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.

 

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

page: 25
39
<< 22  23  24    26  27  28 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 05:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by SevenBeans
It's amazing the number of things that people think about, fantasize about etc. etc. that they would never dream of actually doing in a million years.

The photoshopping was a depiction of fantasy. I expect if we got to see depictions of your phantasies you'd be pretty damn embarassed and not so quick to judge people simply based on such things.


This.

And as far as protecting the daughter -- you people apparently have no concept of what's already going to happen to him. He's already going to lose his family and any contact with his daughter, just from the public knowledge of a single picture on his computer. If he forces the issue to have any kind of contact with his daughter, I'm sure his wife can and will haul him into court, present the evidence, and the court will rule that he is a potential danger and can't have contact, or something along those lines. How do I know this -- because in this country, even well-meaning, good fathers have no rights in our court system. This guy certainly won't have any.




posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 05:35 AM
link   
reply to post by byteshertz
 


He hurt his daughter.



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 05:41 AM
link   
reply to post by MiloNickels
 


Really? You don't see how this could affect her "pursuit of happiness"?



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 05:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by ThousandIslandSunny
reply to post by Heliocentric
 


You cant help child molesters.


Why not?

And we're actually not talking about a child molester, we're talking about a guy who jerked off at a photo.

May the one person in this thread who has never jerked off at a photo throw the first stone!



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 05:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by aero56
Really? You don't see how this could affect her "pursuit of happiness"?


I don't either, please explain...

Someone pasting my head onto a pornographic picture and masturbating to it in the privacy of their own home doesn't effect me at all.



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 05:58 AM
link   
people you gotta think ouside of the box and consider the implication of this news...

since it's in the news it's public... the surrounding who knows the family will be aware of the whole situation...

this is embarassing for the father... but who really cares actually...

true victims are the wife and especially the daughter... she "lost" her father and probably she has to move or at least change school. she can never be sure about her friends. Being 13 means she is not a child anymore, so sexual jokes and even sexual harassment is conceivable,,,

a situation like this is bad if it's done by a stranger... but being done by a father it's a catastrophe...

should he be punished? I don't know... further prosecution means more publicity and wife and girl don't deserve this...

would I like to have my private 5 minutes with him in a dark soundproof room? yeah... would that change a thing? besides making me feel better probably not...

tough situation...



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 06:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by SevenBeans

Originally posted by aero56
Really? You don't see how this could affect her "pursuit of happiness"?


I don't either, please explain...

Someone pasting my head onto a pornographic picture and masturbating to it in the privacy of their own home doesn't effect me at all.



You don't know how the knowledge of what her dad did will hurt her?? I think you might be one bean short of the seven.

But what if the person had a great deal of power over you, lived in the same house and had access to your room while you slept, wake up!



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 06:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by beltemps
should he be punished? I don't know... further prosecution means more publicity and wife and girl don't deserve this...


So we don't prosecute people in order to spare innocent family members from suffering?

The only snag here is, there's nothing to prosecute. No crime has been committed. Whatever people are revolted about happened inside this person's head.
edit on 10-6-2011 by Heliocentric because: so very still, even cherry blossoms are not stirred by the temple bell



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 06:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by Thepreye
You don't know how the knowledge of what her dad did will hurt her?? I think you might be one bean short of the seven.


Good grief...

You understand that many of the comments are referring specifically to the act of portraying the fantasy, and whether that in and of itself harms anyone and should be considered a crime?



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 06:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by SevenBeans

Originally posted by Thepreye
You don't know how the knowledge of what her dad did will hurt her?? I think you might be one bean short of the seven.


Good grief...

You understand that many of the comments are referring specifically to the act of portraying the fantasy, and whether that in and of itself harms anyone and should be considered a crime?


I have an excellent grasp on ethics and morality, thanks, and yes in this case fantasy should be a crime, as this was proven in court and similar laws regarding images and facsimiles have been enacted all over the liberal West, since the advent of the Internet, by experts in jurisprudence shows that my thoughts aren't idiosyncratic in nature.

Psychological harm is often more injurious to an individual than none lethal physical harm, I really don't get why anyone would express sympathy for the devil in open forum.

edit on 10-6-2011 by Thepreye because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 06:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by Heliocentric

Originally posted by ThousandIslandSunny
reply to post by Heliocentric
 


You cant help child molesters.


Why not?

And we're actually not talking about a child molester, we're talking about a guy who jerked off at a photo.

May the one person in this thread who has never jerked off at a photo throw the first stone!


Ofc I have!!! but not one with a pic of my daughters face! its disgusting, and it will probable escalate, the sick freak!!



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 06:48 AM
link   
reply to post by Thepreye
 





Psychological harm is often more injurious to an individual than none lethal physical harm, I really don't get why anyone would express sympathy for the devil in open forum.


But masturbating to these pictures in private does not cause psychological harm to anyone.



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 06:57 AM
link   
reply to post by boondock-saint
 


Are you serious?????? first of all it is normal and a good thing if your thinking of your own girlfriend that way even at 14! this guy is a father so not only is it probably going to go onto him becoming a pedo because he is getting away with this and it will give him a new sense that he is doing nothing wrong but it is in my mind in a way incest i mean thats his daughter not his girlfriend. You cannot justify or say what he is doing is not wrong which is what you are implying! Damn this comment pi$$ed me off nearly as much as the article did.



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 07:02 AM
link   
reply to post by Heliocentric
 


"first stone thrown" I havent. and it wasnt just any photo he put his 13 year old daughters face on it. 13yrs old and his an adult = pedo or soon to be pedo. its his daughter = incest or wishes/soon to be incest. so this wrong indeed, is the law supposed to wait till he has enough of just a face and goes for the real thing and destroys not only some poor kids life but that kids familys life and his familys life as well???



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 07:03 AM
link   
reply to post by SickOfLies
 


Ok first of all, being attracted to a 13 year old isn't even pedophilia, it is Ephebophilia. Looking at pictures doesn't cause this, it caused the making of the pictures. You cannot make laws against crimes that might happen, otherwise might as well just put us all in cells from the time we can walk, we all have the ability to do wrong, should we choose to.

Does watching action movies make anyone more likely to blow stuff up and shoot at people? No, it doesn't. Does playing first person shooters mean we are more likely to go shoot people? No it doesn't. Does reading lolita make anyone more likely to go find a hot adolescent to be with? No. Fantasy is just fantasy, and making them illegal is the dumbest thing I have ever heard. Make more stupid unenforcable victimless crimes. Great idea.
edit on Fri, 10 Jun 2011 07:06:47 -0500 by TKDRL because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 07:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by ChaoticOrder
reply to post by Suspiria
 




That girls *likeness* was not used. Her actual FACE was used and superimposed onto photo's. That is a degrading act performed on an unsuspecting girl.
Then he should have been charged with something closer to that, not child pornography, because it isn't. And most certainly, the guy with Simpsons porn did not have child ornography, because the Simpsons are a fictional family. They don't have a real *likeness*.
not to mention that the simpsons kids are well over legal age by now if they really wanted to stick it to the guy tho he should have been tried for modifying a copyrighted image ( from the porn) etc . atleast they might have had a better chance of that sticking not sure how well the mental abuse case would hold up



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 07:22 AM
link   
reply to post by TKDRL
 


The point is no matter how you twist it, this sicko is wanking over his 13 year old daughter otherwise he would have left the picture how it was. Im finished with this i find it disgusting people are trying to justify this or saying that there is nothing wrong. This guy is a father he is there to protect his daughter and to love her as a father should and that doesnt involve jacking off over her face which is what he did or like i said he would've left the picture how it was. Say what you want but its wrong and one day when he does take it to the next level he will get what he deserves, jail time and alot of blokes showing him first hand just how it feels only this time he'll be on the recieving end. anyway like i said thats all i've got to say.



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 07:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by SickOfLies
The point is no matter how you twist it, this sicko is wanking over his 13 year old daughter otherwise he would have left the picture how it was. Im finished with this i find it disgusting people are trying to justify this or saying that there is nothing wrong.


Most people have disgusting fantasies now and then, it isn't a crime.


Originally posted by SickOfLies
This guy is a father he is there to protect his daughter and to love her as a father should and that doesnt involve jacking off over her face which is what he did or like i said he would've left the picture how it was. Say what you want but its wrong and one day when he does take it to the next level he will get what he deserves, jail time and alot of blokes showing him first hand just how it feels only this time he'll be on the recieving end. anyway like i said thats all i've got to say.


Sounds like you're having a fantasy about this guy getting raped... we better lock you up before you make it happen.



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 07:28 AM
link   
reply to post by SickOfLies
 


As he should, if he does commit a crime in the future. Your appeal to emotion, added to your moral compass argument, and your baseless theory that people should be punished for fantasy because it means they will break a law later is what I have a problem with. If my moral compass were allowed to be law, TV's would be outlawed, I am sure there are many people here that are glad I don't make the laws

edit on Fri, 10 Jun 2011 07:29:22 -0500 by TKDRL because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 10 2011 @ 07:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by SickOfLies
"first stone thrown" I havent. and it wasnt just any photo he put his 13 year old daughters face on it. 13yrs old and his an adult = pedo or soon to be pedo. its his daughter = incest or wishes/soon to be incest. so this wrong indeed, is the law supposed to wait till he has enough of just a face and goes for the real thing and destroys not only some poor kids life but that kids familys life and his familys life as well???


Of course, and lets arrest everyone who plays first person shooters too as someone else mentioned... can't wait until they've had enough of the graphic depiction of violence and they go for the real thing.



new topics

top topics



 
39
<< 22  23  24    26  27  28 >>

log in

join