Paroled Child Molester Given 25 Years For SpammingJudge likens email accounts to "precious cargo"
Ingrate: Child Molester's wanton disregard
for email sensitivity was his undoing.
San Francisco -- A federal judge in California today sentenced a paroled, repeat child molester to a minimum, 25-year sentence for illegal infusion of circular advertisements into the private world of cyberspace.
45-year old Marshall Ingrate III, cried as the sentence was read to him, and said "This is the worst sin I've ever committed. Despite the delete buttons in every email program, I cannot erase the undue memory of deletions I have caused."
Writing his opinion with audible passion, Judge Ethan Asia set a tone that augurs ill for any would-be spammers:
"Today, we are coming not only for you, Mr. Ingrate, but we are coming after the aggregate world of spamming--period. You have arguably transgressed the realms of forgivability with your frequent, insatiable relapses at numerous after-school programs. You even overstepped your legal bounds by your continual tardiness during your compulsory pediatrics ward, work-release program. But now you have made an active choice to violate the most sacred boundaries of dominion ever granted to individuals by God—and this will not go unanswered.
This court cannot expunge the sheer horror experienced by those whose tiny little email accounts have been told that spamming was a natural part of the Internet, only to feel unquantifiable shame after the Spam is opened. Further more, this sentence will carry with it the inertia from the latent threats to further stigmatize the email accounts by telling other email accounts they’ve been spammed. You are lower than dirt, Mr. Ingrate, and if the robes with which I am charged not bind this jurist, I would physically deal with you as an email owner myself. Unfortunately, I have only the maximum sentence of 25 years before me—given with all the malice I can muster.”
Judge Asia was then heard to say, “Get this scumbag out of my face, and let him watch Sesame Street.”
The ruling falls on the heel of another spammer in Virginia who was given a nine-year sentence for similar convictions. Analysts say that the judge’s maximum ruling in the last case exemplifies his irritation with a “decent man who had everything to lose, and chose to lose it by involving himself in the dark world of spamming.”