Court: Dad can paste daughter's face on porn photo

page: 1
39
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 06:27 AM
link   

Court: Dad can paste daughter's face on porn photo


www.sfgate.com


A Milpitas [California] man who used a computer to paste photos of his 13-year-old daughter's head onto bodies of women in graphic poses shouldn't have been convicted of possessing child pornography because the pictures didn't show minors engaging in sex acts, a state appeals court ruled Wednesday.
(visit the link for the full news article)



+1 more 
posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 06:27 AM
link   
Seems like every day brings a new awful story of new depths of human depravity. You don't even have to read this gruesome story to get an understanding of what happened, but the thing I wonder is: How can the court system let this go unpunished?

Its a sick world and getting sicker. I don't know what to say I hate this story and I feel like hitting something but I guess I'll just not do that right now.

www.sfgate.com
(visit the link for the full news article)


+14 more 
posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 06:33 AM
link   
Oh a hard one, no real crime, but the intent of the father is one that elicits reactions of utter bloody bashings.

He's no less a deviant, just has not broken the law..

THE WORST SORT.

gah, heres where we need wankers like jeffrey dahmer... grrr


+22 more 
posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 06:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by badw0lf

gah, heres where we need wankers like jeffrey dahmer... grrr





That doesn't make sense.

What do you mean?

FYI, Dahmer was a serial killer who targeted innocent people and did horrible things to them. He was never 'needed'.



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 06:40 AM
link   
I would guess technically he didn't break any laws. So where does it go from here? Do they moniter his internet activity to wait on him to cross the line? There is alot of threads about how intrusive the government is getting. So on one hand we know this guy has problems but hasn't broken the law. If or when he does, it will be really bad for his daughter. On the other hand, the constitution still applies to him.


+49 more 
posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 06:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Partygirl
 





How can the court system let this go unpunished?


And what crime did he commit? It is not actual child pornography, and being perverted is not a crime.



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 06:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Exuberant1

Originally posted by badw0lf

gah, heres where we need wankers like jeffrey dahmer... grrr





That doesn't make sense.

What do you mean?

FYI, Dahmer was a serial killer who targeted innocent people and did horrible things to them. He was never 'needed'.


Yeah I know, that was a bit off colour..

Well a lot..

BUt this father is showing signs that he's both not worthy of being a father, nor of having a life imo.

Might be harsh, but this scum is NOT a father.




posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 06:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Exuberant1

Originally posted by badw0lf

gah, heres where we need wankers like jeffrey dahmer... grrr





That doesn't make sense.

What do you mean?

FYI, Dahmer was a serial killer who targeted innocent people and did horrible things to them. He was never 'needed'.


On occasion, its nice to have an "exterminator".

This "dad" is neither innocent nor does he deserve anything less than horrible.

Personally, a family member should take this sucker and feed him to the hogs.



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 06:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Exuberant1

Originally posted by badw0lf

gah, heres where we need wankers like jeffrey dahmer... grrr





That doesn't make sense.

What do you mean?

FYI, Dahmer was a serial killer who targeted innocent people and did horrible things to them. He was never 'needed'.


I think he meant to say Dexter.


+29 more 
posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 06:48 AM
link   
while it may have been un-ethical or
even un-moral, does not make it
illegal.

I believe they had the same court discussions
about anime which is artist renderings of children
performing sex acts. No children were used
for the so-called art work. Does it make it
illegal to think it or draw it? Where do you
draw the line with the thought police ???


+47 more 
posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 06:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by felonius
Personally, a family member should take this sucker and feed him to the hogs.


when you were 14 yrs old and jerked off in your
bed at night to the thoughts of your 13 yr old
girlfriend or a hot girl at school, were you not
committing the same offense?
Your 13 yr old gf was underage.
Should somebody have fed you to the
hogs then ???

between birth and present day,
about 99% of us have committed
this very same act. Yet some
stand up high and mighty and have
a holier than thou attitude.



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 06:58 AM
link   
Yeah this is definitely a tough one. On the one hand he is clearly a sexual deviant. But on the other hand he didn't break any laws and he hasn't actually harmed in his daughter. So while I may not approve of what he did, he (maybe unfortunately) has the right to do it as a free human being. Yeesh I feel gross for saying that but I do think that its true. Until or unless he does something legally wrong, we can't convict him. Just because what may be attractive to me sexually, yet you find it offensive or immoral doesn't make it legally wrong. Just my 2 cents


+52 more 
posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 07:00 AM
link   
reply to post by boondock-saint
 


You are comparing thoughts from children in the the same grade with simulated childporn by an adult.

I think you need to rethink your strategy here.



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 07:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by boondock-saint
I believe they had the same court discussions
about anime which is artist renderings of children
performing sex acts. No children were used
for the so-called art work. Does it make it
illegal to think it or draw it? Where do you
draw the line with the thought police ???
Exactly. This is an important question. Are fantasies/drawings/fake images of children performing sex acts actually equal to putting real children in those positions? One Australian judge seems to think so:


Bart, Lisa and Maggie Simpson are at the center of a legal case in Australia that ponders a bizarre — and slightly creepy — question: Are drawings that depict the younger members of the Simpsons clan engaged in carnal activities merely offensive and crude? or do they actually constitute child pornography?

Yesterday, an Australian judge ruled that such images are indeed illegal. The decision upholds the conviction of a man who was found guilty in February of possessing child pornography, after the offending cartoons (which were piracies and not official Simpsons ware) were discovered on his computer. It is not clear how or why the man was arrested, or whether his arrest was part of a larger sting operation.

thelede.blogs.nytimes.com...


Logic would dictate, that if I were to draw/photoshop some people being brutally murdered I could get charged for murder. Oh, but no one gives a !@#! about that. This is the consequence of policing thoughts and fantasies.
edit on 9-6-2011 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)


+7 more 
posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 07:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Exuberant1
reply to post by boondock-saint
 

You are comparing thoughts from children in the the same grade with simulated childporn by an adult.
I think you need to rethink your strategy here.


In the Bible, Jesus left his home and started doing his
heavenly father's work when he was 12 yrs old.
Jewish Bar Mitzvahs usually occur around the
same age. This is around the age of knowledge.
So basically you are an adult in God's eyes
once you realize right from wrong. Mankind
only sets the standard for adulthood at 18.

A 14 yr old boy jerking off is just the same
as a 40 yr old man, both have carnal knowledge
and the knowledge of right and wrong.
So both are equally guilty.



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 07:05 AM
link   
think about the daughter here she must be so horibly messed up from this . now if the daughter saw the pornography there might be somthing to charge the man whith?



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 07:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Exuberant1
reply to post by boondock-saint
 


You are comparing thoughts from children in the the same grade with simulated childporn by an adult.

I think you need to rethink your strategy here.
I could say the same for you really.


+9 more 
posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 07:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by boondock-saint

In the Bible...


Yeah, let's bring the Bible into this.

Let's quote ancient books and pretend to not be off-topic whilst doing it.


+1 more 
posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 07:10 AM
link   
I'm pretty sure the law in the Old Testament was against desiring family members.

Plus, Matthew 5:28 says, "But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart."

So according to the Bible, he committed adultery with his daughter. You might want to rethink using the Bible to defend his actions.
edit on 9-6-2011 by The_Phantom because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 07:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Exuberant1

Originally posted by boondock-saint
In the Bible...

Yeah, let's bring the Bible into this.
Let's quote ancient books and pretend to not be off-topic whilst doing it.


the Bible is the rule and guide
of my life. Everything else is
man made.





new topics

top topics



 
39
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join