Accused sex perp's religion won't let him look at dirty pictures

[charlie]

Here's a goofy story -- David Silverman, 21 at the time (Mar 2007), and 2 other men are accused of picking up a 14 year old and a pair of 15 year old girls, getting them drunk, and capturing the debauchery in digital photos.

That was then. Today David has stymied his defense counsel because...

A Spring Valley man accused of having sex with underage girls claims his religious beliefs prevent him from viewing sexual photographs and helping his own defense.

...

But because he later returned to being an ultra-religious Hasidic Jew, Silverman won't look at the photos, his lawyer, Israel Fried, said yesterday. Fried said Silverman's refusal to participate makes defending him more difficult.

"He's clearly become more religious since this case has been initiated," Fried said. "His religious practices prohibit him from viewing certain images that would be immodest."

http://lohud.com/article/20090211/NEWS03/902110371/-1/newsfront

Bonus inadvertently funny quip from his lawyer:

Silverman was being evaluated by professionals to "figure out if this is strictly a religious belief or a mental defect," Fried said.

[moggie]

1. Gee, a defendant finding Gawd?

what are the chances? :sarcasm:

[Deep13]

2. His choice. The defendant is not required to present a defense.

If the state can prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, then they can still have a trial.

[varkam]

3. Well, a defendant has to be able to participate in his own defense.

Otherwise, he is not competent to stand trial. Here, it would seem that he is able in that he has the requisite mental faculties to do so (or maybe not - the defense counsel might be hoping for the "mental defect" angle) but just unwilling.

[Mr. McD]

4. "a religious belief or a mental defect"

Aren't they the same thing? :shrug: