"Paul Mishkin, the Boston lawyer who represented Matamoros in 1986, could not recall details of the case this week, but said it was clear the judge considered the incident very serious."He [Matamoros] told his side of the story to the judge, but clearly there was evidence that made the judge disagree," said Mishkin. "A two-year sentence in this incident is a fairly severe sentence. You'd have to think there's evidence to support that."
So, what did he do? Just like I said, there is usually some reason for the charge. He wasn't in all this trouble just for peeing (apparently). "Haverhill police arrested Matamoros the next morning, charging him with two counts of "open and gross lewdness," a charge used when a suspect exposes or touches himself with the intent to shock or scare people."
He claims he was 'just peeing' but it's not adding up. What do the witnesses say he was doing? While it's technically possible he may be getting worked over by the law, it's also VERY possible he was not 'just peeing'. I mean, why would people complain about a man discreetely pissing (most wouldn't) AND why would the cops hunt him down the next day just for whizzing (they wouldn't)...the whole 'just peeing' thing sounds like an excuse. Maybe he made a dumb mistake and ran around screaming with his dick in his hand? Sounds more likely than 'just peeing'. He also seems to have other legal troubles so maybe he is a criminal scumbag? I'm definitely not convinced this man was 'just peeing'. Show me a case where someone actually WAS 'just peeing', not just claiming they were because they got caught with their pants down so to speak. Peeing my ass...
Do sex offenders deserve a second chance?
← View full post
"Paul Mishkin, the Boston lawyer who represented Matamoros in 1986, could not recall details of the case this week, but said it was clear the judge considered the incident very serious."He [Matamoros] told his side of the story to the judge, but clearly there was evidence that made the judge disagree," said Mishkin. "A two-year sentence in this incident is a fairly severe sentence. You'd have to think there's evidence to support that."
So, what did he do? Just like I said, there is usually some reason for the charge. He wasn't in all this trouble just for peeing (apparently). "Haverhill police arrested Matamoros the next morning, charging him with two counts of "open and gross lewdness," a charge used when a suspect exposes or touches himself with the intent to shock or scare people."
He claims he was 'just peeing' but it's not adding up. What do the witnesses say he was doing? While it's technically possible he may be getting worked over by the law, it's also VERY possible he was not 'just peeing'. I mean, why would people complain about a man discreetely pissing (most wouldn't) AND why would the cops hunt him down the next day just for whizzing (they wouldn't)...the whole 'just peeing' thing sounds like an excuse. Maybe he made a dumb mistake and ran around screaming with his dick in his hand? Sounds more likely than 'just peeing'. He also seems to have other legal troubles so maybe he is a criminal scumbag? I'm definitely not convinced this man was 'just peeing'. Show me a case where someone actually WAS 'just peeing', not just claiming they were because they got caught with their pants down so to speak. Peeing my ass...