Thursday, March 01, 2007

I guess this is worth a mention

Kent Hovind — convicted, disgraced, pathetic and forgotten — continues to fight the good fight against the penal system. He's got his attorney (presumably the same incompetent no-hoper who couldn't even get his paperwork organized in court and thus earned a rebuke from the judge for wasting everybody's time with his incessant shuffling) asking for an acquittal on the grounds that the Hovinds didn't mean to defraud the government. This is a bit of a step down from the tough-talking "they're the ones breaking the law, not me!" bluster Hovind puffed himself up with on his recorded prison phone calls.

You know, if you shoot a guy in the face, and then tell the judge you didn't mean to kill him, you just might still find yourself sent up the river for murder. Crimes don't become not-crimes when the perp commits them by accident. I mention this only by way of making a point. Kent Hovind, in fact, meant to do every sleazy thing he did, and with his lawyer, he's now lying once again, as he's lied all his life about things like evolution.

So long, Kent. You're as irrelevant as the creationist twaddle you peddle to the uneducated and gullible. No one but you believes your delusions any more.


  1. You state a falacy.
    Some crimes do stop being crimes if you did them by accident.
    They are called "specific intent crimes".
    You used the example of murder (or attempted murder).
    If you point your gun at someone and pull the trigger, you could be found guilty of murder or attempted murder. If you pulled the trigger right as your friend stepped in the way unknown by you, and shot him in the face, you would not.
    You might be guilty of reckless endangerment or negligent homicide, but not murder.
    If you loaned someone your lawnmower and one day saw it in his garage so you took it back, but it turns out he’d bought an identical lawnmower, you took his property, but you are not guilty of theft because it was a mistake. You didn’t intend to take his property, you intended to take your own property.

  2. I submit Kent Hovind intended to cheat the government of taxes rightfully owed. His own statements to that effect helped convict him. Your lawnmower analogy is not applicable here.


PLEASE NOTE: The Atheist Experience has moved to a new location, and this blog is now closed to comments. To participate in future discussions, please visit

This blog encourages believers who disagree with us to comment. However, anonymous comments are disallowed to weed out cowardly flamers who hide behind anonymity. Commenters will only be banned when they've demonstrated they're nothing more than trolls whose behavior is intentionally offensive to the blog's readership.

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.