Randy Cassingham's Blog

Posted by Brian W. in Indiana on May 12, 2007:

This genius deserves everything the courts can give him and then some.

I really doubt that Randy Cassingham seriously meant it when he wrote: “…they really need to drop the charges to avoid Double Jeopardy.“

Here are a few things to consider.

This moron may try to explain away his actions by saying I was drunk, I didn’t know what I was doing, or the alcohol made me do it.

Everyone should realize this fact. Alcohol will not make you do anything that you do not want to do. Alcohol merely lowers your inhibitions to allow you to do things that you subconsciously want to do, but normally think better of.

This rocket scientist dresses up like a woman (a very ugly, unattractive woman) and goes to a playground.

Am I the only one noticing the signs of a pedophile here?

This pervert claims to be going to a “gay bar” while cross dressing. This pervert has more perversions than he has common sense!

What he does behind closed doors is his business, but what he does in public is OUR business!

I hope they through the book at him!

---

Most story taglines are indeed jokes -- and rather obvious ones, such as in this case. -rc

Posted by Lelia in Texas on May 12, 2007:

I am a great believer in public shame. It is one of the best deterents there is. It is too bad that it is not used more. Alcohol did not make him get in a several pound vehicle and drive it. He is lucky he didn't kill someone.

I personally hope that he is found guilty of drunken driving, public indencency, child endangerment and anything else they can think of. Until there is a way to prevent this person from getting behind the wheel again, then public shaming will have to do.

Posted by Jeff - Atlanta on May 12, 2007:

HE WAS DRUNK - weather he hides it or not by dressing as a woman makes no difference at all. What he did was wrong - and allowing him to change clothes - could be the first step in altering evidence after a crime has been committed. Do we wait until he kills a child in the park and remain in the “good old boy” way of thinking – after all – he did not kill anybody?? NO! Put his ass of the front page of the local newspaper and label him as a drunk driver!!!

Posted by Geoff, Bicester UK on May 12, 2007:

I can see no evidence in the report which would suggest that this man was a pedophile (sic). I have no idea what .174% of alcohol means, but it might be lower that we have here in the UK. I suspect that he might have been "under the influence", but perhaps not drunk.

Having his picture plastered over the Web must be punishment enough.

---

The level .174% is, to put it in more familiar terms (if I have this right), 174mg per ml of blood, or more than double Britain's current driving limit of 80, and well more than triple the proposed limit of 50. If we estimate his weight at 190 pounds (about 13-1/2 stone), it would take nine 12 oz beers (5-1/2 pints, or just over 3 liters) to bring him up to that level -- over the course of just an hour. -rc

Posted by Richard, BC Canada on May 12, 2007:

Public humiliation is a rather cruel, but nonetheless effective punishment. In China where I lived for 5 years, the best show in town was when the guards at the local prison handcuffed the prisoners to the sides of open trucks, put posters stating their names, crimes and punishments underneath them and paraded them through the streets for all to see (and apparently enjoy). It was certainly one of the few times you'd see old ladies running to have a better look. Anyone with a red cross through their poster was due for a bullet in the back of the head and you'd sometimes see these poor souls being driven through town to a piece of waste ground where they were shot. Again posters would identify them.

In a society like China, where face is everything, this was certainly a major deterrent. Personally I think it might well work. And I think it's great that this drunken idiot gets displayed (and enjoyed) across the web.

Posted by Baba Kifo from Oakalnd, CA on May 12, 2007:

I have a question: How did the photos get on the internet?

If the photos were released by law enforcement officials as part of a court authorized punishment, then I think Double Jeoprady is a possiblity. But, that's that's not the impression I'm getting form this article.

I could be wrong, but the impression I'm getting is that these photos were "somehow, mysteriously leaked" onto the internet, and not part of any officially sanctioned punishment.

If this second scenario is the case, then the "leaked" photos would not represent a secondary form of punishment. I think they represent serious violations in police procedure and the suspect's privacy, and thus, his Civil Rights.

This is a ridiculous example of something seriously wrong. These photos are evidence of a possible crime having been commited, not email jokes to be traded around as attachemnts or posted on webpages. If these photos were "leaked", then the Law was broken at this police station and an investigaiton needs to occur, because if the law enforcement community does not take the Law seriously, then how can we expect to enforce it properly?

---

Booking photos are generally considered public record, which is why we see mug shots every time a celebrity is arrested. -rc

Posted by Mike from Dallas on May 12, 2007:

"Put his ass of the front page of the local newspaper and label him as a drunk driver!!!"

Don't they do that, in some cities, to johns who solicit prostitutes? Along with impounding their cars? Doesn't seem to be working. The hookers are still doing head over heels business.

---

If they're hookers, wouldn't that be "heels over head" business? -rc

Posted by Joseph, Ottawa on May 12, 2007:

The punishment for the alcohol level is prescribed by law and was meted out accordingly. Putting the picture out to the 'Net is very unprofessional on the part of the police and amounts to nothing more than a juvenile version of the stockade for those with a prurient interest in wierdos and the need to build him or herself up by denigrating someone else. I dare say it was plenty humiliating enough to be seen by the policemen at the station and have to explain to his wife or family. Sending it to the 'Net was childish. Posting it here may be a discussion starter, but that's all I can see it being worth.

---

Yet, you did click through to see them too.... -rc

Posted by Jackie, Washington state on May 13, 2007:

I wanted to comment on what some people thought would be a good solution: requiring that (among other things) this driver would have to attend AA meetings for a specific amount of time. The problem with this is that, as far as I understand AA, you have to be willing to change in order for it to really help you. As the old proverb says, you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink. AA could definitely help him with some of the alcohol issues he's dealing with, but only if he's ready to face them; otherwise it will just be a waste of time.

Someone else commented on how people are wanting to incarcerate rather than fix the problem. I totally agree that the true issue here (or one of them) is alcoholism, and only by treating that will a true solution be found. Unless he's willing to work at facing his addiction, however, I'm not sure what other solution will work. He's put several lives in danger already; no one wants him to continue doing that. A different solution (taking away his car and license, or whatever) would be great, but there has to be SOME way to deal with the life endangerment issue.

Posted by Vicki in Utah on May 13, 2007:

All I can say is if the guy didn't learn a lesson from this, he has serious issues. I think I would not only move from the state but the country. I actually feel for the guy. How humiliating for him!!!