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.

 

Innocent grandfather gassed himself hours after child porn police raided his home

page: 1
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 06:25 AM
link   

Innocent grandfather gassed himself hours after child porn police raided his home


www.dailymail.co.uk

A grandfather gassed himself just hours after child porn police raided his home - even though he was innocent.
Last night his widow launched a bitter attack on the police after hearing at an inquest how detectives who seized his computers found nothing illegal.
Michael Curtis's home was raided and three laptop computers seized after intelligence led officers to his address after he stumbled upon one indecent picture and viewed it for a matter of seconds.


Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk...
(visit the link for the full news article)


edit on 6-12-2010 by Gemwolf because: Corrected title




posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 06:25 AM
link   
I have no words to express my feelings. Utterly gutted. How can the police be authorized to raid and destroy people's lives with no solid evidence.
Anybody wan stumble upon things we rather not see, does that mean that millions risk a home invasion 'just to make sure?'.
And it is only the first step, I wouldn't be surprised if they start targeting the folks with wikileaks insurance file.


www.dailymail.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 06:39 AM
link   
reply to post by TheOracle
 


You should see what the police have done to my life in uk. 24/7 electroinc mind control monitoring, they listen to every word in our home claiming everyone saying anything is me. Jokes are considered by these morons as facts to destroy peopel with.

18 years i have spent with this, without once being aressted or charged, they just absolutely wrecked my life, and enjoyed every moment of there murder campaign.

Imagine not 1 crime in my life, but these scum called police have in effect murdered me with there obsession to kill people for no reason.

I am not surprised one bit about the story if true. I am sure there is worse.



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 06:50 AM
link   
reply to post by TheOracle
 


I am a christian woman and a while back, I
was looking something up on the net.When
I opened the link, I was shocked to see the
link directed me to a porn site.I know that anyone
can accidently open something up and have porn
attached to it.I wouldn't kill myself over it,I would
fight to clear my name!



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 07:03 AM
link   
I thought police were supposed to make us secure or at least feel secure.

Cops and their quotas make driving just the speed limit stressful and even terrifying given how many stories and reports there are of people being stopped for no reason then assaulted, raped or if theyre lucky just thrown in jail for a night or two and their property confiscated.

Now the internet police laying in wait for a year or more to kick in your door and label to all the world as a monster for clicking a link or suffering a pop up you never wanted to click or see in the first place makes just going to check your email a life or death endeavor.

Cant even wave "hi" to a cop without risking being stopped and questioned or just accused of harassment and tased to death.

I suppose in their defense when there are set rules to go by for every little fart and wink you dont get much room to exercise judgment and consider context, probably why applicants with even average intelligence are passed by for hire, but when the structure of your entire organization is based on principles which lead inevitably to guilty before proven innocent you'd think you may want to look for work elsewhere. Unless you honestly believe in the crap they train into you.

If Ive said it once Ive said it a million times, too much power for any person or group of people to have. Way too much.



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 07:04 AM
link   
reply to post by TheOracle
 

From the article:

I don't understand how accidently looking at one single picture for a matter of seconds in March 2009 has filtered down into an investigation in July 2010.
'They must have known he didn't look at any other pictures or visited any other website afterwards. Surely they can come to the conclusion he stumbled upon it?
They made a bad decision and I hope they learned from it.

The picture he stumbled upon was probably planted there by the police to begin with, based on information in the story, so law enforcement seems to have caused this tragedy on both ends, planting an image that people COULD stumble across, and then deciding to pursue someone who does stumble across one image.

There are links on line and if you accidentally click them, they will come after you. It seems outrageous but it's true;

FBI posts fake hyperlinks to snare child porn suspects


Durbin added: "I thought it was scary that they could do this. This whole idea that the FBI can put a honeypot out there to attract people is kind of sad.
I always wondered if some innocent people would get caught up in this type of method, it seems that is exactly what may have happened here.

It's not right. They should be going after people that post child porn, not putting up honeypots that end up in the death of innocent people.


CX
+3 more 
posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 07:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by andy1033
reply to post by TheOracle
 


You should see what the police have done to my life in uk. 24/7 electroinc mind control monitoring, they listen to every word in our home claiming everyone saying anything is me. Jokes are considered by these morons as facts to destroy peopel with.

18 years i have spent with this, without once being aressted or charged, they just absolutely wrecked my life, and enjoyed every moment of there murder campaign.



I'm sure i'm getting a feeling of de ja vu here but anyway....

Andy, i sincerely believe that one day we will get to the bottom of your claims, claims that come in virtualy every single post you make. Each time though another little bit of info emerges that seems to make the story less believable.

You always say that the police have ruined your life and for 18 years have constantly monitored you, yet today you say that not once have they ever arrested you or charged you with anything.

You say all these things about what the police have supposedly done, yet also claimed they have taken all your memories..so how do you know what they've done?


Andy, sorry mate but without a shred of evidence of any kind to back your claims up, it is looking more and more like a seriously concerning case of paranoia.

If i could ask just a few things of you, they would be this...

Show me proof that they have spied on you. (Pics of cameras, microphones etc). Police would not waste 18 years of surveillance on someone who has not done anything.

Show me proof of how they wrecked your schooling by mind control. (And something other than you just didn't do well in your exams and are trying to find someone to blame.)

In 18 years of police intimidation, you WOULD have at least something you could show us as proof.

You openly say you are gay, thats cool....but thats not always an easy life to lead. I do wonder whether you have had a lot of hassle about normal things in your life and you have come up with this story about the police just so you can blame someone.

I know you have had help in the past, you said so yourself, but it obviously hasn't helped you as far as the police paranoia is concerned. You really should speak to someone about it.

I say that not to take the mick, but as someone who has seen the darker side of life and who knows that there is often light at the end of the tunnel.



As for the topic in hand, that is a shame.

How many of us here have seen pics that could be interpreted in many ways by the authorities?

I can't say i've ever seen pics of that kind pop up on my computer, then again i'm pretty hot on security for my kids on the computer, however i'm sure many subjects that are covered here could put us on the watch list if they wanted.

How many people have downloaded certain "cookbooks", just for a look but never in a million years intending to actualy try anything in there.

Lots of material can get you locked up these days.

CX.


edit on 6/12/10 by CX because: spelling



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 08:59 AM
link   
This is a very sad commentary on life today, no matter how you look at it. Unfortunately I am not at all sure about what has really gone down. It seems extaordinarily stupid that the organization or whatever it is, that scours the internet for child porn customers would attempt to make a case against someone for a single observation. Are they that stupid, or was there more "intelligence" that, while it didn't actually qualify as hard evidence, was enough for them to pursue the matter, and the fellow further? If you balance the probabilities, my guess is that there was in fact more to it. I am not saying he was necessarily guilty of anything, but there was probably something to cause the organization to flag the IP address.

Another matter that doesn't sit right is the man's suicide. While anyone would be upset at being accused of something like this, most would not commit suicide over it. The fact that this was so upsetting and unbearable for him could be suggestive of some sort of longer term struggle with the issue. He would certainly not have been the first family man with wife and kids to have interests such as this.

The actions and demeaner of the police in conducting the raid in the manner they did, and treating him as if he were guilty already are completely unacceptable. Yes, I agree they share responsibility for this man taking his own life. There should be no such process carried out without actual evidence of likelihood that a child is at risk. Doing this on a hunch or a whim is an extreme abuse of power and authority. This kind of authoritarian gestapo government is abhorent.

It is somewhat of a quandary to decide where to draw the line between keeping children safe, and avoiding an oppressive society that treats everyone as a potential criminal. Like I said at the beginning, this is just a very sad story.
edit on 12/6/2010 by wayno because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 09:05 AM
link   
Are we so sure this guy is innocent? Something tells me he wouldn't have killed himself if he was, judging by his farewell message. Just throwing out the possibility, as it just fits the facts better.

I have a feeling he got rid of the stuff, (and later, the techs may find it on there, in tech forensics).

Still, he's dead now, so cannot confirm or deny, and I'm not one to usually speak ill of the dead, so I'll just state it as the tragedy that it appears to be, as we really don't know, so must consider him innocent.


It is somewhat of a quandary to decide where to draw the line between keeping children safe, and avoiding an oppressive society that treats everyone as a potential criminal. Like I said at the beginning, this is just a very sad story.


Simpler than you may think. Without proof, assume innocence. That's why it is in our (the US) Constitution. However, in cases like this, GUILT is assumed first, and even if later innocence is proven, the damage is done. I had the misfortune of seeing this happen to others (luckily not me, thankfully)...and the agencies involved have almost total authority in ruining folks' lives.
edit on 6-12-2010 by Gazrok because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 12:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Gazrok
 


Then there is the other side who would scream and cry foul if the police did not act on some intelligence they had and a child got molested, and they couldn't be blamed for doing so. I don't think its easy in situations like this.

One thing that is not helpful is the amount of heat society puts on this subject in general. There is almost a pathetic obsession some people have in hunting down suspects like a witch hunt; even using entrapment.

I have stated it before, and I will repeat it here, there is more trauma put on a child by the reactions of the grownups in his/her life and people in society in general than by the event itself. People are haunted well into adulthood not so much by what happened in their childhood but by what they fear others might think and believe about them. The same goes for the perpetrators. That is probably why they sometimes feel they have no choice but to either kill themselves or their victims.

Alltogether too much heat from hate and over reaction is put on the situation and too little focus on compassion. I guess its easier to bureaucratize control than caring. Its what governments do best.

I agree that we do not know what really happened in this case. The only thing we can state for sure is that the police acted like goons and the family is suffering for it.



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 02:40 PM
link   
Yet they squashed an investigation into MP's who had accessed child porn online, and put it under wraps for 60 years. The Zionist iron fist of control and abuse is gaining power in UK too every week a little more. More gifts from EU and US, their 'special friends'.
edit on 6-12-2010 by wcitizen because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 10:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gazrok
Are we so sure this guy is innocent?
Well he did click on the image, and that was enough to convict the guy in the article I posted in another case. But he was innocent in the forensic investigation of his computers according to the story.

I remember the times when ATS had banners or sidebars with links I'd click by accident, I think one was the mustang story and one was the conspiracy chicks or something. Not once, but several times I clicked those links by accident! It wasn't just me, there was a thread written about it and other people had the same problem.

So I know it's possible to click a link by accident, but the Jury in that one trial apparently didn't believe it. I think it's a slippery slope with that method of entrapment.They at least ought to put up 6 or 10 links and then if they get multiple hits it becomes much harder to claim it was an accident. But as it is just clicking one link one time, which can be done by accident, shouldn't be enough to find someone guilty. (but it was). So was he innocent? In reality? In the eyes of the law? If he accidentally clicked a link I think he's innocent, but the law may say he's guilty. Or maybe when he clicked that one link it wasn't an accident and that's why he committed suicide, but that's still a travesty that resulted from an entrapment activity as opposed to any real child porn operations going on.

The whole idea is to protect the lives of innocent children from abuse, right? I fail to see how anything that happened in this case protected any children.



posted on Dec, 7 2010 @ 02:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 



The whole idea is to protect the lives of innocent children from abuse, right? I fail to see how anything that happened in this case protected any children.


Every law starts out with a purpose, hopefully legitimate, but once enacted it easily grows into something with a life of its own. Quotas get developed, money is made off of fines and whether or not the original law still has bearing the law goes on. Ever stop at a red traffic signal in the middle of the night with no pedestrians or traffic around and wonder what the hell you are doing there waiting for the green when it would hurt no one to just go ahead and drive off? A cop would give you a ticket for doing so if you did, even though the law is rediculous and pointless in the circumstance.

Not saying anti-child porn laws don't have a purpose. They do. But when enforcement turns into entrapment of innocents, then its being taken too far. With the degree of intrusiveness into our lives today, made possible by technology, how long will it be that they go after us for what we do and say in the privacy of our homes just because they can? Especially if it will bring $ in the governments coffers they will do it. Don't let loose of that politically incorect joke within earshot of your computer's microphone -- someone might be listening, and they will report you to collect brownie points with the gestapo.



posted on Dec, 7 2010 @ 04:56 PM
link   
reply to post by andy1033
 


Yeah, that's definetly true fella, 24/7 Mind monitoring, UK police definetly use this to detain the public, obviously not a great expense to carry out and to monitor at all.

a) paranoid b) lying c) stupid.



posted on Dec, 7 2010 @ 04:59 PM
link   
So he was innocent yet killed himself?!

Sounds like a darwin award nominee.



posted on Dec, 7 2010 @ 05:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Romans 10:9
 


I don't think so, he's not stupid. Police and many people will have branded him a paedophile, i felt his life was not worth living with that stigma attached to his character.



posted on Dec, 7 2010 @ 06:09 PM
link   
I had the unwanted pleasure of having my local law enforcement "folks" search my house where nothing was found back in 2006 and must say nothing shocks me anymore. I know many folks hold the opinion that LE do such a bang up job and we all should bow down and kiss their feet but since I know the facts better then anyone in respect to whether or not I was engaged in criminal deeds I will never tust these "evil bastards" in regards to anything they say or do. Some may say otherwise and attempt to make folks such as myself out as being "suspicious shady's" but once it happens to you, your eyes become "opened" and your life is changed forever. And to anyone who believes or is so naive to think that if you simply live a simple law abiding life that this kind of thing wont happen to you might just be in for a surprise one day. And to be fair I am sure there are many in this field that are legit and actually serve the good of the people and they should be commended but for me the mention of law enforcement is not unlike all muslums to O'Reilly.



posted on Dec, 7 2010 @ 06:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 

The honey-pot scenario can get them in as much trouble. Its called "Entrapment" and one of the people caught on the date line show got off because of this.
If you know your rights you can get off of many charges.
Its sad that police take advantage of peoples ignorance; Even sadder is how many cops are unaware of laws and rights.
I do not condone pedophiles, but I also hate corruption and violation of our rights.

I know I run my mouth on here sometimes and say ridiculous incoherent gibberish; but I really wish Every one could be more educated about their rights and the amount of corruption out there.


edit on 7-12-2010 by beholdblight because: Spelling/grammar



posted on Dec, 7 2010 @ 06:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by beholdblight
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 

The honey-pot scenario can get them in as much trouble. Its called "Entrapment" and one of the people caught on the date line show got off because of this.
I agree that's what it seems like and this article mentions entrapment and how difficult it is to use that defense:

news.cnet.com...

Entrapment: Not a defense
So far, at least, attorneys defending the hyperlink-sting cases do not appear to have raised unlawful entrapment as a defense.

"Claims of entrapment have been made in similar cases, but usually do not get very far," said Stephen Saltzburg, a professor at George Washington University's law school. "The individuals who chose to log into the FBI sites appear to have had no pressure put upon them by the government...It is doubtful that the individuals could claim the government made them do something they weren't predisposed to doing or that the government overreached." ...

When asked what would stop the FBI from expanding its hyperlink sting operation, Harvey Silverglate, a longtime criminal defense lawyer in Cambridge, Mass. and author of a forthcoming book on the Justice Department, replied: "Because the courts have been so narrow in their definition of 'entrapment,' and so expansive in their definition of 'probable cause,' there is nothing to stop the Feds from acting as you posit."
So the courts define entrapment narrowly, apparently, which can make it difficult to use as a defense. But I'm surprised Vosburgh's defense didn't cite entrapment anyway.

Maybe he really couldn't because I think one of his other defenses was that he was on a wireless connection and it could have been someone else who logged into his wireless router, like one of his neighbors, perhaps. That's the question about whether an IP is a unique identifier. But they didn't buy that defense either.
edit on 7-12-2010 by Arbitrageur because: clarification



posted on Dec, 7 2010 @ 07:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 


I agree with you but its a matter of how much money/influence you have
look up Date Line To Catch a Predator, all but one was prosecuted.


On a side note; my friend was arrested for something he didn't do. He is straight edge and like to work hard.
A local officer claimed my friend had accidentally swerved over the line nearly hitting the officer in his civilian pickup.
The officer claimed that he had pulled over to catch his wits before pulling a u-turn to catch up.
About 4 miles down the road the officer spots my friend who had just left work from the opposite direction
He runs out onto the middle of the road to rip my friend out of his car at a red lite and arrest him.
A retried officer witnessed the actual crime and testified. He said the car was a different color than my Friend's car and he followed the suspect for a ways and witnessed this man with a completely different description swerve all over the road. Not only did my friend lose the case but he lost his license and received a bigger fine.
I think the biggest kicker was that the supposed crime wasn't even an arrestable offense never mind one to lose a license over. Also the officer was also the prosecutor.
Just goes to show that you're better off not to fight the law, they're right cause they say they are.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join