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

Originally posted by incrediblelousminds
why do you keep quoting 'evil' when I never used that word?

It's almost like you have the inability to argue what someone actually wrote.

I use quotes around "evil" because it is an imaginary concept with an arbitrary meaning.

Would you prefer evil instead?

So quick to drop the morality hammer on anyone who doesnt share your narrow view. You're not hugging a Bible in Arkansas are you?

reply to post by thisguyrighthere


so you think it is 'normal' for a 40 year old man to masturbate while thinking of a 13 year old girl?

Originally posted by ldyserenity
IF I was the police I would have certainly interviewed the daughter, and although it may be a tad intrusive, I would also ask her if she didn't mind being examined and a rape kit taken. Just at her say so, if she said no of course, there'd be no reason to force her to, however, I'd suspect he did something to her based on the evidence.

Rape kit?
That is rape in itself.
Now what will you find?
broken hymen, which could be for a million reasons.
Semen sample, very damning evidence and for a god reason.
Stretched out area, which is inconclusive.
Other than other bodily fluids, not much to find there and would most probably be gone and or considered "tampered"
Rape kit is a bad idea, as it serves no one really, and just traumitizes the "victim".
But I would most definately suspect some deviant activity, fortunately suspicion does not always stick in court.

I wonder if he distributed the pictures or just kept them himself.
Wouldn't putting them on the internet still be illegal? Even though they were photoshopped and not technically child porn, if he distributed them as if they were, that should be a crime the same way that getting caught selling baking soda as coc aine is a crime.

reply to post by blupblup

So he was actually trying to get his 13 year old daughter to pose naked.... he was plying her with drugs also, I'm sure this was only heading in one direction.

So he was charged with child pornography after all according to your post? That is wrong. He should have only been charged with giving her drugs and attempting to sexually exploit her, not child pornography. And I don't see why it would be so hard to get nude photos of his own daughter anyway.

People really need to read the article....


The guy wasn't just arrested and imprisoned for masturbating over edited images of his daughters face...


He was arrested and imprisoned for

Plying her with illegal drugs and asking her to strip to her underwear so he could photograph her

You cannot defend this guys actions....

Just saying "Well he should be free to beat off to what he wants" doesn't cut it.... he was the girls DAD.... he gave her drugs and wanted her to strip..... who knows what would have happened had she not told her Mother.

Originally posted by g146541

Originally posted by ldyserenity
IF I was the police I would have certainly interviewed the daughter, and although it may be a tad intrusive, I would also ask her if she didn't mind being examined and a rape kit taken. Just at her say so, if she said no of course, there'd be no reason to force her to, however, I'd suspect he did something to her based on the evidence.

Rape kit?
That is rape in itself.
Now what will you find?
broken hymen, which could be for a million reasons.
Semen sample, very damning evidence and for a god reason.
Stretched out area, which is inconclusive.
Other than other bodily fluids, not much to find there and would most probably be gone and or considered "tampered"
Rape kit is a bad idea, as it serves no one really, and just traumitizes the "victim".
But I would most definately suspect some deviant activity, fortunately suspicion does not always stick in court.

Don't comprehend english do ya, well I know a lot of people on ATS are not of the English as a first language variety I stipulated I would ASK her if she would do a rape kit, only after interviewing her and whether during the interview if they had suspicion that he did in fact rape her. I guess I should have made it more clear?

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.

Hentai. Now what?

Originally posted by incrediblelousminds
reply to post by thisguyrighthere

 

so you think it is 'normal' for a 40 year old man to masturbate while thinking of a 13 year old girl?

There you go again.

Did I say it was "normal"?

If we start judging each other on what the majority believes is "normal" we'll all end up white with desk jobs smoking pipes and going to bed at 8.

You want me to say it? Fine. IT'S NOT NORMAL. It's not normal for you or me or society at large. That is my opinion based on my definition of "normal."

It doesnt make it criminal.

You're likely surrounded by people all day and night who have thoughts in their minds that would have you wanting to string them all up or crucify them. So what? Thoughts are thoughts.

Originally posted by incrediblelousminds
right, your 'point of view' that there is nothing wrong with a 40 year old man thinking of a 13 year old girl while he masturbates.

Something just keeps jumping out at me here.

reply to post by thisguyrighthere

If we start judging each other on what the majority believes is "normal" we'll all end up white with desk jobs smoking pipes and going to bed at 8.

AHAHA. I can't stop laughing. That is so classic. oh man...absolutely golden

Originally posted by ChaoticOrder
And I don't see why it would be so hard to get nude photos of his own daughter anyway.

That brings up another issue.

Parents have nude pictures of their kids. Just about every one of us has that kitchen sink bath pic in the photo album somewhere.

Is that criminal?

When does it become sick and criminal?

When somebody walks in on mom or dad fondling themselves while looking at it?
What if a neighbor saw it? Does the neighbor have to be fondling himself there looking at it to make it illegal? What if he fondles himself later while remembering it?

At what point is the SWAT team going to kick the door down and haul the sicko away?

Does the fondling turn that innocent family photo into pornographic material or was it already pornographic material?

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere


It doesnt make it criminal.

Well, that's good, because I never said it was.
It's noteworthy how you have to keep claiming i want to criminalize thought for mentioning my OPINION that those in this very thread who say it normal for a 40 year old man to entertain extended sexual fantasies (masturbation) for a 13 year old girl.

reply to post by thisguyrighthere


I believe the difference is that child porn has to be sexual in nature, not even necessarily nude. Nude family photos of children are thus not child porn.

Originally posted by Illusionsaregrander

Originally posted by boondock-saint

A crime is a crime no matter the age
which is why you see 12 yr olds being
tried in court as adults when facing murder
charges.

Again, bullsnip. The reason you see children of 12 being tried as adults is because America is rapidly becoming an Idiocracy full of blood thristy morons who want children treated like adults for their own sick reasons, certainly not because the science justifies it, or the law requires it. We are overturning good law and precedent TO punish children as adults to satisfy these morons.

Children are not supposed to be held to adult standards because their brains have not finished developing yet and its ridiculous to hold them to the same standards.

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

Not just America. There appears to be global elitist conspiracy to sexualise childhood. The apparent infanticisation (sp?) of women feeds this agenda.

reply to post by Partygirl


While I agree with the ruling from a legal point of view (said the lawyer), what a sick motherf****r.

Originally posted by The_Phantom
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)

Hate to burst your bubble her but there is a story in the old testament regarding two sister who are basically a bit horny and a bit broody but there are no men around so they get their father drunk and rape him to concieve.

reply to post by blupblup


You say, "Playing her with illegal drugs and asking her to strip to her underwear so he could photograph her".

The playing with is gonna be hard to "prove".
Drugs, if this is the case then a drug test should be performed, amiright?
If results find trace drugs then they can attempt to tie the drugs to the parent.
If there were pics taken in the underwear, that in itself would be damning, and they would have not worried about photoshopped pics, something in there makes me question the authorities.

reply to post by ldyserenity


C'mon no need to bite at me, I was simply pointing out that rape kit is rape in itself, ask anyone who has ever been examined,
But to put this to a child with little or no hope of getting "evidence" would be fruitless at best and most probably damaging to the child.