Steff

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061010/ap_on_...WtkBHNlYwM3MTg- ERIE, Pa. - A northwestern Pennsylvania woman accused of using her baby to batter her child's father said she didn't realize what she was doing until it was too late. Chyrotia Graham, 27, of Erie, told police she had been drinking when an argument with the child's father turned violent early Sunday morning, according to an affidavit filed to support Graham's arrest. Graham said she "snapped" and began grabbing things and throwing them at Deangelo Troop, 20, not realizing she had picked up her 4-week-old son, Jarron Troop, telling police she held the child by his legs and swung him at his father. Police had said they believed the woman held the baby by the midsection when she hit the man. Graham was being held in the Erie County Jail on Monday on $75,000 bond. She faces charges of aggravated assault, reckless endangerment and simple assault. Jarron, who was born Sept. 11, suffered a fractured skull and bleeding in the brain after the incident. The infant's head hit Deangelo, who had also fathered one of Graham's other four children. Deangelo told the Erie Times-News that Graham never meant to hurt their child. "People are trying to make a big deal about it, but she did not do it on purpose. ... It was just a mistake," he said. Defense attorney Alison Scarpitti, who was assigned by the Erie County Public Defender's Office to represent Graham, said Monday she could not comment because she had not met with Graham. Police said Troop punched Graham in the eye after she put the baby down, and police photos later showed her eye blackened and swollen shut. Authorities said there was no indication that Troop had hit his son but that they were reviewing the case to see if any charges might be warranted. "I don't anticipate any at this time," Erie police Capt. Frank Kwitowski said Monday. Officials at Children's Hospital in Pittsburgh declined to release information about the baby early Tuesday. He was flown to the hospital by helicopter after the incident. Authorities removed Graham's other children from the home. The Erie County Office of Children and Youth granted temporary custody to their maternal grandparents, Gloria Graham and Cornell Petty of Erie.

QUOTE(RibbieRubarb @ Oct 10, 2006 -> 08:31 AM) Didn't you know? It's right here: Derek Jeter doesn't like A-Rod You were missed...

About half way down the page http://www.profootballtalk.com/LiveBlog.htm And I hope ESPN gets fined.

QUOTE(redandwhite @ Oct 10, 2006 -> 12:31 AM) The fact that Jeter doesn't like A-Rod is pretty pathetic. Can you post the link to that "fact".... TIA.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Oct 9, 2006 -> 05:09 PM) Finally, one more point. The issue is not outing a gay Republican. The issue is outing a potential child Predator who happens to be a Republican. There is a monstrous difference there. I do think that everyone on this board is on agreement with that point.

For 1.65 BILLION dollars... Cha... ching.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Oct 9, 2006 -> 09:30 AM) So how long until this technology and/or weaponry ends up in the wrong hands? A long time ago.

Friday night they showed Foley from an interview last year on Dateline praising how they were catching all those "repulsive" internet predators. Oops.

QUOTE(Tony82087 @ Oct 6, 2006 -> 04:12 PM) Would like to hear a couple of fan reviews before I go. 2003 version was alright, but eh. This one is supposed to only be 85 min long or something, so not sure how much "Depth" is going to be there. Someone in my office saw it and said "if you expect to get answers, don't hold your breath". Damn. Guess it's The Guardian tonight

4-0 A's now.

I think we're going to see Texas Chainsaw - The Beginning tonight. I wasn't too fond of the Biel one, but this one is a pre-quel and supposedly explains how the family business got started. Anyone else see it or planning on seeing it?

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Oct 6, 2006 -> 02:37 PM) Error 403 Forbidden here. That site must not like you guys. Here's another link. http://perezhilton.com/katieposhparis3.jpg

Wow...

QUOTE(Brian @ Oct 6, 2006 -> 02:21 PM) Pic must have been removed, cuz it doesn't work. Or Steff just isn't good at this computer stuff. Works fine for me. Maybe it's you with the problem.

QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Oct 6, 2006 -> 01:26 PM) It's splitting hairs, Steff I know. But physically a 16, 17 year old is an adult - even if mentally or legally that isn't the case. I know a 13 year old that's 5'9" and 170lbs. Physical attributes mean nothing where such abuse is concerned.

Sorry guys.. here's the link. http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/3494/635/400/kat1.1.jpg

QUOTE(Iwritecode @ Oct 6, 2006 -> 12:23 PM) My wife watches those baby shows on TLC all the time and sometimes I'm amazed at the people they bring into the room. Not to mention the person holding the camera... Money, money, money, moneeeee.. money!

QUOTE(Texsox @ Oct 6, 2006 -> 11:36 AM) Nope, not relatives, just friends. I wonder if they brought snacks? Like I said, I guess it depends on how close they are. I know several folks who are closer with their friends of many years than they are with their "family".

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Oct 6, 2006 -> 11:47 AM) Umm what excuses? You are reading WAY to far into the post and finding something that isn't there. My point is that they are both indeed pedophiles, yet we as a society only really scorn one of them. I don't know where you are getting the crap about excusing the behavior in either case, and if it is there I would like you to point it out. I also didn't speak of consenting adults in any case. Go back and reread the original post, it refers specifically to cases where one of the parties is underage, as does the post I replied to from NSS referring to the classroom situation. You're right. I am reading way into this entire disgusting vile topic. Your use of "older" and "younger" versus adult and child struck a nerve. QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Oct 6, 2006 -> 11:48 AM) By definition, someone going after a young pubescent male or femaile is not a pedophile. A child molester sure. A sexual predator, absolutely. A creep and a half, most definitely. But a pedophile, no. It's good enough for the American Heritage Dictionary, it's good enough for me. American Heritage Dictionary - Cite This Source ped·o·phile (pd-fl, pd-) Pronunciation Key n. An adult who is sexually attracted to a child or children. pedo·philic (-flk) adj. (Download Now or Buy the Book) The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 6, 2006 -> 11:37 AM) Um... I guess I am missing your point then. You mean the comparisons to Clinton and Lewinsky or something? If so, I agree, that isn't in the same ballpark. That's exactly what I mean.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 6, 2006 -> 11:22 AM) I guess I see both of them as pedophiles - the teacher and the Congressman. And I'll agree with you every time on that one. Yet how does that compare to someone older using power over someone younger? Cut to the chase, I'm looking for a correction of the ignorant generalization here.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 6, 2006 -> 11:12 AM) I think he was comparing the 35 yo teacher and 16 yo boy with 55 yo Congressman and 16 yo boy. In which case, I think its an OK comparison. I don't think he was making excuses for anyone, unless I misunderstood. How is an older person abusing power with someone younger remotely comparable to a pedophile taking advantage of a child...?

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Oct 6, 2006 -> 10:45 AM) This is actually the situation which came to my mind last night when I started thinking about it. To me it is the same basic idea. An older person is in a position of power, and uses that power to put themselves into situations to take advantage of younger, usually more naive people Quit making excuses and just call this spade a spade. They are sick bastard pedophiles. An older person in a position of power on a playing field with another - but younger - niave ADULT is again not even on the same planet for a comparison to be made.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 6, 2006 -> 09:50 AM) I mean heck, look at some of those threads on this board when they happened - guys here were too pre-occupied deciding whether or not they'd "hit that" to notice it was technically rape. PFS, aint it. Take 2 seconds to think if it's was your child - male or female - that was raped. QUOTE(EvilMonkey @ Oct 6, 2006 -> 10:05 AM) Maybe in this tech savy world we should change that phrase to I would IM that? Sounds less violent and more up to date. It's wrong regardless of how you pretty it up. I can not even believe there is a "what if" on the subject. Very sad.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Oct 6, 2006 -> 08:21 AM) In the room, watchin'. I guess it depends on how close they are? My sister was fine with me being there (I was a bit freaky with it though), but daughter-in-law would have been mortified if her sisters had asked (one of them is the Godmom).