Wednesday, January 11, 2017

Supreme Court rules that Rabbinical Court cannot rule on the Get of comatose husband for 21 days


The High Court heard today (Wednesday) the petition of a woman against the Rabbinical Court presided over by Rishon Letzion Rabbi Yitzhak Yosef, who seeks to reajudicate the efficacy of a divorce (get) granted to a woman by her comatose husband.

The court forbade the rabbinical court to discuss the divorce's legitimacy for 21 days, until a decision on the woman's petition is forthcoming. During this period, the High Rabbinical Court will be in contact with Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit.

The Vice-President of the Supreme Court, Justice Elyakim Rubinstein criticized the decision of Rabbi Yosef to reopen discussion on a get that had already been granted and released a woman from aguna status because the divorce had already been granted. "The court is not a place for symposiums, but rather for judicial decisions . Make a seminar, write articles, but why tamper with things?"

Rubinstein then asked the Legal Adviser to the rabbinical courts if he "knows of a precedent where a man from off the street with no connection to the case submits an appeal and the court is willing to discuss it? He would be shown the door immediately. Who would touch it? What role has he in this story? To summon 11 judges for an expanded hearing [as the Chief Rabbi did]? I understand that this is an halakhic dispute, one hundred percent, but to [actually adjudicate it] in court?"

In 2014, S. was given a divorce in a rare and unprecedented move by a religious court in the northern city of Tzfat, seven years after her husband was severely injured in a car accident and left in a vegetative state. A halakhic get must be granted by the husband and accepted by the wife. The rabbinic court in this case decided that they could be the husband's legal guardian and that he would have wanted to grant the divorce, calling it a get zicui. That principle, however, is used for receiving a get and is a passive, not an active, concept according to other rabbinic authorities.

Shortly after the ruling was issued and the divorce granted, Reuven Cohen, who opposed the decision but is unconnected to the couple in question, filed an appeal with the Supreme Rabbinic Court – the Chief Rabbinate’s highest judicial body – to challenge the divorce on halakhic grounds.

This is an unusual step in the rabbinic courts, although Israel's Supreme Courts constantly accept suits filed by uninvolved parties. Most of the cases involving land ownership in Judea and Samaria are filed by leftist NGOs which do not claim ownership of the land.

Two months ago, the Supreme Rabbinic Court and the chief rabbis decided to take on the case, in a move blasted by Mavoi Satum – The Organization for the Rights of Abandoned Women.[...]

This, however, is not a women's rights issue nor is it a civil rights issue, but a halakhic one. In the past, Chief Rabbi Isaac Herzog and YU Rosh Yeshiva Rabbi Herschel Shachter both expressed serious reservations about using the halakhic concept used in granting the divorce, granting a get zicui. Current Sephardic Rabbi Yitzchak Yosef would like to clarify its use in this case by convening a rabbinic court of 11, since it there is no precedent for it being applied in this way.

Does the Gay Issue Threaten the Continuity of Orthodoxy? by Rabbi Yitzchok Adlerstein

Cross-Currents

An essay penned by the lead educator at a Modern Orthodox high school warned of possible shock. “This may surprise many adults, but the reconciliation of the Torah’s discussion of homosexuality represents the single most formidable religious challenge for our young people today.”
The author’s declaration was every bit as surprising and shocking as he warned it would be. If true, we are looking at a systemic failure of Torah chinuch in significant parts of the Orthodox world. It would be to Orthodoxy what Galileo and Bruno had been to the Church – massive inability to respond appropriately to an intellectual challenge.
Reading on in the essay, the incredulity mounted.
More young people are “coming out” than ever before, and that repeatedly puts a face to this theological challenge…As they go off to college, students invariably face the painful moral dilemma created by the seemingly intractable conflict: believing in the primacy and validity of the Torah on the one hand, and following their hearts’ sense of morality with regard to loving and accepting their gay friends – or perhaps “coming out” themselves—on the other. All too often, this earnest challenge results in our children quietly losing faith in the Torah as a moral way of life. 
In my experience, many, if not most, 20 to 40-year olds in the modern Orthodox world struggle with the issue of homosexuality and the divinity of the Torah. They believe in a kind and just God and they want to believe in the divinity of the Torah. But at the same time they feel fairly certain that being gay is not a matter of choice. In the apparent conflict of these ideas, the first two premises seem to be losing ground.
 Could this really be? A Jewish people fiercely clings to its love and devotion to HKBH through millennia of persecution, pogroms, penury, ghettos, auto-da-fes, Crusades, exile, religious and racial hatred and a Holocaust – only to lose its faith over the banning of behavior foreign to 98% of the population?

In those rare moments when our adversaries forgot about us long enough not to visit those horrors upon us, we contemplated a world in which suffering, disease, child mortality, ever-present warfare, and the brutish subjugation of the many by the few were the rule, not the exception. And we went right on proclaiming the goodness of G-d, Who gave us the Torah we cherished! [...]we never relaxed our conviction about Hashem’s justice – although repeatedly given the opportunity. Moshe emes, v’soroso emes.
And the gay issue is the burden that is too difficult to bear, the one that will open the exit door to observance for Orthodox young people?[...]
In some parts of the community, the question is moot. Gays are not discussed. Even using the word is taboo. What you don’t think about can’t be much of an issue. But this is not the case elsewhere, where people talk about the problem, are aware of families that have children who have come out, and have embraced Rav Aharon Feldman’s now-classic position paper on the subject.[1] They struggle to comprehend the pain and loneliness of people they know about – but giving up on the foundations of Judaism is not part of the response. Why not?
Essentially, we’re asking why Torah chinuch in some parts of the community – certainly no stranger to their own problems – nonetheless is more successful in this area. What does it take to produce loyal Jews rather than emunah-challenged socially orthodox ones?
We should be devoting serious study to this and related issues – meaning the collection of real data analyzed by proper scientific methodologies. Such study remains, at the moment, a pipe-dream. In its absence, I will offer one thought, which should be taken as nothing more than the product of some decades of observation, coupled with personal conjecture.
Two phrases seem notably absent in the conversation in parts of the community, while very much in evidence in others. I believe that they have a profound effect on the orientation of young people. Those phrases are kabolas ole, and avodas Hashem. I rarely – if ever – hear them from my Modern Orthodox students and associates. I hear them often enough in parts of the community further to the right. [...]
The combination of these two phrases is a potent elixir, providing those who drink it with the strength to endure many challenges.
I would never suggest that these two concepts describe the inner life and the outer behavior of the majority of the right-of-center Orthodox world. There are indeed many lapses, in deed and in intent. But words – memes – are important. They help define the boundaries of our thoughts, even if they do not linearly dictate their exact content. They create expectations that exert pressure – sometimes consciously, sometimes not – on behavior. [...]
I don’t have the wherewithal to reintroduce these phrases into the everyday discussion of some parts of the Orthodox world. But for those who read the essay by the high school principal with horror, the reaction should be clear. We should ensure that concepts close to our minds and souls remain in sharp focus. Repeating concepts like kabolas ole and avodas Hashem too often is a far better approach than not often enough.
May it be His Will that they rub off on both our children and ourselves.
[1] Among other things, it reminds us that the Torah forbids behaviors, not orientation; that our dealings with those with SSAs should be compassionate and respectful, rather than contemptuous; that Orthodox men and women with SSAs have a contribution to make to the Orthodox community.

Alshich - Why was woman created from man instead of from earth as man was?

Alshich (Bereishis 2:23): Avos d’Rabbi Nossan(Chapter 4) states, “Only this time is she bone of my bones... but after this a woman will not be from the bone of the man.” This doesn’t seem to be teaching us anything. And furthermore how does this indicate “Therefore a man should leave his wife...”? In fact the opposite seems to be true since except for Adam – man and his wife are not related so why should he cleave to his wife? In fact we wrote before the statement of Rabbi Abahu where he asked about the apparent contradiction. The Torah says “Male and female He created them but it also say “And G-d created the Man”. Rabbi Abahu concludes that initially it occurred to G-d to create two beings but afterwards He actually only created one being. 

We wrote how it is possible to say He created them and He called their name Adam when in fact they had not actually been created? The answer is that there is no question that G-d’s mere thought makes an impression which was that male and female traits were created from the earth. If he had created them totally separately there would be no attraction between them. Therefore He created the male alone in actual deed but the female aspect was created by His thought which was placed in potential in Man in his rib. It was because the female potential was in Man when he was created that both male and female were called Adam because they were both from the earth. Therefore their attraction for each other had to be because she was created from his rib. And they - thought they were two bodies one male and one female - he contained an aspect of the female as we will discuss. This was done deliberately because even though they were separate entities – one being from the spiritual dimension of masculinity while the other from the dimension of femininity – but in G-d’s thought they were both created from the earth in a subtle manner in order that they should have unity. But at the same time he should be dominate and she should be subordinate to him. Therefore in reality they are one because she is included within him. Consequently even when she was taken from him there exists a unity between them and she is subordinate to him. 

All of this is understood from the statement “This time she is bone of my bones.” That is to say this time there is greater unity then the previous time when G-d had thought to create two entities and call them Adam totally from the aspect of thought. That is because now she is in reality bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh. Before this there was no unity between us because we were both originally called Adam because we were both from earth and therefore there could be no unity between us because we were to be made separately from earth. However now there is now a connection of unity between us. The reason is because she is called isha (woman) because she was taken from man – i.e. she was not taken from me until I was created as man. Therefore it was good that G-d made us this way and not the way He thought to do initially that we would both be from earth. It was good that she was included within me and then taken out from me. Therefore this explains why she was called woman because she was not made until I was made man. 

Or you can say that if she had been created from a bit of earth it would not indicate unity saying she would not be called Adama (derived from Adam) because adama is the name for earth. But now that she has been taken from the man – the name describes the unity that she was taken from man. 

You can also say that according to what we have written that she did not come from a rib without a nefesh and she did not need to be given a soul. That is because she had a soul already potentially within the rib. Concerning this it is said that if the rib was just a chunk of raw meat and she was created to be just like that bone – then she would not have been called isha for the sake of his rib. That is because since she would have been created from a dead limb there is no reason to describe her as similar to him for the sake of dead matter. But this that she was called woman is because she is derived fully from the man. In other words when the rib was taken from him it was not simply a rib - but she was taken as a full entity that was contained in the rib.

Tuesday, January 10, 2017

Trump - despite clear evidence to the contrary - denies he mocked a disabled reporter

update: Added a video which claims that Trump was not mocking the reporter. I don't agree

This video clearly shows Trump mocking the disabled reporter. Despite his categorical denial of doing so in his attack on actress Meryl Streep  - who said the mocking was disgusting - which it is.

Trumps attack is a familiar technique

NY Times


Under fire after intelligence report, Trump lashes out — at Meryl Streep

The Golden Globe Awards on Sunday night featured a scathing speech by the actress Meryl Streep against Mr. Trump:
“There was one performance this year that stunned me — it sank its hooks in my heart,” Ms. Streep said. “Not because it was good; there was nothing good about it. But it was effective and it did its job. It made its intended audience laugh, and show their teeth.
“It was that moment when the person asking to sit in the most respected seat in our country imitated a disabled reporter,” she said, referring to a speech in 2015 when Mr. Trump shuddered and flailed his arms, appearing to mock a disabled reporter at The New York Times. “It kind of broke my heart when I saw it, and I still can’t get it out of my head, because it wasn’t in a movie. It was real life.”
Mr. Trump, in his inimitable way, spoke with Patrick Healy of The Times to respond to that attack — and then took to Twitter.Donald J. Trump









For the record, Mrs. Clinton did not lose big. She won the popular vote by nearly three million votes and lost the presidency by losing Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin by about the number of people who cheered the Packers at Lambeau Field on Sunday.

Also for the record, here is the video of his original speech referring to that disabled reporter:Mr. Trump told Mr. Healy that he was “not surprised” that “liberal movie people” were going after him on national television, and he said he “never mocked anyone.”
“People keep saying I intended to mock the reporter’s disability, as if Meryl Streep and others could read my mind, and I did no such thing,” Mr. Trump said in the interview.
“And remember, Meryl Streep introduced Hillary Clinton at her convention, and a lot of these people supported Hillary,” he said, referring to Ms. Streep’s remarks at the Democratic National Convention last summer on behalf of his opponent.
================================
The following video claims he is not mocking the disability because he has used similar expressions regarding non-disabled people. However I don't see that the response is the same and stand by my original assertion that he did in fact mock the disabled reporter.


Monday, January 9, 2017

Trump finally acknowledges that Russia might have meddled in U.S. elections

Meryl Streep voices concern about Trump's bullying and humiliating others


Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Thank you. Please sit down. Please sit down. Thank you. I love you all. You'll have to forgive me. I've lost my voice in screaming and lamentation this weekend. And I have lost my mind sometime earlier this year. So I have to read.

Thank you, Hollywood foreign press. Just to pick up on what Hugh Laurie said. You and all of us in this room, really, belong to the most vilified segments in American society right now. Think about it. Hollywood, foreigners, and the press. But who are we? And, you know, what is Hollywood anyway? It's just a bunch of people from other places.

I was born and raised and created in the public schools of New Jersey. Viola [Davis] was born in a sharecropper's cabin in South Carolina, and grew up in Central falls, Long Island. Sarah Paulson was raised by a single mom in Brooklyn. Sarah Jessica Parker was one of seven or eight kids from Ohio. Amy Adams was born in Italy. Natalie Portman was born in Jerusalem. Where are their birth certificates? And the beautiful Ruth Negga was born in Ethiopia, raised in―no, in Ireland, I do believe. And she's here nominated for playing a small town girl from Virginia. Ryan Gosling, like all the nicest people, is Canadian. And Dev Patel was born in Kenya, raised in London, is here for playing an Indian raised in Tasmania.

Hollywood is crawling with outsiders and foreigners. If you kick 'em all out, you'll have nothing to watch but football and mixed martial arts, which are not the arts. They gave me three seconds to say this. An actor's only job is to enter the lives of people who are different from us and let you feel what that feels like. And there were many, many, many powerful performances this year that did exactly that, breathtaking, passionate work.

There was one performance this year that stunned me. It sank its hooks in my heart. Not because it was good. There was nothing good about it. But it was effective and it did its job. It made its intended audience laugh and show their teeth. It was that moment when the person asking to sit in the most respected seat in our country imitated a disabled reporter, someone he outranked in privilege, power, and the capacity to fight back. It kind of broke my heart when I saw it. I still can't get it out of my head because it wasn't in a movie. It was real life.

And this instinct to humiliate, when it's modelled by someone in the public platform, by someone powerful, it filters down into everybody's life, because it kind of gives permission for other people to do the same thing. Disrespect invites disrespect. Violence incites violence. And when the powerful use their position to bully others, we all lose.

This brings me to the press. We need the principled press to hold power to account, to call them on the carpet for every outrage.That's why our founders enshrined the press and its freedoms in our constitution. So I only ask the famously well-heeled Hollywood Foreign Press and all of us in our community to join me in supporting the committee to protect journalists. Because we're going to need them going forward. And they'll need us to safeguard the truth.

One more thing. Once when I was standing around on the set one day whining about something, we were going to work through supper, or the long hours or whatever, Tommy Lee Jones said to me, isn't it such a privilege, Meryl, just to be an actor. Yeah, it is. And we have to remind each other of the privilege and the responsibility of the act of empathy. We should all be very proud of the work Hollywood honors here tonight.

As my friend, the dear departed Princess Leia, said to me once, take your broken heart, make it into art. Thank you.


Trump replied

Friday, January 6, 2017

Donald Trump Casts Intelligence Aside


What plausible reason could Donald Trump have for trying so hard to discredit America’s intelligence agencies and their finding that Russia interfered in the presidential election? Maybe he just can’t stand anyone thinking he didn’t, or couldn’t, win the presidency on his own.

Regardless of his motives, the nation’s top intelligence officials were having none of his nonsense on Thursday. In an extraordinary pushback against the president-elect, James Clapper Jr., the director of national intelligence, told the Senate Armed Services Committee that he was “even more resolute” in believing that Russia not only hacked the computers of the Democratic National Committee and others but also disseminated classic propaganda, disinformation and fake news.

Flanked by the Pentagon’s top intelligence official and the head of the cyber command, Mr. Clapper acknowledged that the intelligence agencies can at times make mistakes. But he distinguished between presidential skepticism about their findings, which is healthy, and “disparagement” of the professionalism of the agencies, which is perilous for national security.

With his refusal to accept regular intelligence briefings on threats facing this country and his persistent denigration of the intelligence community, Mr. Trump has shown time and again that he worries more about his ego than anything else. He is effectively working to delegitimize institutions whose jobs involve reporting on risks, threats and facts that a president needs to keep the nation safe.

Since last summer, Mr. Trump has dismissed intelligence findings that the Russians were responsible for hacking the Democrats and leaking the emails that were eventually made public by WikiLeaks. In November, when the Central Intelligence Agency went further and concluded that the Russian hacking was intended to favor Mr. Trump, he rejected the finding as “ridiculous,” though he and President Vladimir Putin of Russia have repeatedly expressed a bewildering and alarming mutual admiration.

Since then, President Obama has sanctioned Russia for its interference in the election and his administration has released limited corroborating information while most Democrats and some Republicans in Congress voiced outrage over the Russian role and called for a full investigation. Nevertheless, Mr. Trump and his spokesmen have continued to deny there was any evidence of Russian involvement, and on Wednesday, Mr. Trump proved he could still shock people by embracing Julian Assange, the WikiLeaks founder, who has been long reviled by Republicans as an anarchist lawbreaker.

On Twitter, Mr. Trump enthusiastically endorsed Mr. Assange’s insistence that the “Russians did not give him the info” with the leaked emails. This was after Mr. Trump had mocked the intelligence community about a classified briefing he is due to receive on Friday. Given such an attitude, one has to wonder whether Mr. Trump’s plans to reform the intelligence agencies are intended as a vendetta or a serious initiative to make the kinds of meaningful changes that some experts say are needed.[...]

If he ever decides to govern responsibly, Mr. Trump has made his job much more difficult. Having worked so hard to convince the American people that the intelligence community cannot be trusted, what will he tell the country when agents inform him of a clear and present danger?

Thursday, January 5, 2017

Intelligence Chiefs 'Stand More Resolutely' Behind Finding Of Russia Election Hacking


Intelligence agency leaders repeated their determination Thursday that only "the senior most officials" in Russia could have authorized recent hacks into the U.S. electoral and political system.

The director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, affirmed an Oct. 7 joint statement from 17 intelligence agencies that the Russian government directed the election interference — and went further.

"We stand more resolutely on that statement," Clapper said during a Senate Armed Services hearing with the intelligence chiefs into the politically charged issue.

Clapper noted that the intelligence officials would not dive into many more details at this hearing, deferring to a broader, unclassified report on the election interference to be released next week.[...]

In addition to Clapper, testifying before the committee were Defense Undersecretary Marcel Lettre and Adm. Michael Rogers, commander of the U.S. Cyber Command of the National Security Agency. All three will be leaving their positions at the end of the Obama administration.[...]

Assange has denied the Russian government gave Wikileaks the emails. McCain asked Clapper if Assange had any credibility.

"Not in my view," Clapper said.

President-elect Trump, however, has openly questioned whether Russia was involved in the hacking, pointed to errors the intelligence community made over the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and has appeared to back Assange in tweets.

Clapper also said there is a difference "between skepticism and disparagement" of the intelligence community. Trump has taken to Twitter, referring to "Intelligence" and its officials in quotations.[...]

Rabbi Moshe Heinemann - Tzniyus


Rabbi Moshe Heinemann - Tzniyus from Kollel Beth HaTalmud on Vimeo.

Trump’s criticism of intelligence on Russia is dividing Hill GOP



President-elect Donald Trump’s broadside against the intelligence community is dividing Capitol Hill Republicans, with some ready to pounce on Trump’s skepticism that Russia interfered with the U.S. elections and others urging a more cautious approach.

The resulting schism could widen as Congress begins probing the CIA’s charges that Russia intervened in the November elections in an attempt to help Trump, potentially becoming one of the first significant intraparty breaches of the Trump presidency.



U.S. critics of Russian President Vladi­mir Putin, such as Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.), want to go full-bore on holding Russia to account for its suspected election interference. But they may be slowed by GOP senators who prefer to wait to hear the intelligence community’s evidence and for Trump to be installed in the White House.

When asked whether he would be influenced by Trump’s Tuesday tweet about a supposedly delayed “Intelligence” briefing on ­“so-called” Russian hacking, McCain said flatly, “No.”

McCain will hold a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing Thursday on “foreign cyber threats” that is expected to center on Russia. Intelligence officials — including Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper Jr., Defense Undersecretary for Intelligence Marcel J. Lettre II and U.S. Cyber Command and National Security Agency Director Michael S. Rogers — will testify, and some Republicans are hoping they will present evidence that Russia meddled in the elections.

“The point of this hearing is to have the intelligence community reinforce, from their point of view, that the Russians did this,” Graham said. “You seem to have two choices now — some guy living in an embassy, on the run from the law for rape, who has a history of undermining American democracy and releasing classified information to put our troops at risk, or the 17 intelligence agencies sworn to defend us. I’m going with them.”

Graham was referring to Julian Assange, the WikiLeaks founder accused of helping Russia leak emails hacked from the Democratic National Committee. He has few fans in Congress — on Wednesday, House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) called Assange a “sycophant for Russia.”

Assange has denied he received leaked emails from the Russians. Trump echoed Assange in a tweet Tuesday in which he said “a 14-year-old could have hacked Podesta,” referring to Hillary Clinton’s former campaign chairman, John Podesta. Trump also tweeted support for Assange’s comment that the media is “dishonest.”

Assange’s first claim may be narrowly accurate — Russia’s intelligence services used middlemen to deliver the purloined files, said senior U.S. officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the information. But U.S. spy agencies are in full agreement that Russia directed the hacking and orchestrated email dumps to WikiLeaks to help Trump win — a finding at the heart of a classified assessment completed this week.

Trump’s online endorsement of Assange is his latest insult to the U.S. intelligence community and is likely to intensify the antagonism between the president-elect and U.S. spy agencies. He has repeatedly disparaged their work and skipped most of the daily briefings prepared for a future White House occupant.

CIA veterans said the level of open hostility is extraordinary. “I can’t think of any transition during my career as seemingly fraught as this one,” said John Rizzo, the CIA’s former acting general counsel.[...]

The bipartisan heads of the Senate’s Foreign Relations, Armed Services and Intelligence committees met Wednesday to coordinate how to conduct the Russian-hacking investigation over the next weeks and months. After the meeting, Democrats expressed hope that Trump’s attacks on the intelligence community would not complicate their efforts.

“The most important role of the intelligence community is to speak truth to power,” said Sen. Mark R. Warner (Va.), lead Democrat on the Intelligence Committee, noting that Trump’s “rather dismissive attitude of the intelligence community” concerns him. “There is broad-based bipartisan concern that we’ve got to do this investigation in an appropriate manner as quickly as possible,” Warner added.

Joseph Goldman arrested for child sexual abuse, charged with rape, perverted practice, assault

Update  Justice Department

Baltimore Man Facing Federal Charges for Illegal Possession of Guns and Silencer

Joseph Goldman, age 35, of Baltimore has been charged by federal criminal complaint for possessing unregistered firearms and for making a firearm. Goldman had an initial appearance today before U.S. Magistrate Judge Thomas M. DiGirolamo in U.S. District Court in Greenbelt, and was ordered to be detained pending a detention hearing scheduled for January 3, 2017, at 10:30 a.m.[...]

According to the affidavit filed in support of the criminal complaint, on December 19, 2016, Baltimore City Police Department, Criminal Investigation Division Child Abuse Unit executed a search warrant at Goldman’s home as part of an investigation into possible sexual abuse of a minor. Goldman is facing state charges in connection with that investigation. During the search law enforcement discovered a cache of suspected illegal firearms and contacted ATF for assistance.

The following firearms were recovered from Goldman’s residence and seized by law enforcement: from behind the couch in the first floor living room, a 556 short barrel AR-15 long gun with a silver 6.5 inch silencer attached; from Goldman’s bedroom, a 12 gauge short barrel shotgun and two semi-automatic pistols; and 20 rounds of ammunition, a machine vice, miscellaneous gun parts and tools. Law enforcement determined that the AR-15, short barrel shotgun and silencer are firearms that are required to be registered under the law, but were not.

If convicted, Goldman faces a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison for possession of unregistered firearms, and for illegally making a firearm. [...]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fox Baltimore

Baltimore City Police arrested a 35-year-old suspect for child sexual abuse, rape, perverted practice and more on Monday morning at his Northwest Baltimore home.

Around 8:15 a.m. detectives arrested Joseph Goldman at his house on Taney Rd. by Wallis Ave. Officers recovered suspected marijuana, two handguns, one shotgun with an altered barrel, one rifle and a homemade silencer.

Goldman was taken to Central Booking and was charged with first and second-degree rape, second, third and fourth-degree sex offense, first and second-degree assault, perverted practice and related charges. An investigation into the guns will continue.[...]