Saturday, March 9, 2013

The Cannibal Cop, Gilberto Valle

ABC reports

Valle, of Forest Hills, Queens, was charged last year with one count of conspiracy to commit kidnapping, according to a federal criminal complaint, as well as using the National Crime Information Center database to access unauthorized data. He was arrested after his wife allegedly discovered evidence of his intended cannibalism on his computer.

Kathleen Mangan-Valle, 27, was the government’s first witness in her husband’s trial. She told the jury she fled the family’s home with their 1-year-old daughter after she became aware of  his plans.
A federal complaint alleges that Valle exchanged electronic messages with an unnamed co-conspirator “about kidnapping, cooking and eating body parts of [Victim 1].” Prosecutors say that one of the women Valle allegedly discussed eating matches the description of his wife.
Authorities allege that in addition to conspiring to kidnap “Victim 1,” he had discussed plans to “kidnap, rape, torture, kill, cook and eat body parts of a number of women.” He is accused of creating computer files pertaining to “at least 100 women and containing at least one photograph of each woman.”
Let me guess, Orlin, the government hater and Greg, TS and Retired Mustang, the gun-rights (and other rights) fanatics, are going to defend this guy because he really hadn't committed a crime yet.

Have at it, boys.


  1. He is on trial for conspiracy to commit several major felonies, so unless some stunning new piece of evidence shows up, yes, he is a criminal.

    Mikeb, if you would actually listen to what those of us you named have to say, you would understand us better. I'm not going to commit the leftist error of saying that listening equals agreement. But you would save yourself from making outrageously stupid statements such as the one you did for this article.

  2. Mikeb, do you work for the SPLC? I love Liberty, not Tyranny. Collectivists, Communists, Fascists, and Socialists have a difficult time understanding the meaning of individual liberty. You be one of those.

    orlin sellers

  3. Your guesses here are as accurate as most of your other guesses, Mike. That is, not at all. The crime of which he is accused is significant enough that I presume he will remain locked up for the duration of his trial. He will most likely be convicted, assuming the little I've read and heard about the case is accurate. Now, is it really so much better to cast aspersions than it is to argue like an adult?

  4. I don't have a problem with conspiracy to commit X being a crime, so long as X is not one of those victimless crimes thought up by control freaks. Rightfully it should be harder to get a conviction as well.

  5. I'm surprised at you guys. I really thought you'd be concerned about the invasive government reading our e-mails and arresting us for things we've written.

    1. So long as the police and prosecution were acting with the blessing of a warrant, I have no problem with this. His wife presumably made a complaint to the police, giving them good reason to seek a warrant. That's how the process is supposed to work. Now, if the government peeks into what citizens are doing without following the rules, then I would object. Why is that so hard for you to understand?

    2. Gee, Mike, maybe that's because we have a better understanding of DUE PROCESS than you have. Frankly, the fact that you would be disrespectful of our insistence on the protection of Constitutional rights, and that you would not understand the difference between proper arrest for conspiracy to do something following proper investigation and wiretapping supported by probable cause, and the bullshit precrime you favor, just goes to show that you're a shitty lawyer if you are one at all.