It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

FBI Mistakes Judge's Graphic 'Fantasy' Tape as Recording of Torture, Murder

page: 3
5
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 3 2008 @ 06:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by wrangell76

not once did I ever say that I was self righteous nor compared myself better than he. This judge though has an obligation to everyone to set an example for the rest of the nation to do what is right. For example if this judge is condemning a father for being involved in sadistic rituals and pornography in his personal life, but yet this judge goes home and does the same thing or worse on an audio tape?! What kind of justice is that? Where is the line drawn? Someone has to set the example. This is the judges responsibility. A judge knows this too.

. . .

what an immature statement to make.
You are not seeing the point at all. This judge was elected by individuals in this nation to set an example for the rest of the nation, for the children of this nation. If children now see that it is ok for a judge to say one thing in court but do another in his personal life, it is scary to think what kind of future generation we are preparing for this nation.



First of all, you mention that part of the job that a judge might have is "condemning a father for being involved in sadistic rituals and pornography in his personal life." This is not what family court judges do. Family court judges, like the man in question, determine what is in the best interests of a child. The decide which parent or other relative a child should live with, determine the visitation shedule between parents, etc. It is not their job to say that someone is a bad person because they might be into porn or S&M.

If a parent left pornography or sex toys laying around where a child might see them, or engaged in acts around the child, or with a child... that is another story. Those are things that a judge would determine are harmful to a child. The only way that a judge is going to care about what a person does in their personal life is if it is illegal, or if it can be shown that it is detrimental to a child in some way. Note that I said "if it can be shown to be detrimental. There is always a measure of proof that must be met in such cases.

That being said, I will move onto the other paragraph that I quoted. Judges are not elected (or appointed, as in some cases) to "set an example for the rest of the nation." Judges are elected or appointed because they will make wise and just decisions. In most cases, before they even get to the bench, judges have years and years of legal experience and have been quite successful in their legal careers. That is all that is needed to justify a person getting on the bench.

Now, their moral character may come into question if they are shown to be dishonest in some fashion, or if they are charged with or convicted of a crime. But for the most part, morality doesn't matter much. How many politicians and officials have been on the news because they have had affairs? How many presidents admittedly lied to the entire country about their affair? The reason I bring up Clinton, is because even though he was dishonest, and did some things with cigars that others might find depraved, it was decided that these things had nothing to do with his fitness as president, and he was not kicked out of office. How is this different?

And to the person higher up in the thread that was questioning what he meant by saying that he hoped it was his voice on the tape... I am thinking that this is why he said that: He has not heard the tape that they have. All he knows is that an investigation took place to make sure that someone wasn't hurt or killed. He probably meant that he hopes that it is the fictional recording that made, and that it is not some other tape that actually does contain evidence of a crime. He probably is just hoping that someone else didn't make a tape showing someone actually being victimized in some way.

My opinion: If he broke the law, he should not be a judge. If he did nothing illegal, as long as he always is professional about his job, I see no reason (besides embarrassment) for him to resign. Nowhere in the article did it make reference to him being a judge that people have filed complaints about or anything... so there is no basis to say that he might have been a "bad" judge.

Edited to add: The article that I read earlier today was exploring the possibility that the tape was stolen and planted by someone who was out to get him. Not that he just "left it where someone could find it."

[edit on 3-1-2008 by TheHypnoToad]




posted on Jan, 3 2008 @ 06:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Essedarius
True. And...on a side note...if you are dumb enough to allow your sexual fantasies to become glaringly public then, guess what...you deserve to lose your job just on principle.


Really? people should lose their jobs if their sexual fantasies become public? That seems a bit extreme to me.

But hey, since we are heading that way. Why not brand these people as witches and burn them at the stake? We all know that fantasies of this kind only come from being in league with the devil.



posted on Jan, 3 2008 @ 08:21 PM
link   
I would simply like to publicly apologize for the insensitive nature of my earlier posting. I did not put in enough time to convey my thoughts in a suitable format.

I will now remove myself from this discussion.



posted on Jan, 3 2008 @ 09:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by zerotime
Really? people should lose their jobs if their sexual fantasies become public? That seems a bit extreme to me.


If "his honor" is not intelligent enough to keep incredibly sensitive personal material confidential, I should feel A-OK with you having access to OTHER PEOPLE'S sensitive information?

And you are accusing ME of extreme political correctness? Please.
Action...reaction. This judge playing the role of VICTIM is hilarious and absurd.



But hey, since we are heading that way. Why not brand these people as witches and burn them at the stake?


Or better yet, why not just burn all the people that think there should be consequences for mistakes? Wouldn't that just fix EVERYTHING?



We all know that fantasies of this kind only come from being in league with the devil.


That's a helluva leap you just made. And you are accusing others of making character judgements.

Please.



posted on Jan, 3 2008 @ 10:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Essedarius
If "his honor" is not intelligent enough to keep incredibly sensitive personal material confidential, I should feel A-OK with you having access to OTHER PEOPLE'S sensitive information?


According to the article the tape was essentially stolen by a secretary who apparently turned it over to the police after the judge fired her as a way to get back at him. And well I guess it worked.


Originally posted by Essedarius
Or better yet, why not just burn all the people that think there should be consequences for mistakes? Wouldn't that just fix EVERYTHING?


What was his mistake? I guess making the tape. He did nothing illegal. This wasn't a crime. He had a sexual fetish as does every single person on earth. Some people here have made it clear that they do not agree with his preference but why does that matter. I can never understand why people feel so threatened by what others do in the privacy of their own homes.



Originally posted by Essedarius
That's a helluva leap you just made. And you are accusing others of making character judgements.
Please.


Sorry, the devil quote was meant to be sarcasm. But that was also an era when society thought it was okay to judge the sexual thoughts of woman. Men were kind of luckier in that time. If they had a lusty thought it was because some female temptress was after him.


but whatever, I feel that I have said about all I can on the issue. My point is as clear as I can make it. Beware being different. It will cost you if anyone else knows about it.


[edit on 3-1-2008 by zerotime]



posted on Jan, 3 2008 @ 11:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by zerotime
Beware being different. It will cost you if anyone else knows about it.


Your points are well made, but I still think the guy is reaping what he sowed. (And I'm not passing any judgement on his fetish...just his decision making.)

I think the real lesson here is this:

Beware starring in a simulated snuff tape then leaving it in a place where your mistreated and estranged secretary has access to it.



posted on Jan, 4 2008 @ 02:39 AM
link   
So no one can see the conspiracy angle to this?


Rather people want to bicker over fantasies?


My point earlier, and I 'll rephrase it. This sounds to me like a cover up by Foxnews and the FBI. I'm willing to bet the tape was more than a fantasy.

Thats why I made the comparison to Eyes Wide Shut and Hostel.

I'm worried we have a bunch of libertine Marquis de Sades running the show. One got exposed and the others are covering for him.

This just sounds like pure conspiracy theory material. Yet people want to argue over fetishes.

Something is very wrong about this, very shady, and scary.



posted on Jan, 4 2008 @ 03:47 AM
link   
Yeah. This was just made up fantasies on a tape. Give me a break. INvestigate further!!!!!!!!!



posted on Jan, 4 2008 @ 04:56 AM
link   
reply to post by MikeboydUS
 




This just sounds like pure conspiracy theory material. Yet people want to argue over fetishes.


Could be a clear case of "Clenton & Monika" while the real issue was the Panama canal. It is so easy to get the US public sidetracked by putting up a moral sexual issue. OH! he did this or he had that sexual fantasy. Wouldn't be surprised if the tape was genuine and being covered up. However the public was so busy with the fantasy that they missed the real issue. Just a thought.



posted on Jan, 4 2008 @ 12:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by MikeboydUS
So no one can see the conspiracy angle to this?

Rather people want to bicker over fantasies?

My point earlier, and I 'll rephrase it. This sounds to me like a cover up by Foxnews and the FBI. I'm willing to bet the tape was more than a fantasy.

Thats why I made the comparison to Eyes Wide Shut and Hostel.

I'm worried we have a bunch of libertine Marquis de Sades running the show. One got exposed and the others are covering for him.

This just sounds like pure conspiracy theory material. Yet people want to argue over fetishes.

Something is very wrong about this, very shady, and scary.


It was investigated by police and FBI and it was concluded that it was not real. My guess is that they found more evidence that the people on the tapes were fine and that this was part of their sexual activity. The secretary herself was probably involved in some way. That's how she knew were to get the tape when she was going to be fired in the first place.

As far as the FBI, Police department, new crews, investigative journalist all covering the case up because there was a real murder committed by a well organized group of sadists that hold high offices and important positions in society....well...that is your fantasy. You seem to be basing reality from a couple fictional movies you have watched.



posted on Jan, 4 2008 @ 12:15 PM
link   
I just read the title story and immediately had to post my thoughts. This guy needs to be psychologically examined, tested, than polygraphed.

First, he resigns which is a total confession something is wrong in his head. Looking him in the face I see he is disturbed and should be under psychiatric care. This guy is a nut case and should be disgraced off the bench. The guys judicial cases should be reviewed for any failure enforcing the law correctly on innocent and criminal cases.

The guy is caught in his so called fantasy and now back pedals out of his delusions. Bye Bye judge.

Why do guys in high offices get caught, come clean and than try to back out of there confessions. Just like senator larry craig. admits guilt in a court of law and than goes oops, I didn't mean to answer guilty, I did nothing wrong. Ya right, in whose mind.



posted on Jan, 4 2008 @ 01:02 PM
link   
There's a reason they call it Deviant Behavior, it's because it deviates from the norm, and yes, despite what you see on your television, there are still norms in modern society.
As individuals, we all demonstrate deviance at some level or another, but sexual torture so graphic and realistic that the FBI mistakes it for the real thing, sounds fishy enough as it is, but if the FBI obtained a copy, then apparently this judge has a problem keeping it in the bedroom, and therefore is probably a freakster. We all have fantasies, we all have quirks, taboos, and idiosyncrasies, but most of us don't have problems keeping them private and most of us aren't being investigated by the FBI and most of us aren't in a position to make rulings that effect the lives of other people.
All these people defending the Judge's right to fantasize, would you let a guy that for example, openly admits to fantasizing about having intercourse with children baby sit your kids? Hell no, should we let a Judge sit on a bench that openly admits to frighteningly realistic sexual torture and rule on cases of families and societal norms? Does their position as a judge who rules the lives of others warrant a certain protection of that hypocrisy?
It arrives as no surprise to those who study it but History is full of horror stories like these that were all too real, the ruling classes have always keenly demonstrated a psychosis of class driven sexual and violent mistreatments of those they consider to be their lessers. I guess we should be glad this guy is only fantasizing.
Give a man a fish and he eats for a day, give a man a stick and a sense of authority, and he won't have to catch fish for himself any more.



posted on Jan, 4 2008 @ 01:50 PM
link   
reply to post by twitchy
 


I would look to a Judge to do his duty and be as bound to enforce the exact word of the law, regardless of his fantasies, as I am bound to follow the word of the law, regardless of my fantasies.

What you are really saying in all that black and white up there is basically, "Should we believe in general and special relativity? After all, Einstein married his cousin."

See what I mean?

No? Well, what I mean by this is you are judging what the person says in a professional capacity because of what the person does in his personal life.

Forget the messenger and forget about the contents of the message; you lot are shooting the guy who wrote the message because you don't like the way he ties his shoes.

Why should the rulings of a Judge who fantasies about robbing banks be any different from the rulings of a person who just wants to play golf? The law still says bank robbery is illegal. Maybe you think he might just "let the next one off for a laugh"?

I expect him to be a professional and do his job just like we expect a mechanic to fix our Fords even though he, personally, despises Fords.

The whole line of thinking a majority of the posters in this thread are heading down is a scary one indeed. I mean who are any of you to say that any of you are fit to perform the jobs that any of you have now?

Jon

[edit on 1.4.2008 by Voxel]



posted on Jan, 6 2008 @ 07:22 PM
link   
Why should a judge making a fantasy tape make him any less than the rest of us? If the President reads "Hustler", should he be fired?? It sounds like we have a bunch of "judges" on this website.



posted on Jan, 6 2008 @ 07:22 PM
link   
Why should a judge making a fantasy tape make him any less than the rest of us? If the President reads "Hustler", should he be fired?? It sounds like we have a bunch of "judges" on this website.



posted on Jan, 6 2008 @ 10:46 PM
link   
It really is an issue of personal moral value projection.


As far as taping and recording personal acts, whether of fetish, sexual, or fantasy actions ... there is no guarantee that that tape will not get out. It happens.

Look at the famous people who's private exploits have come into public ... let me use a popular example.

Tommy Lee and Pamela Anderson tape. It was their personal video. It was never meant for public viewing. The public bought it from online downloads and VHS copies like hotcakes ... in fact, it probably still sells well. Oh, you could probably say that Tommy is a sadist for using that tool on any woman, and Pamela is a masochist for letting a tool of that size be used on her. But, different strokes for different folks, that is what makes the world go around.

So ... now, are people bad who own porn? Well, it is one of the largest grossing industries in the U.S. ... so that means a majority of the population do not meet the standards and are not normal nor are fit to have a job ... the way this thread has gone.

Whatever someone is into, as long as it does not directly harm another individual, is their business.

I personally would never date a stripper nor a porn star. That is my personal morals and values. I could not accept that kind of stress in my life. I still hold respect for those who do, and feel they have every right to work a second job without discrimination. I could date someone who used to do it, as long as they didn't talk about it, let it remain in the past.

If someone prefers naked cartoons, well, that too is their business. Who are any of us to judge what makes them happy ... again, as long as it causes no harm to others.

Remember, the U.S. was created for freedom of choice, expression ... not to impose religion, values, and ideals onto your neighbor and countryperson. If you don't like something, don't look, don't listen ... that is your freedom.

I personally don't like violence, greed, or generally bad things happening in any form. I don't try to stop horror flicks from being made ... I don't stop music I don't care for from being produced. I don't write tv stations and tell them to only deal with positive issues. I have enough power and control, I change the channel, I don't buy a movie ticket, I change the radio station, I don't buy the CD ... I make my personal decisions so others can do so as well.


If you wish to make an argument of 'protect' the children ... that is fine. There are more than enough safe guards already available to you. There are 4-digit locks on tvs, cable boxes, dvrs, game consoles, computers, and just about everything that a child can access. It is the parent's(s') duty to protect what information comes into their child's ears and eyes, not the game industry, not the movie industry, not the web sites ... for all you have to do is be a good parent and learn what is already there, use the lock-out devices, read the ratings of products ... you can even use them to protect yourself from things you don't wish to see ... not to mention these abilities have been available for quite some time.

Proper child rearing and the child will be drawn to the better things ... don't worry about that more expensive vehicle and a bigger house ... get a job where you can spend more time with the child and lesser expenses. That matters more.


In the end, this thread sounds more like a mob than a forum. No one but the authorities and the ones involved has seen the tapes. They found him to be innocent of crime, don't let someone else spin it otherwise.

Stick to your morals, teach them to your kids and loved ones .... don't ever push them on others, for they will rebel against them.

If you are G-d-loving ... then read what J-sus had to say ... love them all, forgive them, turn the other cheek. For you to be forgiven, you must forgive and love all those around you (not just whom you deem worthy).

Take are, and see the real truth.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join