Thanks, ace. Thanks a bunch for that.

Yeah.

Do you suppose that could be...nah, it couldn't be.

We the jury find him guilty, honor.

But they haven't presented the case yet. In fact, the prosecutor hasn't told you the alleged offense yet.

Yeah, we know. But just look at him.

Sweet mother mary.....

GROSS sexual imposition - sounds like an understatement to me

Holy shit...Separated at birth?

Seriously. WTF is wrong with that guy.

Besides getting hit in the face with a sledge hammer when he had a soft skull...

What a nightmare!

Hey, can we get off the Star Wars theme already?

I think we finally have a working definition of "gobsmackingly vile."

Oh, sweet mercy. "Gross..." Nauseating would be a better word!

So here's a feeble attempt to provide the barest gloss of some kind of ethical discussion to what is otherwise a rotten.com-esque morbid fascination...

Does it make this guy more morally culpable that he "sexually imposed" himself on children because he's so physically hideous?

I'm not being rhetorical, here. I mean it. Getting molested is damaging enough, but what if Quasimodo does it? Does that warrant greater blame?

Some production designer in Hollywood is caching the image right now, and calling up a makeup guy to see what we can do reproduce this guy's look for a monster movie.

I agree with the first remark up there--I don't think the guy was born that way; he looks to have encountered an angry dad with a shovel and/ or crowbar.

It is beauty itself that lives day by day in them idly -- This is the power of their faces. -- William Carlos Williams, "Spring and All"

True dat.

Formatting was fuxxored:

It is beauty itself
that lives
day by day in them
idly --
This is
the power of their faces.

The guy is obviously deformed, whether it be by Pappy's shovel or Nature's ugly stick. If he weren't a sex offender, I'd never mock him.

Well, that was so bizzare that I had to look it up on Snopes.com.

Oh my word.

What?

How?

Ugh.

For fans of The Big Lebowski:

http://www.co.lake.il.us/sheriff/Person/DetailSexOffender.asp?id=145

Looks more like this syndrome:

http://surgery.vanderbilt.edu/surgery/plastic/cfa/hypertelorism.htm

Chucky liiiives!

Whew. See-Dubya, I thought you were gonna direct me to a Snopes page that said it was fake, or worse, old.

That would've shitcanned what little credibility I have left with Ace.

As for whether or not it's real, looks real to me. Real wrong.

Oh, one last thing-- Crouzon's Syndrome?

I guess that's one more thing we can wish on Zarqawi, eh?

Cheers,
Dave at Garfield Ridge

Just make sure you don't put him in shakles! Heaven forbid the jury gets the wrong impression...

It's real.

http://www.esorn.ag.state.oh.us/Secured/p23.aspx?oid=13753

(Seems like Snopes could validate, considering it took me about 10 seconds.)

If he's really 5'7" tall, his head is about a foot across. Looks like a joke to me.

Que es mas macho.

Oh, if you're going to start sharing Smoking Gun mugshots, no set would be complete without THE MOST HORRIFYING MUGSHOT EVER.

That guy really makes Nazi membership look attractive, don't he?

Cheers,
Dave at Garfield Ridge

I went to high school with a girl that had a face with similar problems (but actually worse). For some reason she and her family told everyone that she had been involved in a bad car accident, but she later told some close friends that they were birth defects (and those "close friends" of course shared the news with the whole school). I always thought it was kind of odd that for some reason they apparently thought it would be shameful if she were born that way as opposed to it being caused by injury.

But apparently there was a lot of that going around, as there was a kid who had to walk on crutches all through school. His family and all the teachers always told everyone his legs had been damaged when he was hit by a car. My sister became friends with his sister, who told her that he actually had cerebral palsy but they didn't want anyone to know. Why, I have no idea.

Anyway, interesting comment about how this could traumatize a kid even more than normal. That's definitely true, but I don't know where you go with that. It doesn't seem right to punish people for having a deformed appearance, but then I have little sympathy for any type of sex offenders, so I don't really care how fairly they're treated, so, sure, throw them in jail for a few extra years if they're ugly.

I don't know if he did anything with a child though, as it just says "gross sexual imposition", which I guess is kind of like rape but somehow not as bad ("imposing" vs. "forcing"). I have no problem with listing offenders that victimized adults, but I think they should make it clear who is which, as my understanding is that sex offenders are pretty consistent in whether they target minors or not.

I've seen that one before, rdbrewer, but it always makes me think the same thing:

"Butthead Incarnate."

Yeah, I don't know why Snopes didn't validate it:

We contacted the Ohio Attorney General's office, who told us: "This is an accurate photo of this offender."

Seems like it's validated then, right? They seem to be overly cautious sometimes, and other times they are quick to believe someone (like John Lennon claiming "Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds" has nothing to do with LSD).

Here is the Ohio statute concerning gross sexual imposition:

§ 2907.05. Gross sexual imposition.

(A) No person shall have sexual contact with another, not the spouse of the offender; cause another, not the spouse of the offender, to have sexual contact with the offender; or cause two or more other persons to have sexual contact when any of the following applies:

     (1) The offender purposely compels the other person, or one of the other persons, to submit by force or threat of force.

     (2) For the purpose of preventing resistance, the offender substantially impairs the judgment or control of the other person or of one of the other persons by administering any drug, intoxicant, or controlled substance to the other person surreptitiously or by force, threat of force, or deception.

      (3) The offender knows that the judgment or control of the other person or of one of the other persons is substantially impaired as a result of the influence of any drug or intoxicant administered to the other person with the other person's consent for the purpose of any kind of medical or dental examination, treatment, or surgery.

      (4) The other person, or one of the other persons, is less than thirteen years of age, whether or not the offender knows the age of that person.

      (5) The ability of the other person to resist or consent or the ability of one of the other persons to resist or consent is substantially impaired because of a mental or physical condition or because of advanced age, and the offender knows or has reasonable cause to believe that the ability to resist or consent of the other person or of one of the other persons is substantially impaired because of a mental or physical condition or because of advanced age.

Sexual contact is defined here.

After soberly reviewing the applicable statutes, I feel confident in declaring this guy one sick bastard.

Snopes really needs to revise that page. Not only should it be Verified -- if the Ohio Attorney General's Office's word isn't good enough, what would be? -- but they also speculate that the tuxedo shot "may" be a digital alteration when the diameter of the collar appears quite a bit smaller than his neck.

He's 5'7" and his head comes to the top of the lightswitch? Seems fishy to me.

Well, he's probably sitting in a chair. Or he is a puppet. But I'd guess it's real.

Holy Carnival of the Fuglies Batman!!

I gotta go with Sean M. on this one. Dave, you're a bad influence on Ace. And I'd rather have a 6'10", 400 pound gay rapist for a cell mate than that Arian nutcase to which you linked. Yikes!

Hondo - other persons is substantially impaired because of a mental or physical condition or because of advanced age.
You ain't makin' it any better pal!

It's gonna take a lobotomy to get rid of this case of the willies. Bleah.

I looked at this photo before going to bed last night.

I had nightmares. Terrible, terrible nightmares.

And I just looked at the guy. Jesus.

Bob, your point about not punishing people because they're ugly is fair, but I don't think it applies. We don't punish people for having syphilis, for example, but if you rape someone and knowingly give that person syphilis, it's OK to impose a harsher sentence.

Jesus. I'm still a little shaken from that picture.

Notice the bottom of his neck, where the top of the shirt meets it? Looks like the bottom edge of a thick, latex Halloween type mask.

I'm still not sure if it's real. Plus the color of the skin is just wrong.

But, OTOH, the sites look like the real deal.

compos mentis--

Let's not overreact.

The statute doesn't require that the victim necessarially be substantially impaired because of a mental or physical condition or because of advanced age.

He might have just drugged the victim, used force or the threat of force or attacked them while they were doped up. Or the victim was under the age of 13.

I've gone past the willies. I've got full-on heebie-jeebies.

Dogstar, it's not a mask. No idea whether the "mug shot" is fake or photoshopped, but that's a real face.

It's a person with craniosyntosis of some kind, probably Crouzon's, maybe Apert or Pfieffer syndrome.

The picture looks real to me. Obviously there's something wrong with the guy's skin, which is why it might look like a mask to some people. Note the fold in his neck skin. There may be a similar fold at the collarline, creating the impression of a latex mask.

As for his height, he's probably sitting. To me what I can see of his posture looks like he's sitting in a chair next to the wall.

The tuxedo picture at Snopes, which they seem to feel casts some doubt on the legitimacy of both pictures, is obviously Photoshopped. There is some "scarring" (poorly done clone tool) at the junction between the door and the door frame where they had to recreate that area when they removed his upturned collar. Those blotches could conceivably be something that was actually there, but to me it looks like accidental clones of the bottom of the door hinge. There is another problem that's more damning. If you look at the edge of the door right above his head, a chunk of the picture has been shifted to the left, which is a clear sign of tampering, as a camera wouldn't cause such a distortion. What's puzzling about that one is I don't see what they were trying to do that led to that artifact. It might just be an outright screwup.

Humorously, whoever Photoshopped it apparently couldn't resist color-correcting the photo to give the perp more typical skin tones.

I've been incredibly busy of late, but I figured I'd pop in on this one.

Sems like a real face with real propblems, but not from a disease. More like a large rectangular piece of something creamed his face years before and he's had numerous reconstructive surgeries. Look at the top of the mandible and middle of the forehead. Clear demarcations of the impact.

And I like rotten.com when they're not doing the creepy bullshit sex crap.

Hobgoblin, craniosynostotic syndromes can cause the appearance you think is suggestive of a two-by-four to the midface.

Too bad there is no picture of his hands - some hand deformities like webbing and weird thumbs distinguish some of the syndromes, which otherwise have a similar appearance.

Do you suppose it's Sloth's evil twin?

Holy. Hell.

Gah, thats creepy.

Ace,

Never do that again.
Never, EVER.

Thank you.