B
B1ackwater
Guest
CNN
NEW YORK (AP) -- A priest accused of stalking Conan O'Brien pleaded
guilty Tuesday to disorderly conduct.
The Rev. David Ajemian leaves court after pleading guilty to
disorderly conduct.
The Rev. David Ajemian, 46, admitted in Manhattan Criminal Court that
he sent letters and DVDs to the NBC talk-show host's home and office,
and "I also sent mail to the home of Mr. O'Brien's parents."
He said he never meant to cause anxiety or to upset anyone.
"I recognize that what I did was disorderly and I'm glad the people of
New York have accepted that," Ajemian said as he left court. "I plan
to return to the Archdiocese of Boston and I hope to return to
ministry duties."
Judge Rita Mella ordered Ajemian to pay a $95 court charge and signed
a two-year order of protection directing him to stay away from
O'Brien.
The Roman Catholic priest was arrested while trying to enter the NBC
building in Manhattan for a taping of "Late Night With Conan O'Brien"
despite being warned to stay away by the network's security personnel.
On Friday, a judge found him fit to stand trial despite claims of
psychiatric issues.
Ajemian, who allegedly began writing to O'Brien in September 2006, has
been placed on leave by the Boston Archdiocese. He was removed in June
rom his last posting at St. Patrick Parish in Stoneham after two
years.
Ajemian attended Harvard University at the same time as O'Brien, but
it is unclear whether the two crossed paths there.
- - - - -
Hmmm ...
It is an "evangelical" religion after all ... believers
think they get cozmik brownie points for converting others.
A high-profile score like O'Brien - someone who could, in
theory, convert many others from his media perch - is worth
at least five brownie points (2.5 extra virgins if you're
a moslem, eh ?
But, in a nominally "free" society, at what point does the
right to evangelize crash into the right to NOT be evangelized ?
This wasn't a case of religioning-up the State ... it was all
played out in the private sphere. While the constitution limits
religions role in State affairs, it also empowers it AGAINST
State inhibition as it goes about its daily business (unless,
of course, you're a Mormon fundamentalist - then they can
send a zillion federal marshals to interfere with your free
excercise).
There is no explicit right spelled-out in the constitition saying
anyone may completely refuse evangelization in every way, shape,
time or place. You can't make the churches take down their steeples
or make the religious radio station shut down. You can't have
someone arrested for saying "God bless you !" or "Merry Christmas"
or handing you a WatchTower pamphlet on a streetcorner. The law
is even hesitant about keeping J.Ws. off your lawn - and if the
folks next door encourage you to handle rattlesnakes or bow
towards Mecca five times a day ... that's their business. In the
greater interests of liberty you've gotta put up with it.
So, aside from "celebrity", what makes the O'Brien case any
different ? One could say the evangelism was so specifically
targeted, so relentlessly persued, that it ceased to be "free
expression" and instead became a species of 'assault'. But
is that true ... or did O'Brien just get off easy because
he's a 'celebrity' ? Would cops and courts be so eager to
keep J.Ws or whatever off YOUR lawn ?
NEW YORK (AP) -- A priest accused of stalking Conan O'Brien pleaded
guilty Tuesday to disorderly conduct.
The Rev. David Ajemian leaves court after pleading guilty to
disorderly conduct.
The Rev. David Ajemian, 46, admitted in Manhattan Criminal Court that
he sent letters and DVDs to the NBC talk-show host's home and office,
and "I also sent mail to the home of Mr. O'Brien's parents."
He said he never meant to cause anxiety or to upset anyone.
"I recognize that what I did was disorderly and I'm glad the people of
New York have accepted that," Ajemian said as he left court. "I plan
to return to the Archdiocese of Boston and I hope to return to
ministry duties."
Judge Rita Mella ordered Ajemian to pay a $95 court charge and signed
a two-year order of protection directing him to stay away from
O'Brien.
The Roman Catholic priest was arrested while trying to enter the NBC
building in Manhattan for a taping of "Late Night With Conan O'Brien"
despite being warned to stay away by the network's security personnel.
On Friday, a judge found him fit to stand trial despite claims of
psychiatric issues.
Ajemian, who allegedly began writing to O'Brien in September 2006, has
been placed on leave by the Boston Archdiocese. He was removed in June
rom his last posting at St. Patrick Parish in Stoneham after two
years.
Ajemian attended Harvard University at the same time as O'Brien, but
it is unclear whether the two crossed paths there.
- - - - -
Hmmm ...
It is an "evangelical" religion after all ... believers
think they get cozmik brownie points for converting others.
A high-profile score like O'Brien - someone who could, in
theory, convert many others from his media perch - is worth
at least five brownie points (2.5 extra virgins if you're
a moslem, eh ?
But, in a nominally "free" society, at what point does the
right to evangelize crash into the right to NOT be evangelized ?
This wasn't a case of religioning-up the State ... it was all
played out in the private sphere. While the constitution limits
religions role in State affairs, it also empowers it AGAINST
State inhibition as it goes about its daily business (unless,
of course, you're a Mormon fundamentalist - then they can
send a zillion federal marshals to interfere with your free
excercise).
There is no explicit right spelled-out in the constitition saying
anyone may completely refuse evangelization in every way, shape,
time or place. You can't make the churches take down their steeples
or make the religious radio station shut down. You can't have
someone arrested for saying "God bless you !" or "Merry Christmas"
or handing you a WatchTower pamphlet on a streetcorner. The law
is even hesitant about keeping J.Ws. off your lawn - and if the
folks next door encourage you to handle rattlesnakes or bow
towards Mecca five times a day ... that's their business. In the
greater interests of liberty you've gotta put up with it.
So, aside from "celebrity", what makes the O'Brien case any
different ? One could say the evangelism was so specifically
targeted, so relentlessly persued, that it ceased to be "free
expression" and instead became a species of 'assault'. But
is that true ... or did O'Brien just get off easy because
he's a 'celebrity' ? Would cops and courts be so eager to
keep J.Ws or whatever off YOUR lawn ?
