Bubba the Love Sponge Accuses Mark Lunsford of Exploiting His Daughter's Rape and Murder
It was a brutal sentence, uttered in the middle of a heated argument.
But shock jock Bubba the Love Sponge Clem isn't backing off a harsh comment he made Thursday morning while pressing Mark Lunsford, whose 9-year-old daughter Jessica was abducted, raped and murdered by convicted sex offender John Couey in 2005.
Clem insists that Lunsford, who last week revealed his intention to file suit against the Citrus County sheriff's office for failing to investigate the disappearance properly, is addicted to the fame which has resulted from his daughter's death. The radio personality also raised pointed questions about what Lunsford has done with cash contributions to the foundation he established in his daughter's honor.
Lunsford called in to Clem's Cox Radio show Thursday morning. As he was talking about how he had to wait for IRS approval to establish his foundation, Clem let the bombshell drop: "You have to wait for your daughter to die before you can start raping money from people -- I understand."
"The only thing I'm guilty of is sticking up for the people of Citrus County, who will have to pay for this lawsuit," Clem said Thursday night. "I'm the most pro-law enforcement radio person out there. I stick up for cops...Maybe if he would have spent less time at the tavern (the night Jessica disappeared) she would still be around."
Lunsford's counsel, Jacksonville attorney Eric Block, accused Clem of trashing the father of a murdered girl to win ratings for his radio show. "(Lunsford) lost his daughter to a rape/murder....He was furious. I was listening in and I was shocked," said Block, who added that Lunsford has hired a First Amendment attorney to explore the possibility of suing Clem. "They're not interested in facts; they're interested in shock radio."
During the 12-minute interview, Lunsford insisted all his foundation's financial records are available online, disputing a Tampa Tribune story which said the foundation claimed $25,000 in expenses for office supplies and furniture. Lunsford said he takes a salary of $54,000, inviting Clem to join his board of directors so he could see all the records.
Clem asked Lunsford if he would take a drug test before coming on his show, repeatedly asking where cash donations to the foundation have been spent. Lunsford eventually hung up the telephone when Clem asked a pointed question alleging he was at a bar while Jessica was abducted.
Block said Lunsford is limited to a maximum $100,000 award, which he has promised to donate to charity minus attorney's fees. The attorney added that Lunsford blames the sheriff's office for focusing on his father Archie as a suspect when Jessica's disappearance was first reported.
"The police lied to Mark and told him Jessica's blood was found in his father's underwear," said Block, noting that Jessica was taken from Lunsford's home while he was out and his father was babysitting; Lunsford maintains Jessica was alive for days after Couey abducted her. "The sherriff's office decided she was dead and Archie killed her. They weren't looking for a live little girl. they were trying to get Archie to admit to a crime he didn't commit."
Citrus Country Sheriff Jeff Dawsy disagreed with Lunsford's assertions last week, telling the St. Petersburg Times "Jessie was already dead before I hit the street looking for her."
Producer Brent Hatley said Clem knows Dawsy and may be partially reacting to defend the sheriff. But Clem claims to have two private investigators and a forensic accountant looking at the publicly-available financial records for Lunsford's foundation. And given that Lunsford is a nationally-known advocate who called into the radio show himself, Clem isn't worried about a lawsuit, either.
"I cannot wait to get into a courtroom over this," said Clem. "I may be looking like the bad guy now. But I won't be for long."


The Feed is a blog on TV, media and modern life by St. Petersburg Times TV/media critic Eric Deggans. Possibly the most critical guy at the Times, he has served as music, media and TV critic at various times over 10 years.
E-mail Eric Deggans:

08-DP-0125 — Scott Lipscomb, 5549 Beard Road, v. Joshua Lunsford, 1461 Paldao Court, petition for civil stalking or sexually oriented offense protection order.
This was posted in Springfield News-Sun
Filed in common pleas court.Feb 13
Wonder why there had a be a protection order to keep Joshua away from his victim.
http://www.springfieldnewssun.com/n/content/oh/story/news/local/2008/02/12/sns021308pubrec.html
Posted by: Warreng | March 04, 2008 at 09:23 AM
Anyone got Bubba's contact info? Maybe he cna do a show on teens like my son who are effected by these laws Mark is pushing even tho he professed his son fell under Romeo and Juliet...maybe he will listen and understand our pain and anguish as his own child faced this but was set free from registration....lets make Mark answer for our son's and daughters as these laws do not keep any child safe...example: residency restrictions of two thousand feet..how does this keep a child safe? So big whoop a RSO cannot live within two thousand feet of a school or park yet they can go to these places in most states? Do folks not realize if you alienate offenders then they have nothing to gain and will say to hell with society? Do you all think RSO recitivism rates are higher then drug dealers/pushers? Our children are in more danger of a stranger selling them dope then a offender...and no law can protect our children only we as parents can do this..begin by not leaving your child alone in the toy aisle...watch them outside....no walking alone home from school...educate them on safety and how to yell "fire" if someone tries to grab them as this draws attention faster then help...another idea is monitor your teens online and who they talk too and what your teen says...we are responsible as parents to love our children but to protect them as well and its not our governments job to babysit them or pass draconian laws which has kept no child safe...
Posted by: mom of teen offender | March 03, 2008 at 07:30 PM
To Bubba,
Im Wesley and I think Mark L. looks like a sex offender himself so I say keep up the good work
Posted by: Wesley Reamsnyder | March 03, 2008 at 01:08 PM
Hey Ann, Bubba is right about everything and if you havn't noticed Mark Lunsford is robbin money from the state so he can drive a new Hummer thats not right he lives in a trialer he cant afford a new Hummer on a $54,000 salary and also pay bills its obvious alright.
Posted by: | March 03, 2008 at 01:04 PM
I tried to link up my son's story here for all to read who like to speak out to legislators concerning Romeo and Juliet laws for all our son's as this could be anyone's child, grandchild, niece or nephew..but it was blocked as the computer think its spam so hopefully it will come thru later. If you write me I can send you my son's story and news articles concerning his case and how many states are now looking to pass the Adam Walsh Act which will put thousands of more teens on the registry as young as ten years of age.
Posted by: mom of teen offender | March 03, 2008 at 12:21 PM
To Trish:
The reason you cannot find the article online is because the Citrus County Chronicle took it down. I don't know why they did but it was up as recently as July 2007. One of the earlier posters here posted up the article
Posted by: Fallen | March 03, 2008 at 11:43 AM
Thank you...two years ago before this all happened I never realized our politicians were making consensual sex teens register as lifetime offenders. Many states do not have the Romeo and Juliet law and I'm working towards pushing Oklahoma and Iowa to fix this before the registry claims thousands of more young lives. I know another boy in Ohio similar to Josh case who is a lifetime offender and he was only seventeen yet Joshua walked with a slap on the wrist. I want Mark to do right by our son's across this country and not only speak out for his son but all our son's who are sacrificial lambs for these do good laws. What is tragic is if my son had sold dope to a ten year old he have no conviction and no one ever know of his "crime" yet he had consensual sex and his life was over before he ever truly began it as a legal adult...and all politicians can say is "we cannot look soft on sex offenders" all I get from media is" well Mark is a friend we cannot discuss Joshua case"...so my son don't matter? Thousands of young boys across this country are worthless cause they are poor and have no name? Lets stop talking the talk Mark and walk the walk
Posted by: mom of teen offender | March 03, 2008 at 11:31 AM
Momofteenoffender,
I am so sorry for the situation you and your son find yourselves in. Yes the ridiculous laws that Lunsford has pushed for are tearing up families across the US. He has stated publicly that he is out for REVENGE! The revenge should be limited to John Couey who was the one who killed Jessie. But his thirst for revenge does not end there. I hear the stories of people in the same boat as you over and over again. It always breaks my heart. We have gone crazy in this Country and it is money and fame hungry people like Mark Lunsford who are greatly responsible.
Posted by: truthandjustice | March 03, 2008 at 10:16 AM
Marks son Joshua showed up in court in Ohio with a tshirt with Jessica's face on it. How disgusting. He was over 4 years older than the girl he was fondling and he got a slap on the wrist. Some guys are on the registry for life and spend over 5 years in prison for what Josh did. He even got out of a parole violation. There is not justice in this country that is not bought and paid for.
How about all the money Mark said people were sending him in the mail after Jessie disappeared? Did he claim THAT on is income tax? How about all the gifts he received? This man who has NO qualifications for ANYTHING besides driving a truck is going about the US demanding laws that cost the taxpayer millions and do not work! He does not care that these laws lump all offenders into the same category, but SAYS the Romeo and Juliet offenders are different now that his son is one. IT is all disgusting.
Posted by: truthandjustice | March 03, 2008 at 10:05 AM
Isn't it just the least bit possible that we should maybe find someone else to protect our children... You know- like PARENTS?...
And if we insist on having some figure-head be the "defender of the children", can't we find someone a little more qualified and a little less embarassing? Like.. oh... maybe... Paris Hilton? Surely even she can do a better job...
Just some food for thought. Now you can go back to your willful blindness- sorry to intrude on your pipe-dreams...
Posted by: Alotta Hooey | March 03, 2008 at 07:29 AM
Isn't it interesting that Lunsford claims to be trying to "fix" what's wrong with the Sherriff's Dept. by suing...
So that means he'll only ask for an injunction, right? (for you idiots, injunction is a court order to do or not do something...)
Surely, he wouldn't ask for money, knowing that the police he claims to support are already under-funded!
And- jeepers- how many more "mistakes" will be made in other cases because the Sherriff's Dept. has to waste valuable time and resources fighting a frivolous lawsuit? Isn't it strange how Lunsford gets a pass, no matter how bad his behavior, because he is suffering for his bad parenting? And isn't it strange that this self-professed "protector of the children" promotes laws which exacerbate the very factors which lead to sex offender recidivism according to every study that's been done?
Look- it's true that Mark wasn't just a bad father, but an ABSENT father for most of his children's lives. And it is tragic that his daughter had to die to make him decide to care about "the children". And he is a drug-user and regular drunk. And he constantly makes it obvious to all but the most blind among us that he is in it for himself. But, let's not think about any of these things- that would require some uncomfortable truths to be acknowledged... like how easily we jump on the bandwagon every time the media gives us a "boogey-man" to fear. Let's just keep saying that Mark should be "left alone". Why?- "Look what he's been through..." That way, we can ALL "feel good" while doing NOTHING to actually help children (kinda like Mark, himself).
Yes, I'm sure it was awful for him. It would take an extremely cold-hearted person to not care when their child meets a fate like Jessica's... Even as selfish, scummy, and absent as Mark was, I'm sure he felt bad. Luckily he found a "calling" (not to mention a pass on all of his bad behavior, a path to fame as a "hero", and a nice income to boot) by "saving the children".
A question for you, Mark- Why did your son where a T-shirt with Jessica's picture on it to court when he was charged with "touching" a 14 year-old? Could it be that the apple doesn't fall far from the tree, when it comes to exploiting Jessica's death? No, I'm SURE he was just "mourning" her, not trying to get the light sentence he got- right, Mark???
Now, please - everyone be sure to cleanse your conscience by defending this creep. As long as you can "feel better", the truth really doesn't matter, does it? Kinda explains why you lemmings keep supporting the laws he promotes- "feel good, do nothing"- quite a rallying-cry, huh? Ranks right up there with "remember the Alamo"...
Here's an interesting experiment- Everyone open your recycle bin and examine all the files. How many of you have kiddie-porn in there? Not too many?... Wierd, huh? But, after all- "He's been through enough", right? So let's just forget all that inconvenient information, shall we?
And isn't it nice that he's applauded as a protector of children? Especially considering the hysteria he is constantly supporting which lead to the curtailment of rights for everyone- including "the children".
Puhleeze, people! What does this idiot have to do to get you to stop defending him?!
Posted by: Alotta Hooey | March 03, 2008 at 06:55 AM
Well, let's take what Lunsford says at face value-
So, let me see if I've got this right- The police screwed up by focusing their attention on the wrong person, and are therefore partially responsible for Jessica's death, is that REALLY what you're saying, Mr. Lunford?
And your answer to that is to promote legislation which forces police and the public to focus on MANY innocent people before the actual perpetrator every time a tragedy like this happens? Interesting logic, Mr. Lunsford...
Perhaps, Mark, you are blinded by all that smoke you're blowing up everyone's wazoo... I'll leave it to the readers' imaginations as to what kind of smoke Lunsford is well-known for "blowing"...
(Hint: ...it ain't tobacco...)
Posted by: Alotta hooey! | March 03, 2008 at 06:27 AM
I am appalled Mark Lunsford gives himself a fifty four thousand dollar yearly salary off his daughters foundation and at the lawsuit he is considering against the police. BUT my real issue with Mr. Lunsford is this: his son Joshua Lunsford of Ohio last year was accusedof a sex crime by fondling his fourteen year old gf when he was eighteen. Mark immediatley spoke out saying it was "Romeo and Juliet". I agreed Joshua may of been a legal adult but did not deserve registration on consensual sex. Well as many know Joshua had two felonies dropped to one misdemeanor under Ohio law so therefore he was not made to register. Yet my son and thousands like him in this country are registering for life under the sex offender laws Mark has pushed. My son at sixteen met a girl who admittedly lied to him about her real age she was truly thirteen. He was charged and given a deferred judgement under Iowa law but is being made to register at age seventeen for life as a aggravated offender. He was NOT even a legal adult but charged as one due to state laws. Now where is Mark crying out for my child or the thousands of others? Why will he not contact me (and I have attempted several times) to help me push the Romeo and Juliet laws? Did Joshua get special treatment? Is all our son's sacrificial lambs to promote these laws but for Mark's son? Is there two different legal systems like many accused Paris Hilton and Mel gibson of having when they were in trouble? Mark Lunsford lost his daughter tragically and Jessica should of never died but due to her death he has pushed laws which violate the constitutional rights of many including my child. I want Mark to contact me so we can work together to push all states to pass Romeo and Juliet laws. Myson could live to be eighty or ninety (if he is not killed from a vigilante) and that is rediculous for consensual sex. Plus the deferred which means legally he is not convicted if he does probation and finishes it. Where is the outrage for the money us tax payers are putting out to keep our dchildren safe yet its being wasted by law enforcement to watch those deemed NOT dangerous like my son? Yet the registry will read predator status due to the way the laws are written? Help me fight to save my son's life contact me at a_political_prisoner at yahoo mail. Lets fix these laws so the real child predators can be monitored accurately not teens having consensual sex.
Posted by: mom of teen offender | March 03, 2008 at 05:16 AM
To the person that mentioned the news article that had found child porn on Mark lunsfor'd computer at the time of Jessica's disapearance ....I remember an article claiming that they found child porn on lunsford's computer but i can't find it anywhere now???what is going on here??why isn't this all over the news??Just amazing how relevant information is lost !
Posted by: Trish | March 02, 2008 at 08:59 PM
Bubba has brought a low life scumbag out of the shadowes and exposed him for the lowlife pice of trash that he is. Bubba has evadance that saportes his clames as well as a team of lawers at his disposal. Mark is going to BURN IN hell for his sins
Posted by: Robert Seman | March 02, 2008 at 07:39 PM
Cindy,
Get a life, COX knows he is controversial that is why they hired him, they don't care if you write them, for your one letter of disagreement there is five supporting him, and as far as the sponsor's go they know Bubba is going to bring controversy and where there is controversy there are ratings, that meaning listners, which is what they want, IF YOU DONT LIKE WHAT BUBBA HAS TO SAY, THEN DON'T LISTEN, IT'S THAT SIMPLE, THAT IS WHY WE LIVE IN AMERICA,FOR FREEDOM OF SPEECH
Posted by: ryan | March 02, 2008 at 05:23 PM
Mark is Guilty... Taking money away from his so called charity. Maby this whole thing was a shoot so mark can grab some fame and some money on the side... Cmon crown attorneys, lets get this molester behind bars
Posted by: Nancy | March 02, 2008 at 02:04 AM
comment test here....
Posted by: Eric Deggans | March 01, 2008 at 10:38 PM
About time someone spoke up against Mark Lunsford to his face! Did you people down in Florida forget Lunsford has child porn on his computer (In an article from the Citrus County Chronicle, an article that mysteriously "vanished" from the internet back in October), or how his son got caught with his hands in the teenage cookie jar? (Type in Joshua Lunsford Ohio and you can find the articles). These are valid news reports. I just wish someone would expose Walsh too. Go to johnwalshournewgod at blogspot dot com, there are links to news articles and things on Walsh, Lunsford and Foley that will make you reconsider their "exalted" status
Posted by: Fallen | March 01, 2008 at 04:58 PM
"Bubba has exploited mark to the max. That is sad that Bubba has nothing else better to do is to hound Mark. Get over your Self Bubba karma is comming for you..."
Are you serious? Who has exploited whom? Seems to me, Mark is the one doing the exploiting around here, exploiting the tragedy and exploiting those with a heart who donated and continue to donate. Enough is enough. Not only is it sick the way he chooses to profit from his daughter's death but equally disturbing that there are still people who would rather look the other way than call a spade a spade. There are questionable activities going on where Mark is concened and the public has every right to ask hard questions since we are the ones contributing to his pocket as he drives around in his NEW HUMMER. Wake up! Doesn't take a monkey to see something isn't right here, all you have to do is open your eyes.
Posted by: Kathi | March 01, 2008 at 03:15 PM
Perhaps mark should focus on running his foundation legally instead of trying to sue everyone in the state. He may be in court soon, not to sue someone but instead facing child porn charges. His own son has been charged with sexual activities with a minor. I think this family should just crawl back into sewer they crawled out of and stay out of the media spotlight
Posted by: Jon | March 01, 2008 at 02:32 PM
I believe Mark is using the foundation as a source of income. With all the cash gifts not reported and paying himself triple of what he was making before, it seems obvious he is profiting off this terrible trajady. This isn't his passion. He is dupping the good nature of bikers everywhere. I belive this lawsuit is the final opportunity for him for a large payday. It also sickens me that his laywers are proclaiming him a icon. I think taxpayers of Citrus County should be disappointed!!!! Soory about spelling errors
Posted by: darren | February 29, 2008 at 05:01 PM
I love when anti-Bubba people - or people in general - comment on someone's lack of intelligence and then seemingly think that "a lot" is one word. Oh, and I believe the correct spelling is "Busch" Gardens.
Is part of Bubba's approach geared towards ratings? Yes. But anyone who has ever listened to him should know that he has always been the voice of the common man. If the politicians in Tampa were too corrupt - he would call them out. When the handicapped individual was dumped from his wheelchair - Bubba called people out.
He never said anything regarding Mark Lunsford prior to this lawsuit. And since half of you - it seems - are Lunsford "marks," you should know that Lusford fired his original attorney for questioning the police department during the initial investigation. He's done a complete 180.
The fourth amendment states that you can't just barge into someone's home. If Couey's sister - or whomever - lied, then how is that the cops' fault? Unless they have probable cause, or a warrant, they aren't allowed to go inside. Period.
Bubba is raising some serious questions. And it seems that most of you are like the Catholic church. You just want to keep the blinders on.
Posted by: Tonka61 | February 29, 2008 at 05:00 PM
I believe Mark is using the fondation as a source of income. With all the cash gift not reported and paying himself triple of what he was making before, it seems obvious he is profiting off this terrible trajady. This isn't his passion. He is dupping the good nature of bikers everywhere. I belive this lawsuit is the final opportunity for him for a large payday. It also sickens me that his laywers are proclaiming him a icon. I think taxpayers of Citrus County should be diaappointed!!!!
Posted by: darren | February 29, 2008 at 04:59 PM
I love when anti-Bubba people - or people in general - comment on someone's lack of intelligence and then seemingly think that "a lot" is one word. Oh, and I believe the correct spelling is "Busch" Gardens.
Is part of Bubba's approach geared towards ratings? Yes. But anyone who has ever listened to him should know that he has always been the voice of the common man. If the politicians in Tampa were too corrupt - he would call them out. When the handicapped individual was dumped from his wheelchair - Bubba called people out.
He never said anything regarding Mark Lunsford prior to this lawsuit. And since half of you - it seems - are Lunsford "marks," you should know that Lusford fired his original attorney for questioning the police department during the initial investigation. He's done a complete 180.
The fourth amendment states that you can't just barge into someone's home. If Couey's sister - or whomever - lied, then how is that the cops' fault? Unless they have probable cause, or a warrent, they aren't allowed to go inside. Period.
Bubba is raising some serious questions. And it seems that most of you are like the Catholic church. You just want to keep the blinders on.
Posted by: Tonka61 | February 29, 2008 at 04:59 PM
Check out this link from my blog:
http://sexoffenderissues.blogspot.com/2007/03/couey-trial.html
Or this blog:
http://marklunsforddeposition.blogspot.com/
Posted by: ZMan | February 29, 2008 at 04:48 PM
"affend",yeah maybe I'm not as smart as i think,"offend",sorry my 3yr old is tugging at my leg to go play,at least I spend time with him and lock my doors at all times.Enough said
Peace and protect the little ones,
JB
Posted by: Jb | February 29, 2008 at 04:45 PM
Lindsay, I have no problem with Mark going out for the night. I don't feel he endangered Jessica's life because he left her with the grandparents that cared for her from 1998-2004 while he lived in N Carolina.
My problem is that Mark wasn't with Jessica for most of her life. Thank God for Ruth Lunsford for giving that child the care and love she deserved.
Posted by: Warren | February 29, 2008 at 04:39 PM
Cheryl,
I agree with you on the laws. Since the Lunsford act and the local distance laws came into play the number of absconded sex offenders has gone up drastically. Ironically, this is one of the main things Lunsford tried to stop since Couey was himself absconded at the time of his daughter’s abduction. It also has put a serious burden on our local law enforcement agencies that were already under funded and under staffed as well as on the Florida Department of Corrections Probation and Parole Division. Not to mention the millions of dollars it costs the state to maintain. Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for protecting children but I’m not sure this was the right answer. I know that at the time everyone was trying to do the right thing, but I think the whole law was a piece of knee jerk legislation in response to a horrible tragedy. As for Bubba, I think that he has a few good points, but some of the comments were out of line.
Posted by: | February 29, 2008 at 04:36 PM
I Love Bubba. He says the things people are afraid to say. Keep up the good work Bubba. I am glad you are back.
Posted by: Christine Bislick | February 29, 2008 at 04:35 PM
No,nothing else to say,other than I have an IQ of 172,how many of you can say that? also born with common sense.Hope everyone has a good and safe weekend,OH I'm not Bubba and don't personally care for him.
Sorry if I affended anyone,(all in fun).
Later:JB
Posted by: Jb | February 29, 2008 at 04:29 PM
"There by the grace of God go I" . It could be you who found thenmselves in those circumstances. Your life could have been a lot different. You are where you are now because of the path you went on. Maybe you had some assistance, maybe not. Perhaps you were born into a better path. There is credibility to the "nurture" argument. Be glad you had a different path.
Posted by: Hillary | February 29, 2008 at 04:29 PM
And I am sorry if I said anything offensive to anyone it wasn't ment to be personal. Hope you have a great weekend also.
Posted by: Cindi | February 29, 2008 at 04:25 PM
I am just trying to ignore it but thank ya'll anyways.
Posted by: Cindi | February 29, 2008 at 04:23 PM
Hey JB, that's not cool. You may have a different opinion that Cindi but you don't have to be mean. Most of us are just carrying on a nice friendly debate but when it comes down to it, she has here opinions and we have ours. It's Friday, I hope everyone has a great safe weekend......
Posted by: John | February 29, 2008 at 04:21 PM
Jb, that comment to Cindi was in poor taste and inappropriate. I disagree with her, but try to be respectful at the same time.
Posted by: Warren | February 29, 2008 at 04:20 PM
Bubba is right on spot! Mark has a bad past. He was a terrible parent. He is living off the tragic death of his daughter. He was NEVER there to take care of her, even at the end. Now he get private donors for clothes, motorcycles, travel, and still takes a large salary from the "Foundation". That foundation needs to be gone thru with a fine tooth comb. What has the Foundation done for children so far? The laws Mark fights for won't make a SINGLE child safer. But Daddy Mark sure is a lot better off.
Posted by: Cheryl | February 29, 2008 at 04:09 PM
Cindi, they will not end up in my recycle bin unless I intentionally save then delete.
Try it yourself. View some pictures then look in delete or recycle bin.
They won't be there.
They will end up in the temporary internet cache, not delete bin.
Posted by: Warren | February 29, 2008 at 04:04 PM
Actually Cindi, when it comes to the internet, I will agree with you on this one. Questionable images can get on your computer without your approval. That's why anti-virus programs exist. With the existence of Spam emails / Trojan virus' / etc. , who knows what's on most peoples computer. I know this because I do have an Information & Technology degree (in response to Cindi's question of what I have a degree in)
Posted by: John | February 29, 2008 at 04:03 PM
John, LOL...maybe she was living in Grammer, IN?
Posted by: Michelle | February 29, 2008 at 04:02 PM
Warren, A man is considered innocent until proven guily by his peers (ie John Couey). I bet if you checked your temporary internet files and cookies you might find questionable images. He was not downloading or uploading images nor did the article imply that he had saved child porn websites to his favorites.
Posted by: Cindi | February 29, 2008 at 03:56 PM
Cindi, please stop. You are making it too easy for me. Bush Gardens? Really.... How long have you lived in Florida?
Posted by: John | February 29, 2008 at 03:54 PM
And you have a degree in????? NOTHING. I knew it. ( beer school at Bush Gardens does not count)
Posted by: Cindi | February 29, 2008 at 03:50 PM
Cindi,
"BTW, I thought Casey articulated very well. Only someone who did not have an understanding of grammer and spelling would think otherwise. "
Grammar, not grammer, unless you are talking about the city of Grammer in Indiana
Posted by: Warren | February 29, 2008 at 03:49 PM
Cindi, in reading your response, it doesn't surprise me in the least that you thought Casey articulated very well....
Posted by: John | February 29, 2008 at 03:47 PM
I’m a single mother with two teenagers to support. I receive no support from their father. And I don’t even make $54,000 a year. I definitely feel a lesser “salary” should be taken by Lunsford for his work in the Foundation. I fully support Lunsford for attempting to change the laws to keep this from happening again. But I work in the legal field and, as with many other laws we don’t like, if you don’t stick to the letter of the law Couey would NOT be in jail and receiving the sentence that he has. Granted Jessica may still be alive if things were handled out of the context of the law, but at the expense of another child (being Couey’s next victim)? That is not right either. And as many people as I have heard on Bubba’s show and read comments from on-line, no one really says anything specific about what exactly the Sheriff did that was wrong? It just keeps sounding like people wanted the Sheriff’s office to break the law and handle things without due process. Where are the specifics as to what they actually did wrong? It’s all just been implied, but nothing specific has ever been stated. Now Bubba on the other hand, has stated very specific allegations of what he feels Lunsford has been done wrong. If Lunsford is on the up and up…why be so illusive? So many people have been going on and on about how wonderful Lunsford is, but no one really addresses any of the questions that Bubba has raised. That seems shady to me. In situations such as this, you can only be a martyr for so long. And of course he wants to put the money he would receive from his suit against the Sheriff into his Foundation, that way he can continue his “salary”.
Posted by: Michelle | February 29, 2008 at 03:45 PM
Ann, as to child porn on Lunsford computer.
From an article published in The Citrus County Chronicle and has since been removed.
By Dave Pieklik, Crhonicle Online
(The Citrus County Chronicle)
According to documents released Monday afternoon, investigators say they discovered child pornography on Mark Lunsford's home
Lunsford, the father of 9-year-old Jessica Lunsford, who was killed in February, denies looking at the images, while the sheriff's office says none of the images had been "downloaded, filed or saved."
Though the documents did not go into specifics about the images, Assistant State Attorney Pete Magrino said the images were found on Lunsford's computer. However, he said his office is not pursuing charges.
"There was no evidence found by law enforcement that the computer was used in the manufacturing or production of child pornography, only that there were a limited number of items that were viewed," Magrino said. "To expend additional law enforcement resources and prosecutor resources to make a case, when balancing societal goals. I mean, Mr. Lunsford's been through enough."
Sheriff spokeswoman Gail Tierney said a "handful" of images were found by members of the sheriff's computer forensics unit in the computers delete bin. She said the images had not been downloaded, filed or saved.
----------------------------------
The files were found in the delete bin, therefore they had been saved and deleted.
Posted by: Warren | February 29, 2008 at 03:44 PM
John, do you pay property taxes on that single wide? No? Don't worry then, you are not paying their salary unless you are counting all your tickets. I guess that would count.
BTW, I thought Casey articulated very well. Only someone who did not have an understanding of grammer and spelling would think otherwise.
Posted by: CIndi | February 29, 2008 at 03:43 PM
Rick, do you realize that our taxes pay for the police force? If Mark is suing the police, then he is indirectly suing me. That makes it my business. So you can bury your head in the sand but I'm not. Mark needs to be stopped before he swindles any more money from hard working Americans.
Casey, before you start insulting the educational backround of the people on this blog, you may want to go back to school and brush up a little bit on your english as well.
Posted by: John | February 29, 2008 at 03:39 PM
John,
See you at the Nazi meeting tonight. Bring the leather straps!!
Posted by: Adolph | February 29, 2008 at 03:30 PM