Guy Hamilton-Smith has never made a secret of his circumstances, hard as it’s been. It happened long ago. He’s paid his debt to society and tried to move on, by going to law school and seeking admission to the bar. The bar has been unforgiving, and that’s been his burden.
But there is a woman who loves him, married him and knows the person he is today, despite his past failing. For the sake of Google, this woman will be called Paper Tiger, after the handle she uses on twitter. Her name doesn’t have to be connected in perpetuity to what transpired.
So I’m going to say this: my wife got fired from her job today.
Not because of anything she did. Her clients loved her. She got great reviews.
They found out she was married to me.
That’s it.
— Guy Hamilton-Smith (@G_Padraic) April 1, 2019
Paper Tiger worked as a social worker with at-risk teens**, with the sensibilities one would expect of a person who has dedicated herself to such a cause. And I have no doubt, nor should you, that she was wonderful at her job and served the teens under her care brilliantly. Her one fault was that she was married to a man who, in the scheme of chaos theory connections in the minds of the unduly passionate and hysterical, was problematic.
How could someone marry a person who, even 13 years ago, was the sort of man the warriors would rather stone to death than forgive, unless she too was complicit in his evil?
I get wanting to punish people. And wanting to punish them for eternity.
But she didn’t do anything wrong. She’s a hard worker and good at what she does.
She was fired for a crime I committed thirteen years ago.
My heart is broken. She was so happy to have this job.
— Guy Hamilton-Smith (@G_Padraic) April 1, 2019
The irony is that Guy feels the pain of his wife suffering for his conduct years before, as if there was anything he could do to change what he did. He can change who he is, but the woke don’t really care about that, can’t be bothered to think hard enough to take it into account.
I guess I’m at a loss. I don’t really know what I’m supposed to do.
Die, I suppose. Die alone somewhere, in some hole. I think that’s probably what most people want.
My mere existence hurts the people I love the most.
— Guy Hamilton-Smith (@G_Padraic) April 1, 2019
When there’s no redemption, what alternative are there? But this isn’t really about Guy at all, but about his wife. This is about the irrationality that draws connections out of fear, loathing and hatred. Paper Tiger has been nothing but wonderful at her job. Yet, what should be the only question, how well she serves the teens in need, doesn’t save her from the attenuated flow of hatred.
It’s not enough to be good, but your “morality” requires you to never like, no less love, anyone who is ungood. If Paper Tiger wasn’t “complicit,” somehow tainted by her proximity to someone who committed a mortal sin in the eyes of the woke, then how could she possibly go near such a horrible person? How could she love him? How could she (ugh) marry him? No good person would have any association with any person who is problematic, no matter what.
As I asked on twitter, “Is this really the world you want to live in?”
I know Guy. He’s a good person, a smart lawyer (if unadmitted, because character and fitness is far more hung up on his crime 13 years ago than, say the upstanding Michael Avenatti), and deeply regretful for his actions. But then, I know the person, not the cartoon character others would make of him because of the worst thing he ever did. And I’ve no doubt Paper Tigers does too.
When Guy twitted about how his life was imputed to his wife, to make her unemployable by association, many of the people expressing empathy and support are the very same people who would rip Paper Tiger to shreds for her love of such a horrifying man. Of course, they know Guy and recognize him not to be that cartoon character villain, so they will cut him a break.
These same people, brilliant as they deem themselves, remain too self-unaware to grasp the hypocrisy of their ideology. They are wholly untouched by the cognitive dissonance of the pitchfork in one hand and tear-soaked hankie in the other. Some try to rationalize it, not because it’s rational but because they believe they can talk their way out of any hypocrisy by tossing out meaningless jargon. But the reality is that if they didn’t know Guy, like and respect Guy, they would be demanding Paper Tiger’s head on a platter, for who else but a horrible person would possibly deign to marry an even more horrible person?
So I ask them, the woke, the unduly passionate, the ideologically irrational but deeply outraged and offended, is this really the world you want to live in?
*Tuesday Talk rules apply.
**I’m informed that part of the job was to help 18-24-year-olds on the Sex Offender Registry find housing, adding yet another level of idiocy to the horror of having a husband on the Registry. Don’t ask. I can’t explain it.
Discover more from Simple Justice
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Gee, I don’t see how this could happen. As the USSC has determined (In their alternate reality since they are not final because they are infallible, but rather infallible because they are final (when you really, really think about it, the USSC and the woke are almost the same)), the SO registry is not punitive.
We live in a sick world and the “law” is no help.
Well, this was just as simplistic and worthless as possible. Doesn’t reddit miss you?
Gee, I thought Tuesday Talk rules apply. I otherwise do not waste your time and comment. I am merely venting my feeling for GHS.
They do apply. That’s why I didn’t trash a comment with the deeply thoughtful conclusion, “We live in a sick world and the “law” is no help.”
And here I was thinking that the goal of aggressive progressives was to ensure women would not be defined by the men they associate with.
Well sure, unless they’re awful.
Matthew 5:45 NKJV.
“He makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust.”
Jimmy Carter.
“Life is often unfair.”
“Paper Tiger’s husband must be beyond reproach.” Julius Caesar
“Paper Tiger is Imperialism and all reactionaries!!” Mao Tse-tung
“That being said, very early on, when things began to get serious, I laid it all out to my fiancé as dire as I could make it. I explained the risks, regarding law enforcement, regarding vigilantism, regarding homelessness, regarding anything else I could think of. I wanted her to make the decision on her own terms, and with as much information as I could give her.”
He knew. Doesn’t make it any easier though
As we all know, most of these CP cases are not guys who are truly pedophiles. It’s been explained to me that most of them are addicted to pornography and seeking a new “high” (for lack of a better word). Makes sense from what I’ve seen, but I’m no psychologist.
Regardless, these cases suck. It goes without saying that the material is truly abhorrent, but the visceral reaction to the material doesn’t define the person. That being said, I didn’t know about Guy but I had that initial reaction, although briefly, when I read his history.
I hate the feeling of looking one of these clients in the eye, trying to keep their spirits up, and knowing the life as he knew it is over. If such a visible and unusual path to redemption doesn’t save Guy, and doesn’t even save his family, then it doesn’t speak well for the rest of them. I suppose he is right and both the woke and the crime control groups both agree he should just die. Disheartening.
Imagine how many fewer brain cells would have been murdered had you left out that first paragraph.
I’m really not sure what the sass is supposed to mean. I know you choose not to represent those charged with CP, so I’m assuming you disagree. It’s a ramping up I have heard from my clients time and again. I just googled, Guy’s story, and even his Reddit AMA references it:
“I’m responsible for my actions. Starting when I was a teen, I developed a really unhealthy relationship with porn. I was bullied pretty badly, and so I found retreating to the relative safety of the online world to be comforting.
Porn became an hours at a time thing for me. As time wore on, I found my way into different branches of it, different types of porn. One day, when I was in high school, I came across an image of a nude girl, probably 14 or so. At first, it kind of freaked me out because I had this dull awareness that it was wrong. As time wore on, the taboo nature of it drew me back, and I began to download that amongst pretty much everything else that I came across.”
Otherwise I can just speak anecdotally and from what I’ve learned from experts I’ve had evaluate my clients, but I can remember 2 or 3 of my CP clients being diagnosed as actual pedophiles. Other lawyers who have worked on CP cases have said the same to me.
I think it goes without saying, but if most of these CP guys aren’t even pedophiles, then it is especially disheartening we are condemning them and their spouses for life.
No, you missed my point entirely. That wasn’t “sass” (cute word), but trying to prevent you from reducing highly complex matters into simplistic reductivist sentences. It wasn’t necessary to make the point that followed.
What is particularly incongruous is that some of these people are serving/have served more time for their pictures of children than other defendants with state convictions for sexually abusing actual children.
Guilt and punishment by association is not a new occurrence in our society and its unfortunate that we cannot move beyond retribution. How we can change it, I don’t know. But perhaps a good first step would be to end our fixation with registries, watch lists, gang lists, and whatever list of the month that make us feel safe but doesn’t in reality.
While I’ve certainly made efforts later in life, I’m not sure my hands are clean enough – to be as angry for Guy, as I am right now. Hell of an ending you had there, Scott.
The thoughtless cruelty of this is galling beyond measure. Even a line as good as “pitchfork in one hand and tear-soaked hankie in the other” only partially makes up for it.
If syllabuses are really going to be made more #inclusive, maybe adding Hannah Arendt would be a good place to start.
So you Heidelberg U people stick together?
Heidelberg U. A good education and a great tan.
SHG Re your ** I might be able explain it. Presumably her working with 18-24 year olds on the sex offender registry would give her husband access to these relatively youthful offenders and allow him to corrupt them, or something crazy and vindictive along those lines.
You know how one gets to the Island of Conclusions?
You leap.
Twice a month, you can get a ferry over from the Island of Misfit Toys.
I want to know what alternate reality they live in where social workers would never be caught dead in the company of such unsavory characters as convicted criminals, drug addicts, etc.
To help them is one thing. To sleep with them is literally Jeanine Pirro.
To err is Huma.
Speaking of erring, did you see what a certain B. McLeod in Houston did yesterday. Judicial grand opening/grand closing.
What a bonehead. Isn’t that right, Judge McLeod?
Maybe this is funny, but I don’t get it.
It’s a Weiner joke.
Oh. Okay.
Is it really legal for govt agencies to fire employees based on who their spouse is? That would seem to run afoul of discrimination law and other Constitutional protections. I guess the devil is in proving what the real reason for termination was.
Did someone say govt agency?
Thank you Scott.
Sorry that you had to suffer this.