you should contact an attorney and get it off your record

I did about 5 years ago. They told me it would cost $12,000. They said the conviction would not just vanish. My record would read that the charges had been removed. So whats the point?

I'm not really sure but since you obtained counsel to check it out I would assume you know if it's worth it or not. I had some minor drug charges removed from my record which do not show at all but I suppose each case and or state is different.

ROFL, land of the free.

Have a friend who likes to get high? Jail time.

It is pretty simple, isn't it? Thanks for this.

Yes, I would. As I have told you a few times, I think he was innocent of any sexual misconduct, and I think if you read the Nolan Dalla interview you would get it. HE was in his 70s. There were other children in the car and able to hear any conversation. Use some common sense, if you have even one little bit. The family, including the accuser, signed notarized letters that they believed he was innocent. His accuser and her parents signed notarized letters. You judgemental folks know nothing about scientific reason, the American system of fairness, or common sense. Gamblers do not get the same shot as justice as everyone else in West Texas. I have had friends fot to prison for killing a poker hijacker, and later get a full pardon from the Governor. I have had a friend go to prison because a crooked cop framed him with one pill of dope, a redbird. One pill, prison. I have heard of several framed for weed back in the 1960s. Some of the people on here that just say the same things over and over must be too dumb to really play poker.

In every thread, there is one guy that is the dumbest of all. He pled nolo contendre, no contest. HE did not plead guilty. In the Nolan Dalla interview, Slim and Nolan said guilty but there was no such plea. It was not a plea about sex in anyway. It was called simple assault where the prosecutor would have something to save face. You LIE AND LIE when you cay he was convicted of sexually assaulting a minor. The reason I know the family stands behind him are the notarized letters, their statements, their reconciliation. You can make arguements without lying over and over, and distorting what was said. Now repeat yourself. Duh! In a twist to get something for the prosecutor who could not go to court, there was no mention of sex or a minor. It was simple misdemeanor assault. Pleading no contest and pleading guilty or being "convicted" are not the same. However, I do not expect you to understand that since it is obviously way, way over your head.

I grew up in Amarillo. My grandfather regularly played in various games around the area with Slim, and he would occasionally keep horses at our place. I'm not going to say I knew the guy personally, but my grandfather did. My grandpa was of the old school, your word is your bond type and said he respected Slim more than just about any other guy he knew because he carved out a good life by his guts and brains, and always treated everyone well and always kept his word. I've also always been told the charges were brought up shortly after he won a huge game with Stanley Marsh (local rich oil guy, and total nut job most famous for making the Cadillac Ranch) and Marsh was very well connected.

rubbing a girls knee /= child molester

A man does not get a good reputation for keeping his word as to gambling easily. It is a life-long thing. I'd echo that Slim paid his losses, wasn't known to cheat, and had the rep you need to gamble in West Texas. Suddenly becoming the lowest form of life after 70 just does not happen. The reason for a plea bargain is to keep from having a greater crime on your record. The same logic guys on here would say, if you are indicted for capital murder, and plead guilty in a negotiation session to a reduced charge of manslaughter, they will go ahead and punish you for capital murder. Most cases are handled by negotiation rather than trial. Pleading No Contest means exactly that. He cut a deal, and plead No Contest to a charge that does not mention sex or a minor.

Not this again.

Nobody than himself and the girl (IF their memories are reliable) knows what he did, if anything.

There are thousands of examples of child molestors of all ages (perp and victim) where absolutely nobody suspected anything.

There are thousands of examples of overaggressive prosecution of innocent people.

Pick a side if you wish. But don't even bother claiming the "evidence" supports your side.

You guys don't get it. Johnny KNOWS and that is all the evidence he needs.

Yeah, plea deals are always about a prosecutor saving face and have nothing to do with a defendant wanting to save face or the prosecutor wanting to save the victim the stress of going through a trial.

You are 100% right again. Does never being wrong get tiring?

I'm wrong about a sucker flopping a set. Just doesn't seem fair. On this, there is only one side open. All the logic lines up. I'd never defend a child molester or someone who pled guilty or even Nolo Contendre to child molesting. Slim did not. You may read the big lie that he did a 1000 times here but it is not true. In Texas, and I assume most states, anyone convicted of child molestation would be a registered sex offender and their picture on TV. This includes 17 year old boys with 16 year old girls, and there was some debate about changing it. Slim has some misdemeanors on his record, and this is one. Again, it does not mention sex. It does not mention a minor.

This is what gets me. Slim basically admits that he touched [he used the word petted] in a manner most people would consider inappropriately but he thought it was all right because he was just clowning with her.

His description of what happened is creepy as hell. If a grown man ever acted that way around my daughter, it would require a great deal of self-restraint to go to the police rather than killing him.

As others have pointed out, and Johnny ignored, Slim was definitely convicted of something although not the original charge.

Don't believe me, Mr. Research? Research no contest pleas.

I know of someone who faced that choice after the police did nothing. He decided it was better for the children that he be out of prison and the man alive than his being in prison and the man dead.

Given your track record Johnny, would you like to defend Warren Jeffs next?

I'm perfectly willing to believe this. Now provide details and jpgs. If they all provided notarized letters, including the child, then they did it to clear his name. In which case the documents should be readily available.

Right now, the only thing we know for sure is that he was convicted of an assault involving a child, and there's a guy on the web who says he's innocent. We called, now show your hand.

Not saying he did, but whose to say Slim did not pay them for the statements? Yes, it is a crime I believe, to swear a false statement, but if Slim does not talk and the people giving the statements do not talk, no one will know the recantation is what is false.

Slim did talk to Nolan Dalla in an interview with links posted on this thread.

I would never defend any child molester. If I believed there was a 1 per cent chance Slim was a child molester, I would not defend him.
Child molesters have no cure. They do it or have the urge to do it for life. I am for putting them to death on the third conviction. I'm really against them. Slim is not even close to being one of them. This is a great injustice. He was too old to become a sicko that late in life. The research on sex offenders is clear, and his age group doesn't just start this sickening behavior. I think it is o.k. for the relatives to shoot child molesters if they are sure something occured. This is Texas.

He is a confirmed sicko pervert. Just STFU already. Enough of this thinly veiled brag that you were friends with this scum bag. He is/was famous, you aren't and never were. No one cares that you knew him and were friends with him or whatever, and this idiotic brag/defense is pointless.

His reputation has already been completely ruined and there is nothing left to salvage. Just look at his description of the acts that took place. If those aren't the words of a creepy child molesting horn dog I don't know what are.

He was indicted on charges of indecency with a 12 year old girl, but was extremely lucky to have received a plea bargain that was reduced to assault, to which he pled no contest. The legal terminology that they used when punishing him is irrelevant. All that matters are the facts, and the facts are that he rubbed on a 12 year old girls thigh and asked if it feels good. ****ing sick imo. It doesn't matter that certain members of his family and most of all you don't think that he did anything else. There is a very thin line between professional hustler and con-man, and deceiving people is what Slim was best at, so it shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone with half a brain that he deceived the ones around him into thinking that he wasn't a sick pervert. Big surprise, his con worked on Johnny Hughez, the bumbling/delusional old man who won't stop rambling about crap from the 60s in NVG.

Actually you're right, the professional hustler was a real honest straight shooter. He even said it himself. He never touched her genitals or squeezed her breasts or touched her innapropriately....

You are still lying over and over. He did not plead anything to sexual assault. He plead no contest to simple assault and the words sex weren't in there. Several people have said this and you just do your BIG LIE over.

Nice 1500th post Johnny, old boy! Congrats!

So typical of the uber-biased Johnny Hughez; to ignore 99% of a post that absolutely destroys him and proves him wrong, and focus on only one small, insignificant part of it. You pick and choose which facts to support and argue against, and ignore all others. This is something that has been mentioned time and time again by people in this thread and others like it.

Try reading the rest of my post before you go nitpicking for errors in legal terminology. I don't run spellchecks on your posts do I? Because if I did your posts would surely come back with a big fat F. The damn legal terms don't matter, all that matters is that he rubbed on a 12 year old girls leg! There is no excuse for this perverted behavior, so stop trying to cover it up, and stop continuing with your defense of this disgusting old child molesting pervert!! His innocence is the real BIG LIE

Here's an analogy for you Johnny so you can get my point through that thick old head of yours.

Let's just say, theoretically, that a man named Johnathon Hooze was caught sneaking into the local pre-school and removing the panties of the little girls with his teeth during nap time. One girl woke up and reported him to the police. The police indict Johnathon on charges of obscenity and indecency with a minor, but are feeling generous and offer him a plea bargain that involves dropping the charges to theft (for stealing the panties), to which he pleads no contest. Mr. Hooze admits that he stole the panties with his teeth, but never touched their genitals or squeezed their breasts, except when clowning around.

Just because Johnathon Hooze pleaded no contest to theft, it doesn't change the fact that he stole their panties!!!!! No matter how much his old demented buddy attempts to defend him in some kewl online forums, it doesn't change the fact that he is a sick pervert who admittedly committed extremely inappropriate acts with a minor.

Your opinion isn't what matters, and neither is the legal terms behind his indictment. All that matters is what's fact, and the fact is that he admittedly committed extremely inappropriate acts with a little girl.