17 y.o.boy beats H.S.guidance counselor to death,after he forces boy to put him in sex harness & asks boy to perform sexual acts,in OH
Joe1orbit
Hello,
Over in Ohio, a 17 year old boy named Michael Vego has pled not guilty to a
first degree murder charge, regarding the beating death of his high school
guidance counselor, a 48 year old man named Robert Rhodes. Michael is being
charged as an adult, and is being held on a cool million buck bond.
This murder occured in December, inside the guidance counselor's home. He was
found naked, beaten to death, in the basement of his house. 17 year old Michael
told police that guidance couselor Robert had invited him into his home, in
order to engage in sex games. Michael helped the guidance counselor into a "sex
harness" that the man had erected and hung from the ceiling of his basement.
The guidance counselor had ASKED michael to put him in the sex harness. Michael
then beat the 48 year old man to death, after the counselor asked Michael to
perform sex acts. It's not clear whether the 48 year old man asked Michael to
beat him, or if Michael just became enraged over being asked to perform sex
acts, and chose to beat the counselor.
Regardless, 48 year old Robert was beaten to death. And now your pathetic
society will try to punish this 17 year old BOY, still a minor, after he was
taken advantage of and coerced into going to the counselor's home and then
being confronted with a basement sex room in which the 48 year old TOLD the 17
year old to put him in a sex harness & then asked the boy to perform sexual
acts, most likely something like doing oral sex on Robert, as he hung in the
harness. How pathetic you humans are!
After beating Robert to death, Michael stole the guidance counselor's car,
and fled, but was later apprehended. The only good news is that Michael is not
eligible for the death penalty, because in Ohio, CHILDREN cannot be sentenced
to have a legal murder committed against them, via the DP.
IMO, if this 48 year old high school guidance counselor invited a student
that he was entrusted with counseling into his home, then took the 17 year old
down to his basement, showed him a sex dungeon, stripped naked, asked the 17
year old to put him into a sex harness, and then asked the 17 year old to
perform sexual acts upon him, the 17 year old boy had an ABSOLUTE RIGHT to
respond with deadly force, and beat the 48 year old horny guidance counselor to
death. If his defense attorney's can establish that the above scenario is
accurate, there is NO justification for any jury or judge finding 17 year old
Michael guilty of ANY crime.
Take care, JOE
The following appears courtesy of yesterday's United Press International news
wire:
Friday February 20, 1998
Boy arraigned in school counselor death
AKRON, Ohio, Feb. 20 (UPI) 17-year-old Michael Vego of Cleveland was ordered
held in lieu of $1 million cash bond after pleading innocent today as an adult
in the beating death of his high school guidance counselor.
Vego faces charges of aggravated murder and grand theft in the December slaying
of Cleveland South High School counselor Robert Rhodes, 48, in Rhodes'
Barberton home.
Rhodes' beaten and naked body was found in the basement of his house. Vego
allegedly told police he helped Rhodes into a sex harness hanging from the
ceiling and then beat him after Rhodes' asked Vego to commit sexual acts.
Vego then allegedly stole Rhodes car and headed for Cleveland.
Because Vego was a juvenile when the crime occurred, he cannot be sentenced to
the death penalty if convicted.
Grnbrier
joe1...@aol.com (Joe1orbit) writes:
<snip>
>asked the 17
year old to put him into a sex harness, ...
>asked the 17 year old to
"Asked", all he did was "ask"?
>perform sexual acts upon him, the 17 year old boy had an ABSOLUTE RIGHT to
>respond with deadly force, and beat the 48 year old horny guidance counselor
to
>death. If his defense attorney's can establish that the above scenario is
>accurate, there is NO justification for any jury or judge finding 17 year old
>Michael guilty of ANY crime.
If Michael was simply "asked" to perform these various tasks, as your post
indicates, couldn't Michael simply have said "no" and left the premises?
I'm afraid I don't follow where what the guidance counselor did that justified
his getting murdered.
From reading your entire post, it seems like an awful lot of polite "asking"
was
going on, rather than any coercion. When I'm asked to do something I don't
want to do, I say "no."
Doogie
> Take care, JOE
Joe1orbit
joe1...@aol.com (Joe1orbit) writes:
><snip>
>
>>asked the 17
>year old to put him into a sex harness, ...
>>asked the 17 year old to
grnb...@aol.com (Grnbrier) Wrote:
>"Asked", all he did was "ask"?
Hello Doogie,
Yes, as far as I read the new wire article, the guidance couselor asked 17
year old Michael to do these things. That does not change the fact that the 48
year old man is in a position of AUTHORITY over the 17 year old. He even has
the power to ALTER the boy's school records in a negative way, if he so
desires. The 48 year old guidance counselor chose to try and impose his desires
and needs upon the boy, and did so from a position of power.
>>perform sexual acts upon him, the 17 year old boy had an ABSOLUTE RIGHT to
>>respond with deadly force, and beat the 48 year old horny guidance counselor
>to
>>death. If his defense attorney's can establish that the above scenario is
>>accurate, there is NO justification for any jury or judge finding 17 year
>old
>>Michael guilty of ANY crime.
>If Michael was simply "asked" to perform these various tasks, as your post
>indicates, couldn't Michael simply have said "no" and left the >premises?
He might have been able to that. He might not have been able to do that. I am
not an eyewitness to the encounter. But regardless, Michael had no OBLIGATION
to leave, unless he was told to leave. He had the right to STAY, become enraged
over his being asked/told to do things he did not desire to do, and then to
seek and claim violent vegeance against the human being who was trying to
impose his desires upon him. He had no obligation to LEAVE. He had a right to
RESPOND with deadly force. If the 48 year old man had TOLD him to leave, and 17
year old Michael REFUSED, at the very beginning of this encounter, that would
change the situation slightly.
>I'm afraid I don't follow where what the guidance counselor did that
>justified
>his getting murdered.
He attempted to impose his will upon a 17 year old boy, and did so from a
position of power and dominance, granted to him by society and by virtue of his
being the guidance counselor for this boy. That is what justifies the 17 year
old murdering him, if his True Reality so dictated/allowed.
>From reading your entire post, it seems like an awful lot of polite "asking"
>was
>going on, rather than any coercion. When I'm asked to do something I don't
>want to do, I say "no."
You do as you see fit. This 17 year did as he saw fit. I respect his right to
act to preserve his personal integrity. Not to FLEE, but to FIGHT.
I do not know how much "polite asking" was going on, since I did not witness
the incident.
Take care, JOE
>Doogie
>
>> Take care, JOE
Captive964
Hi Joe,
Not to be rude, but if every woman in the world killed every man in authority
over her who made an unwelcomed advance, I dare say there would be a man
shortage by now. Not to mention we'd have burned through a lot more Presidents.
Captive
Joe1orbit
joe1...@aol.com (Joe1orbit) writes:
>>
>>><snip>
>>>
>>>>asked the 17
>>>year old to put him into a sex harness, ...
>>>>asked the 17 year old to
grnb...@aol.com (Grnbrier) Wrote:
>>
>>>"Asked", all he did was "ask"?
>> Hello Doogie,
>>
>> Yes, as far as I read the new wire article, the guidance couselor asked 17
>>year old Michael to do these things. That does not change the fact that the
>>48
>>year old man is in a position of AUTHORITY over the 17 year old. He even has
>>the power to ALTER the boy's school records in a negative way, if he so
>>desires. The 48 year old guidance counselor chose to try and impose his
>>desires
>>and needs upon the boy, and did so from a position of power.
joe1...@aol.com Wrote:
capti...@aol.com (Captive964) Wrote:
>Hi Joe,
Hello Captive,
>Not to be rude, but if every woman in the world killed every man in authority
>over her who made an unwelcomed advance, I dare say there would be a man
>shortage by now.
I view each and every murder case individually. If the facts of this case
where exactly the same, except for the one difference that the student was a 17
year old girl, I absolutely would feel that she had the exact same right to
beat the guidance counselor to death.
> Not to mention we'd have burned through a lot more
>Presidents.
Every situation is unique. I do not generalize and give "every woman in the
world authority to kill every man who makes an unwelcome advance". But, in MANY
such cases, depending upon the circumstances, the girl/woman SHOULD have the
legal right to respond with deadly force. Is AGE a key factor? Yes, it is. And
so is the societal standing of the man. A high school guidance counselor is in
a DIRECT position of power over a student. That increases the validity of that
student using deadly force against that counselor, if the counselor acts
inappropriately in ANY significant way, from my perspective.
Take care, JOE
>
>Captive
Jack F
Glad to hear it! Fuck the little rat bastard kid! Fry him! Or better
yet...gimme the switch, I'll do it myself!
An eye for an eye!
JackF<8P
<has no mercy for criminals>
Joe1orbit <joe1...@aol.com> wrote in article
<19980221162...@ladder03.news.aol.com>...
Agent@Large
On 22 Feb 1998 00:10:22 GMT, joe1...@aol.com (Joe1orbit) wrote:
>"Jack F" <nospamin'Jackm...@yahoo.com> Wrote:
>
>>Glad to hear it!
>
> Hello Jack,
>
> Of course you are. How nice to get one of you profoundly inferior humans
>weighing in with your deranged perspective.
>
>>Fuck the little rat bastard kid! Fry him! Or better
>>yet...gimme the switch, I'll do it myself!
>
> I'm sure you would. And all the while, you would have no idea, no
>understanding, of the fact that YOU are far more worthy od death, and far more
>evil and malicious, than any mass or serial murderer, much less this 17 year
>old boy, that YOUR pathetic society has created.
>
>>An eye for an eye!
>
> Pathetic. You can actually look at yourself in the mirror without bowing your
>head in shame. Good for you. I have no quarrel with you. You are simply the
>spokesman for countless MILLIONS of humans who are just as narrowminded,
>irrational, bigoted, and EVIL, as you are. You are in the majority, don't
>worry.
>
>>JackF<8P
>><has no mercy for criminals>
>
> You are far more evil than Jeffrey Dahmer and Ted Bundy and every other
>serial killer to have proudly stalked your pathetic world, combined. IMNSVHO,
>of course.
>
> Take care, JOE
And this, folks, is the response from one of society's member of the
National Rifle Association who claims he is "amoral."
His moralistic, judgemental, value-laden remarks only serve to
demonstrate his similarity to his fellow citizens (that is, if you
believe his views).
In essense, if one were to accept Joe's perspective, he is no
different than those at whom he targets his rage.
Agent@Large
On 22 Feb 1998 03:33:53 GMT, joe1...@aol.com (Joe1orbit) wrote:
>...
> Yes, that is my response. And yes, I am a member of the NRA and I am 100%
>amoral. I could watch a helpless baby be tortured to death, and feel not a
>twinge of emotional caring or desire to help that baby.
>
> My response was made to this man, Jack, who is posting as a DIRECT
>REPRESENTATIVE of his society.
This is purely judgemental.
>
>>His moralistic, judgemental, value-laden remarks only serve to
>>demonstrate his similarity to his fellow citizens (that is, if you
>>believe his views).
>
> There is no moral judgement in my comments, only FACTUAL STATEMENTS.
Your words, "...EVIL, as you are..." is indeed a moralistic judgement.
There is not ONE factual statement in your comments. If a statement
cannot be supported by evidence, it is an _opinion_, not a _fact_.
I'd be happy to direct you to the sources that support this universal
view, but I would guess you don't even care if you use the terms
correctly. On the other hand, I am open-minded enough to read the
sources that support how you determine what is a "fact."
(Now here's an empirical test to see who's more open-minded, huh?)
> There is
>no sense of values, beyond the simple and undeniable one that all individual
>killers are created by their society, and thus have a right to kill, while
>society has NO right to kill or punitively punish any of it's creations.
As even you agree, this is a value of yours.
>
>>In essense, if one were to accept Joe's perspective, he is no
>>different than those at whom he targets his rage.
>
> Well, I target my rage upon every human being on planet earth. In my above
>post, I expressed the facts about Jack,
No. You expressed your own moral judgement on the man.
> who was speaking on behalf of his
>society,
This is an evaluative judgement of yours with no substantiation.
> as being an inferior and evil human, far more so than any individual
>killer, because Jack is sanctioning the right of his society to punish and
>murder it's own creations.
"Inferior" is a judgement, and "evil" is a moral term. This entire
sentence is full of moral judgements. Need I say more?
The hilarity of it all is that you have the incredible AUDACITY to
write: "You have no right to judge others."
You have proven my point better than I could have - thank you.
P.S. I have nothing against expressing unsubstantiated opinions, nor
against making value-laden, authoritarian, moralistic judgements such
as you do, endlessly; I just like to make it clear that trying to pass
them off as "facts" is blatantly erroneous. There are times when you
do correctly identify your opinions as such, so you aren't wrong 100%
of the time. (Even a broken clock is right twice a day.)
Chriwor
I can add some minor information to this story, since I live in the area
and have had contact with acquaintances of the people involved.
I never met Michael, however, or saw Rhode's basement.
The counsellor had previously been discharge from Barberton
High on multiple suspicions of soliciting minors, which was why
he was working in Cleveland and living in Barberton at the
time of his death.
He was in the business of selling fake high school diplomas
to drop-outs. This, in fact, was the lure he used to
get teen or early 20s males to engage in s&m sex games
with him. It was often his "price".
He often made home-made s&m pornoes with his young
friends and clients. The 17 year old who ultimately killed
him is allegedly featured in at least one of these tapes.
On the day of his death, Rhodes once again inveigled
Michael over, and this time added something new
to the entertainment agenda. He showed Michael
tapes of child porn he had filmed involving twelvish
year old boys (whom the police have not identified or
revealed if they have been able to track down to see
how or why they came to perform in these tapes, if you're
interested). Michael said he had had enough at
that point, and when Rhodes strapped himself into
his basement harness, Michael snapped under the
weight of his rage and revulsion and let him have it.
Do not know if this is or was merely a self-serving
explanation or not.
The counselors genitalia were cut off and stuffed
in his mouth. Now there's a little tidbit they
left out of the papers -- so feel special, people.
Joe1orbit
"Jack F" <nospamin'Jackm...@yahoo.com> Wrote:
>Glad to hear it!
Hello Jack,
Of course you are. How nice to get one of you profoundly inferior humans
weighing in with your deranged perspective.
>Fuck the little rat bastard kid! Fry him! Or better
>yet...gimme the switch, I'll do it myself!
I'm sure you would. And all the while, you would have no idea, no
understanding, of the fact that YOU are far more worthy od death, and far more
evil and malicious, than any mass or serial murderer, much less this 17 year
old boy, that YOUR pathetic society has created.
>An eye for an eye!
Pathetic. You can actually look at yourself in the mirror without bowing your
head in shame. Good for you. I have no quarrel with you. You are simply the
spokesman for countless MILLIONS of humans who are just as narrowminded,
irrational, bigoted, and EVIL, as you are. You are in the majority, don't
worry.
>JackF<8P
><has no mercy for criminals>
You are far more evil than Jeffrey Dahmer and Ted Bundy and every other
serial killer to have proudly stalked your pathetic world, combined. IMNSVHO,
of course.
Take care, JOE
>Joe1orbit <joe1...@aol.com> wrote in article
PattyC4303
Joe1orbit
"Jack F" <nospamin'Jackm...@yahoo.com> Wrote:
>>>Glad to hear it!
Joe1...@aol.com Wrote:
>> Take care, JOE
ag...@ie-com.com (Agent@Large) Wrote:
>And this, folks, is the response from one of society's member of the
>National Rifle Association who claims he is "amoral."
Hello,
Yes, that is my response. And yes, I am a member of the NRA and I am 100%
amoral. I could watch a helpless baby be tortured to death, and feel not a
twinge of emotional caring or desire to help that baby.
My response was made to this man, Jack, who is posting as a DIRECT
REPRESENTATIVE of his society.
>His moralistic, judgemental, value-laden remarks only serve to
>demonstrate his similarity to his fellow citizens (that is, if you
>believe his views).
There is no moral judgement in my comments, only FACTUAL STATEMENTS. There is
no sense of values, beyond the simple and undeniable one that all individual
killers are created by their society, and thus have a right to kill, while
society has NO right to kill or punitively punish any of it's creations.
>In essense, if one were to accept Joe's perspective, he is no
>different than those at whom he targets his rage.
Well, I target my rage upon every human being on planet earth. In my above
post, I expressed the facts about Jack, who was speaking on behalf of his
society, as being an inferior and evil human, far more so than any individual
killer, because Jack is sanctioning the right of his society to punish and
murder it's own creations.
Take care, JOE
>
Joe1orbit
>>amoral. I could watch a helpless baby be tortured to death, and feel not a
>>twinge of emotional caring or desire to help that baby.
>>
>> My response was made to this man, Jack, who is posting as a DIRECT
>>REPRESENTATIVE of his society.
ag...@ie-com.com (Agent@Large) Wrote:
>This is purely judgemental.
Hello,
Yes, I judge your society to be evil and perverse and unworthy of being
sustained or supported.
ag...@ie-com.com (Agent@Large) Wrote:
>>>His moralistic, judgemental, value-laden remarks only serve to
>>>demonstrate his similarity to his fellow citizens (that is, if you
>>>believe his views).
>> There is no moral judgement in my comments, only FACTUAL STATEMENTS.
>Your words, "...EVIL, as you are..." is indeed a moralistic >judgement.
No, it is a FACT. Your society is evil.
>There is not ONE factual statement in your comments. If a statement
>cannot be supported by evidence, it is an _opinion_, not a _fact_.
I decide what are facts, what are lies, what are truths, and what are
opinions. You are free to reject my decisions, if your inferior mind so
dictates.
>I'd be happy to direct you to the sources that support this universal
>view, but I would guess you don't even care if you use the terms
>correctly.
I am not interested in your sources, or in how you view truth or fact, from
your societally biased perspective.
> On the other hand, I am open-minded enough to read the
>sources that support how you determine what is a "fact."
>(Now here's an empirical test to see who's more open-minded, >huh?)
No, the test only proves that you are willing to accept the irrationality
that you are told. For example, the death penalty IS MURDER. That is a FACT.
Your society tells you that the death penalty is NOT murder. Your acceptance of
this hypocritical lie does not make you open-minded. It makes you an irrational
hypocrite, which is appropriate for you, since your society is wallowing in
irrational hypocrisy.
>> There is
>>no sense of values, beyond the simple and undeniable one that all individual
>>killers are created by their society, and thus have a right to kill, while
>>society has NO right to kill or punitively punish any of it's creations.
>As even you agree, this is a value of yours.
It is a rational and logical statement of my philosophical beliefs. Anyone
who does not see or appreciate the truth behind this belief, is an inferior and
irrational fool. IMNSVHO, of course.
>>>In essense, if one were to accept Joe's perspective, he is no
>>>different than those at whom he targets his rage.
>> Well, I target my rage upon every human being on planet earth. In my above
>>post, I expressed the facts about Jack,
>No. You expressed your own moral judgement on the man.
I judged and condemned his irrational and brainwashed support for an
irrational and deranged point of view, that his society forced upon him, via
brainwashing.
>> who was speaking on behalf of his
>>society,
>This is an evaluative judgement of yours with no substantiation.
But it's still a FACT.
>> as being an inferior and evil human, far more so than any individual
>>killer, because Jack is sanctioning the right of his society to punish and
>>murder it's own creations.
>"Inferior" is a judgement, and "evil" is a moral term. This entire
>sentence is full of moral judgements.
Moral judgements against your society.
>Need I say more?
It's pointless, but if you are so scared of me and my Truth that you feel
compelled to say more, go right ahead. I will be busy tomorrow, using my
professional quality Super-VHS video camera to record myself for all of
eternity. So, don't expect ANY further replies to this thread.
>The hilarity of it all is that you have the incredible AUDACITY to
>write: "You have no right to judge others."
I do have that audacity. I judge and condemn your society. I despise you
brainwashed humans who are enslaved to lies. But I don't judge you. I see that
you are VICTIMS of your society.
>You have proven my point better than I could have - thank you.
I am always happy to address your points. I am proud of my beliefs and
briliantly insightful philosophies. I have no interest in or control over how
you perceive my Truths. So, you are welcome.
>P.S. I have nothing against expressing unsubstantiated opinions, nor
>against making value-laden, authoritarian, moralistic judgements such
>as you do, endlessly; I just like to make it clear that trying to pass
>them off as "facts" is blatantly erroneous. There are times when you
>do correctly identify your opinions as such, so you aren't wrong 100%
>of the time. (Even a broken clock is right twice a day.)
When I state something to be a fact, it is a fact. When I state something to
be an opinion, it is an opinion. The fact that you are unable to appreciate the
facts that I lay out, has no bearing upon the validity of those facts.
And now I must turn off my 'puter, and do some other stuff, and then tomorrow
I will be busy most of the day, filming myself with the $1500 Panasonic Pro
Line Super VHS video camera that I have already used to create over 100 hours
of full color and sound Living Legacy of myself. Got my 6 foot tall tripod all
set up, and even zoomed in to the optimal position where my full head and chest
is visible in as large a fashion as possible. So, I will be making motion
pictures tomorrow. No time to engage in idle chatter with you humans, I'll be
busy talking and ranting and raving to a red light in front of a video camera
lens.
Take care, JOE
Wycked1
As a person who works with young adults I can assure you 98% of them can say
NO. Try it ask them to clean their room or mow the yard, Kids are pretty astute
these days and know when an older man is coming on to them, this kid was
already screwed up and knew that killing was wrong but did it anyway. How come
so many teens (even younger) can report an adult without killing them?
Dave & Tammy Parkhill
On 22 Feb 1998 05:36:37 GMT, joe1...@aol.com (Joe1orbit) wrote:
> And now I must turn off my 'puter, and do some other stuff, and then tomorrow
>I will be busy most of the day, filming myself with the $1500 Panasonic Pro
>Line Super VHS video camera that I have already used to create over 100 hours
>of full color and sound Living Legacy of myself. Got my 6 foot tall tripod all
>set up, and even zoomed in to the optimal position where my full head and chest
>is visible in as large a fashion as possible. So, I will be making motion
>pictures tomorrow.
I'd *love* to be a fly on the wall for *this*..... I can just
imagine. <g>
Tammy
Joe1orbit
On 22 Feb 1998 05:36:37 GMT, joe1...@aol.com (Joe1orbit) wrote:
>> And now I must turn off my 'puter, and do some other stuff, and then
>tomorrow
>>I will be busy most of the day, filming myself with the $1500 Panasonic Pro
>>Line Super VHS video camera that I have already used to create over 100
>hours
>>of full color and sound Living Legacy of myself. Got my 6 foot tall tripod
>all
>>set up, and even zoomed in to the optimal position where my full head and
>chest
>>is visible in as large a fashion as possible. So, I will be making motion
>>pictures tomorrow.
park...@fox.nstn.ca (Dave & Tammy Parkhill) Wrote:
> I'd *love* to be a fly on the wall for *this*..... I can just
>imagine. <g>
Hello Tammy,
I got up a 5 AM this morning, to begin my day of immortalizing myself on
videotape. Things went very well. I recorded about 5 1/2 hours of footage, but
after reviewing myself on the 55 inch TV, I decided to edit out about 20
minutes, because I'm not happy with the way those 20 played out, in terms of my
on-screen demeanor. Still, I have a little over 5 brand new hours of very
worthwhile footage of myself, for all of eternity. I will of course make copies
of all 3 tapes, in Super-VHS, so that there is no danger of losing the
material, even if my original tape degrades or breaks down.
No flies on my walls, though. I like my privacy, and had complete privacy
during this 8+ hour taping session. I did some of it standing up, but then sat
down for awhile. And yes, I did use props to enhance the visual enjoyment of
any future viewers, just in case there are any actual viewers besides myself,
in coming years/decades.
Take care, JOE
>
> Tammy
>
>
>
Ben
That boy had every right to smash the crap out of that sick minded
pedophile. I would do the same thing. I would do it with a lead pole and
keep going until you wouldn't recognise the counsellor's face.
Hoover, J.E.
I would suggest you air it on public access cable, if you're not
already.
Joe1orbit
"Hoover, J.E." <highp...@absurd.net> Wrote:
>I would suggest you air it on public access cable, if you're not
>already.
Hello,
I do not know whether you are addressing me in your above comment. If you
are, thanks for the suggestion, but I have no interest in airing any of my
camcorder videos to the general public. I create them to leave a Living Legacy
of my True Reality, not to entertain or amuse an audience.
Take care, JOE
ty4...@gmail.com
xtals...@gmail.com
After his death, more students came out to say that Rhodes made offers to boost thier grades if they did a few "favors" for him. Some guys said he was creepy and left and others claimed they did favors like mow his grass, paint his house, and other labor at his house. Somehow, those guys that did the "labor work" were the same guys on honor roll but never went to class.