The Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel reports:
Randall Shesto II of Waukesha[, a 21-year-old rock musician,] was found guilty in June of sexually assaulting a 15-year-old girl [whom he had met on MySpace] …. He earlier this year had been convicted of having sex with another 15-year-old girl ….
“You love your music. Your music has been the tool by which you have ingratiated your way into the lives of these girls. You may not play in a band in any public appearances during the term of your probationary period. I’m taking away from you the tools by which you worked your misdeeds, sir,” [Judge Ralph] Ramirez said [at Shesto’s sentencing].
Ramirez sentenced Shesto to … [effectively] probation for five years for second-degree sexual assault of a child [plus] a year in jail — one month behind bars and 11 months on work release….
Generally speaking, judges have a great deal of latitude in imposing probation restrictions, including ones that interfere with what would otherwise be the probationers’ First Amendment rights; probations generally have no more First Amendment rights than prison inmates, and prison inmates have very few. The rule is that the restrictions must be “reasonably related to legitimate penological interests,” and restrictions aimed at blocking behavior that could interfere with the probationer’s rehabilitation, or at blocking behavior that could facilitate future crimes by the probationer, are generally upheld.
So the judge’s reasoning — which I’ve tried to encapsulate in the subject line — is, under that standard, not implausible (though not open-and-shut correct). But it is pretty unusual, and struck me as worth noting.
Thanks to Ted Frank for the pointer.
UPDATE: Commenter BGates is the winner:
So instead of being a local rocker, he’s a local rocker who The Man won’t let play because he’s too dangerously sexy. He’ll never attract 15 year old girls now.