Moms for Liberty (M4L), the anti-LGBTQ+ “extremist group” that constantly vilifies LGBTQ+ people for “sexualizing kids,” hired a registered sex offender who allegedly had oral and anal sex with a 14-year-old boy to handle the religious outreach for its Philadelphia chapter.
The offender, Phillip Fisher Jr., was convicted in 2012 for the aggravated sexual abuse of a 14-year-old boy, The Philadelphia Inquirer reported. He pleaded guilty to one count of “aggravated criminal sexual abuse of a minor between the ages of 13 and 17” in the case, even though a grand jury indicted him in 2011 for 12 counts of sexual assault and sexual abuse. Despite his guilty plea, Fisher “insists that he did nothing wrong,” the publication wrote.
He didn’t “have sex with” a 14yo. Just as the charge says, he “sexually abused” a 14yo. He’s a rapist and molester.
Also, of course, “insists that he did nothing wrong”. He’s a republican. It’s ok for them. /s
And these are the motherfuckers that tell you that drag performers are after your children.
They just don’t want to share the children with anyone else.
Everyone here is talking about the sex offender thing, but I’m more curious about something much more rudimentary.
Why is this mom’s group being led by a dude named Phil?
It’s almost like protecting children is not actually one of their goals.
Is it still “allegedly” if they’ve been convicted of it?
I get what you mean. But I think that yes. Lots of people plead guilty to things they didn’t do. And plenty of people who have done the crime plead innocent and get absolved for technicalities or lack of evidence, procedure errors, etc.
So the allegedly is not for the benefit of the person being talked about but for the journalist’s legal protection. Because guilt can only be established by a judge by proper court proceedings and appeals and all of that. Like, how the only person who can legally say that someone died are medics and judges.
I am not a lawyer: A guilty plea is an admission of guilt, so I believe you’re wrong about that, thankfully. Provided the specific crimes being discussed are the same ones that were plead to, I don’t think there is an issue here
I don’t know, that’s up for the journalists to sort out. They’re the ones using the “allegedly” language here.
I mean considering any normal person is basically going to be bankrupted by a non frivolous lawsuit, I wouldn’t blame them for erring on the safe side even if they’re sure they’re in the right
What’s with all these people raping underaged boys
Society teaches men not to display vulnerability and to never admit sexual victimization. Boys are treated more independently and left without supervision often and sooner due to the perception that they are stronger and more capable. This make them vulnerable to intimidation and abuse.
Makes sense, he knows how to speak their language.
AYO??? 🤨 This ain’t right…
A more accurate name would evidently be “pedos for hitler.”
