between the bars of a cell. My opinion and my expression of that opinion is ignorant of the facts of the case, but by the definition of the proceedings, so is your opinion.

I am empowered by the 1st amendment the right to believe anything within my heart as long as it does not adversely affect the rights of another citizen. I can even express my opinions in a matter of personal freedom. Given what has been released on Smith, to the public, I know the following(Tomorrow, I may know otherwise):

Clinton Smith was awaiting trial on an earlier assault charge related to another woman and another child at the time of his arrest. It was the Paramedics who responded to the location who first contacted Homicide detectives. The Affidavit including the a document signed by the attending physician and two nurses said the cause of death was sexual assault. The medical examiner’s report is not currently available and its admission into the public record is in fact against the law. You as a paralegal and a defacto adjunct to the court should refrain from mentioning its contents until they’re released by the court in question to the public. Your party to them is acceptable, your use at this time and on this site, is not. I lament this, because I would like to know more about it now, before the case is complete. I also know that when the paramedics arrived, the child was unresponsive, that she seized and later convulsed not once, not twice, but three times before she passed and could not be resuscitated. Significant signs of trauma were on the infant, and Clinton Smith was responsible for the child from a time in which the child was alive to a later time when the child was critically injured. Later, that child succumbed to her injuries. I doubt very much that the medical examiner’s report did not include abdominal injury as the apparent cause of death. Can you honestly say otherwise? I think you know where I’m headed here.

We as American citizens have a duty to protect the United States Constitution.

Nothing in me does anything less on a daily basis. I believe firmly that it is my duty to protect the Constitution from politicians and officials as much as foreign governments and their agents. The Constitution is a living, breathing portion of my will as a free citizen of this country, and I rate membership as a citizen to this country as one of my most valued possessions.

I am a Paralegal and have vowed to defend the defendant’s rights and to promote judicial fairness. You have to realize that not everything you read or hear is true.

And not every case, is a case of the police getting it wrong. In fact, I believe the opposite to be true.

Murder is absolutely wrong as is rape. But to judge and condemn someone because of what charges he is facing is wrong.

Completely a lie and a fabrication not supported by the Constitution, or any other article of American law. I as a free American citizen may condemn and judge any other person so long as I do not attempt to seek or actually gain access to any artifice of actual justice against him. Clinton Smith is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, not in the court of public opinion or in the individual heart and mind of any other human being. If he’s cleared of these charges, I have as my right, the right to consider the preceding in some way less than valid and will have the right to review the court case including the prosecution and defense’s sides. I think it’s ignorant of you to prejudge my rights and so gruesomely misjudge the Constitution. The Constitution has vast powers but it does reserve rights for the citizen you are attempting to misinterpret, either purposefully or unintentionally.

The fact is, without Smith’s statement there is no murder charge.

You are mistaken. There is a dead body, there are witnesses to the damage, and there is proof that Mr. Smith was present. If you’ll attend to the definition above, homicide is indicated. There’s also a history of violence. Direct evidence is not required for a murder conviction. A jury or judge must merely be convinced of his guilt. If you were to serve on that jury and only know what you currently know of his case, you’d set him free. I would not.

The bite mark on the baby’s chest wasn’t clearly a bite mark.
The prosecution has since taken dental impressions to attempt matching Smith’s teeth to the supposed bite mark. If that proves not to be his teeth then there would be no evidence of anything.

If it is proven to be his teeth, will you set aside the jurisprudence as a human being and citizen and recognize that a grown man killed an infant as surely as if he had pointed a gun at her head and pulled the trigger?

Without penetration of the baby, there is no Felony as required for Second-Degree murder.

Incorrect, Aggravated assault could still be proven by matching any of the child’s other, non-life threatening bruises with any other item in the house including the kitchen table in this particular case. The Felony would be Aggravated Assault, and the clarification would be with a deadly weapon.

Without these things, Clinton Smith has been wrongly accused.

Again, I think you miss the point. Even if Clinton Smith gets off on the lesser charge of child endangerment, he was and is responsible for the death of an infant.

Then would you still want him to burn in hell for something he didn’t do?

1. You miss the point of this website. Please read the about section above, it’s quite enlightening. The site is motivated not with a will to send someone to hell, but to make an assumption of these individuals and to publicly inform on the publicly available particulars. In other words, the purpose is journalism and public entertainment. As a second, redeeming public service, victims come and read some of these articles and sometimes gain either closure or an understanding of human feeling and support. There are other benefits, but few if any of the site’s participants believe or intend to influence the will of the almighty. I find catharsis in some of these cases, due to personal injury, but I do not believe that my indication on an html radio button and form somehow allow me to actually condemn someone to Hell. When men and women are exonerated, the admins of this site do in good faith report when they can or are notified.

Or perhaps you don’t understand the subject matter here?

I’m ready to pass any test you’re willing to give in this matter. I hope I clearly have demonstrated that I am an effective and competent interpreter of the US constitution as any good American citizen should strive to be. My profession is that of a software developer and requires a firm grounding in logic. I am a human being, mostly whole, sane and of sound judgment. I am making a firm and solid personal inventory of both my actions and I find no fault in my argument or in my position. Please proceed if you believe my position is in error in any way.