It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


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

page: 18
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in


posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 04:37 PM
This man is a sicko, and actions do speak louder than words (or thoughts); his photoshopping work is testament to that...but I don't think you can count is as a CP charge. Perhaps keep an eye on him to make sure he doesn't pull anything else more extreme, but that's about it for now. I really hope his daughter doesn't know what he's up to because that can mess with her head for life.

posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 04:38 PM
On one hand, they are right, the guy did NOTHING wrong in the eyes of the law. On the other, they should at least keep an eye on that girl. He put his daughter's face onto porn. And while I'm no moral police, you can do whatever you want behind closed doors with consenting adults and fantasize about whatever you want (your brain is your own and how would we know what your thinking about anyway? lol), he's still doing something that's wrong on more than one level. Just because he said he 'wasn't going to do anything (vomit what a scumbag)", doen't mean he wasn't in actuallity, getting close to doing something and just got 'caught' beforehand.
Also, what happens to his daughter now? It's out in the open, she's going to get teased at school, and the big one, she knows her own father was fantasizing about her. Sick sad world going on right now, can't wait for this type of thing to be gone.

posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 04:48 PM
reply to post by boondock-saint

wouldn't coming out of a vagina as a baby constitute an unwanted act of pedophilia? eew my head touched my mom's vijayjay

I think he's sick, but he is doing it the harmless way and he isn't breaking any laws, so who cares? If he touches his daughter he should be castorated. without anisthetic.
edit on 9-6-2011 by TheLastStand because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 04:50 PM

Originally posted by boondock-saint

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.

Sorry to tell you, The bible is also man made. Or do you dispute that?
The point to the is pretty cut and dry. The man was arrested, A judge says he is not guilty, He is let go. As far as moral issues, We all have our own views and I dont like the idea of people telling me how to think. Just like you wouldnt like it.

His problems will be with his wife, daughter and family. I am sure he will catch alot of slack over it.

posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 04:58 PM
First thing is first he is not a pedophile he is a hebephile

So many do not find out the information in the article.

During their visits over the next few months, the girl said, Gerber gave her marijuana, which she had used before, and coc aine, which she wanted to try. During one of the drug sessions, she said, Gerber asked her to pose for pictures and she agreed, but she burst into tears when he told her to strip to her underwear.

Read more:

Now as far as the events surrounding this man, there is a lot of things to be said. Personally I find the man to be a disturbed individual that should be placed under court orders evaluations and mental help. So many things are morally and ethically wrong with this story, sadly though I do not find it at all surprising any more. Our world is screwed royally and only seems to grow worse.

That said looking at posts early on it does seem as though people want to start prosecuting for thought crime. As a man I can say without a doubt I am sure I have seen some young lady at the store and thought man she is looking good and not know anything about her. Is she underage or of legal age, looks can be very deceiving, I looked as though I was in my early teens well into my mid twenties. Should a man be locked up just for thinking a sexual thought about a young lady? Or should there be an actual crime? Of course this guy knew the age of the young girl involved and it was his own daughter so that makes it wrong in and of itself, that though is still not a crime.

His crimes are listed above and hopefully those will be enough to put him away. However, just thinking lustful thoughts about teenage girls while wrong morally is not wrong criminally. Of course he has already spent 13 years in prison for a crime he "technically" did not commit, so we could see a man being both pardoned and convicted as well as being compensated for false imprisonment. Certainly a case to watch.

In my opinion this man is dangerous not only to his daughter but to other young teens as well. I think his actions (the Photoshop thing only) are reprehensible even though not an actual crime. He certainly should not be near young girls since he tried to get his own daughter to undress while giving her mind altering drugs. He is a predator that has not done more than set up for an attack. Given the time he most certainly would have taken action (at least some of his actions suggest this). Would all cases be like this? Doubtful, certainly you would have some who would be to fearful to go further than just doing a Photoshop (not talking about the drugs or asking of clothing to be removed). We can never truly understand the workings of the mind, it is far too complicated. To say for certain we know without a doubt what this man would do if given the chance is out of the question. We all know the likely scenario though and most of us would be right about the ending. However, there is always the chance we could be wrong, because anybody can change.

With what we have now it appears evident this man is dangerous to teenage girls do to predatory actions.


posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 05:03 PM
reply to post by g146541

See....this is the problem.....people make excuses for these perverts. I used to do a lot of things when I was a teenager, but now that I am a grown woman, I don't do them anynore, because it is just inappropriate. Nobody seems to get the connection between thoughts and deeds (when it comes to people like this). I studied this subject in criminology and abnormal psychology, and it DOES matter that he was creating porn pics using his daughter (or any other child's) photo. I'm not talking about a single thought, I am referring to the ones who fantasize about it ALL the time. It's not just a fleeting thought. After a while, the thinking about it is not enough. and they eventually act it out. The fact that he took the time to CREATE these photos, using his daughter's face, clearly shows that he has an interest in her sexually...otherwise he would not have altered the pic. He tried to take it a step further, asking her to let him take semi nude pics. The next step would have been to actually have sex with her or rape her. And these guys aren't really afraid of getting caught, because they know all they will get is a slap on the wrist. Now, I am NOT saying the girl was 100% innocent, because she willingly took drugs etc, and who knows, maybe she was promiscuous......HOWEVER.....that is where the difference is. She is STILL a child, even if she looks like a woman physically....her mind is still not fully developed. That is what these pervs use to persuade kids to have sex with them. It doesn't even matter if the girl threw hereself at him......HE is the adult (supposedly), and he should not allow it. The girl obviously grew up with out a father figure, which is also probably why she did drugs etc. Many girls who grow up with out a father are promiscous because they need the love of a "father figure", and especially if they were abused in the past, they equate sex with love. The pedophile knows this, and uses it to get what he wants. So many children get abused and even killed EVERY DAY by these types of people. Sure, guys will fantasize about a beautiful 20 year old etc....that's one thing and not what I'm talking about........what I mean is it's NOT right to fantasize about a CHILD. The trouble with thoughts are that they can lead to acts in many cases. No one stops to think about the victim, and the psychological damage it causes......and to make excuses for people who do this is ridiculous. Anyone remember Jessica Lunford? She was the little girl who was kidnapped from her bedroom by a piece of trash named John Cooey. He held her hostage for a couple of weeks, raping her repeatedly daily......then when he got tired of her, he got rid of burying her alive. In an interview (right before he commited suicide), he talked about how he started being obssessed with young girls after looking at child porn...and started fantasizing about it more and more....then one day he saw Jessica. He was going to lure her into his trailer, and molest her. But he wound up raping and killing her.The point being, that the THOUGHTS led to this. So thoughts DO matter. Any guy who is into porn will tell you that they will move into harder and harder core stuff because after a while, one thing won't do it anymore. Now, I am not referring to ALL men, so please don't think that's what I mean.... I know that not every person will act on thoughts, but the potential is there. Sorry this is so long, but this subject really bothers me. No one should make excuses for guys (or women) who do this....for the child, it is spiritual murder.

posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 05:03 PM

Originally posted by miniatus

Originally posted by Maslo
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.

You're right.. it's also legal to post and download 3d animated scenes of sex with children apparently, I saw something about that in the news a year or so ago ..

Now this is what really disturbs, we have a Gov't ruling stating that is ok to do this, People really need to be questioning the freaks running the Country, because if they had any kind of Morals what so ever, they wouldn't be deeming this kind of behaviour lightly, in fact they're promoting it through zionist movie and advertisements. This is where the Problem begins, and whether or not people wake up will be what Society turns into 10 yrs from now. People seem to think its ok, because they're brainwashed into thinking its just normal ordinary behaviour. It's anything but.

edit on 9-6-2011 by miniatus because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 05:09 PM
reply to post by ChaoticOrder

We are talking about a man who KNEW the age of the girl because it was his DAUGHTER....not some guy thinking about a younger women....and that is not ok.

posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 05:23 PM

Originally posted by TheOrangeBrood

Originally posted by freakjive

Originally posted by SevenBeans
no victim.

By just having this man as a father, She is a victim!

People are victims to much harsher forms of mental anguish from their parents that aren't protected under the law. This girl probably doesn't even know; if she does, whoever told her is the 'abuser', no?

Why does it matter if someone else was dealt harsher conditions?

It's not fair to say that she is any less affected. She is very aware of what happened. She was subjected to drug use and asked to strip down for photographs by her father.

Were you not aware of that fact?
edit on 6/9/2011 by freakjive because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 05:26 PM
Well at least this kiddie fiddler freak has exposed himself , hopefully his daughter knows better then or her mother to remain in contact with him. That is of course assuming they do not live with him. For the love of god these pedo monsters seem to be coming out of the wood work. Just recently I have exposed several pedo sympathizers on youtube claiming child porn was acceptable to look at. Seems there is a pedo rights movement going on? IDGI? These people should have no rights, they need castrated and banished from our continent to some deserted island imho.

These people make people like me resort to violence Grrrrrrrr feed them to me!
edit on 9-6-2011 by Unknown Soldier because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 05:27 PM
reply to post by Forevever

I did allow my kids to attempt a relationship with their father, I just never left them alone with him - had their attempts panned out, we might be having a different conversation. For the most part, my lack of trust, and not wanting to leave them alone with him, simply came down to the fact that he never requested them on a regular basis. Showing up once every few years, is ridiculous, and its definitely not wrong on my part to insist the first attempts at visitation were supervised. His disagreeing with supervision just makes me question his motives. And if he felt so strongly about it, he might have mentioned it to the judge at the time we got a support order... think?

Thank you for pointing the reasons out..I was inclined to think you had valid reason..and was hoping it wasn't just because you distrusted him.Obviously he wasn't very keen on having a relationship, or he would have tried harder.

posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 05:29 PM
He didn't possess any child porn so end of story. We can discuss how he is depraved and a pig e.c.t, but I don't think anything bad should happen to the guy so long as he keeps his thoughts to himself. Thought police here we come!

Edit: whoops, read more on how was taking pictures of her, that changes everything. Nevermind, that is pretty messed up.
edit on 9-6-2011 by SmokeandShadow because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 05:36 PM
reply to post by ChaoticOrder

mat groening(sp) the simpsons creator when he showed barts wang in the simpsons movie some court or group got upset and all pitchforky and he calmy replied bart has been on tv for 20 years i just chose to not have him age or something along those lines and he didnt get harrassed and fyi ive seen some of that creepy simpsons stuff and its not from looking for it there basic pop up adds that sadly you cant turn off so if the australian guy problay got screwd that way or actively sought it out (either way ppl that get there jollys off of the simpson kids are kinda werid)

more directly on topic is the dad a pervert and problay a sicko yeah but he wasent charged with that so thats why they couldnt convict him if anything he should be charged with mentaly dammaging his kid imagine how she feels at school now this kids eiher gonna loose it or freak out at some point cuz of this problay

i hope there watching the dad and the kid more closely cuz this is bound to go no where good but until he does screw up hes protected by the same laws we all are

posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 05:37 PM
Never mind there is not consensus about whether fantasies of these natures are unnatural, abnormal, or socially unacceptable.

I happily notice that we are in near universal agreement that it should be both illegal and socially unacceptable to act upon these thoughts, i.e. to inflict extreme abnormalcy onto the object of these fantasies, especially if the perpetrator were to be in a position of authority or trust over the victim, as a father would be. We agree that action should be taken to protect developing minds from the confusion and insecurity that these crimes would unfairly inflict upon them.

posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 05:39 PM

Originally posted by HardbeatAcolyte

Originally posted by gabby2011
Do you realize that serious torture ,and snuff films make a great deal of money as well.. so I guess if some like it and spend money on it it's ok that it happens?

Would you care to substantiate these claims? How much money, exactly, is a great deal?
As far as I can gather, the concept of an underground market for snuff films is more of an urban legend than a reality. Are there videos of violent deaths in circulation? Yes. Do some people pay money for them? Probably, I'm not sure, but it's a possibility. But what makes you think there's a 'great deal of money' in torture and murder videos?

Someone told me that the very rich twisted people pay a lot for it. I'm not so sure if they are an urban legend.

Look at how much S& M films make..and how much people pay to have someone whip them...etc. many of these people are from very well paying jobs, so it stands to reason ..if that kind of kinky stuff makes people rich, that there are other levels of sadism that do as well.

posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 05:40 PM
wait a god damn minute here. There are actually people on this site saying he didn't do anything that bad????

He put his own 13 yr old DAUGHTERS face on that of a porn actor and some think its not that big a deal, or just because there is no law for it its not that bad???

are you F-ing kidding me?

This is sick, he clearly has sexual desires about young girls, and his own daughter, what kind of sick man does that? I'll tell you, its a peodophile that who.

Defending this scumbag and saying things like, well when you were 13 didn't you jerk of to class mate is not even in the same league.

the reaction to this article from a small minority on ATS has sickened me to the same degree as the man that did this to his own child

posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 05:46 PM
you people are walking a fine line of pornograhy and kiddie porn

and kiddie porn is illegal for a reason and it does not matter if its computer generated or not.

the body of and adult and the face of a child.

its sick on so many levels.

if you condone those actions then you are no better than those pedophiles.

edit to add: reading through this thread you know who to keep your kids away from.
edit on 9-6-2011 by neo96 because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 05:50 PM

Originally posted by StealthyKat
reply to post by g146541

After a while, the thinking about it is not enough. and they eventually act it out.

Not true at all.

For a pedophile, abstinence in the only option. If you take away the devices that keep them in abstinence by the same sentence as doing the actual deed, then why wouldn't they just rape rape rape? Your punishment defeats your premise.

I'm not defending the man, if he tried to take pictures of his daughter naked then he should be incarcerated.

I'm just saying that the acts of photoshopping faces onto naked bodies should not be criminal, regardless of the age of the face; that's just pushing that border that makes them really offend.

If we want them to be abstinent, then we should allow them to be abstinent, not push them.

posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 05:54 PM
reply to post by thisguyrighthere

from what i rember from my criminal justice classes bathtub pics and whatnot while not exactly liked by authrotys (lol or us poor kids who get embarssed later on in a non bad way) are ok.its if they have any kind of like sexual pose costume or like creepy stuff i dont realy wanan try to rember but it has to look shady not innoceent but some parents have gotten in trouble at least initially for bathtub picks but its ususaly over reacting film devlopers(wallgreens etc)

posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 05:55 PM
reply to post by thedarktower

I second that! I am just sick of hearing the pathetic excuses for this kind of garbage.

new topics

top topics

<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in