Parents lose custody of children for a month after innocent bathtime photos developed at Walmart

page: 1
64
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
+24 more 
posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 12:20 PM
link   
An Arizona couple are suing Walmart after they developed their vacation snaps & wrongly decided that some were of a pedophilic nature and reported them to the police. The couple lost custody of their 3 daughters for a month and their names went on a central sex offenders.


A Walmart employee, unhappy over the content of several bath time pictures, contacted bosses with concerns that they may have been images of child pornography.

Instead of receiving a batch of happy memories of a fun family outing, the couple were reported to the police and their children were placed into the care of the Arizona Child Protective Services Agency.

It was a month before the girls were returned to their parents, after a Maricopa County Superior Court judge ruled the photographs were in fact harmless and a medical exam revealed no signs of sexual abuse.

Daily Mail


The story is also reported here ABC News

The photos were simple childhood nudity taken on holiday. In particular a number were bath time photos and three were of the girls lying on a towel naked with their arms around each other. The Walmart employees decided that these were pornographic in some sense.

The couple are suing Walmart for damages and to recover $75,000 in legal fees they incurred defending themselves.



Apparently you can't take pictures of your own children in the bath anymore without running the danger of Child Protection Services seizing your kids and putting your name on a sex offenders register.

edit on 9-3-2013 by ollncasino because: (no reason given)



+13 more 
posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 12:26 PM
link   
They put them on a sex offender list and all the people want is 75 large. If I was them I would be taking Walmart for everything. Invasion of privacy for one. I think it is none of walmarts concern what photos are of when they are devolved any much as they need to know if my toilette paper from them rolls over or under the roll next to my crapper. What happened to innocent until proven guilty. Sounds to me that they tried to throw the book at these loving parents but gots burnt. I would take walmart for all I could.



posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 12:32 PM
link   
They are only suing for 75k? This is Wal-Mart, they shouldn't be so nice, I would sue them for zillions of dollars. This is just another symptom of society completely losing it's collective mind. I am just trying to imagine these wannabe heroes working at Wal-Mart actually thinking this whole thing out, using some sort of warped, deluded reasoning that gave them the conclusion they came to; that they were witnessing child pornography.

I've heard similar stories like this, one where a father was watching his kids swim in a lake. He was reported and approached by the lifeguard and they were accusing him of being a pedophile and peeping little kids. The lifeguard eventually realized he was in the wrong and they went on their way, not before completely infuriating the father.

I always keep hoping that one day, this insanity will end. I am not so sure I will see that day come.


+10 more 
posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 12:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by marbles87

They put them on a sex offender list and all the people want is 75 large. If I was them I would be taking Walmart for everything.


What is wrong and deeply worrying is that parent are presumed guilty until proven innocent.

Their 3 daughter were seized and they were put on a sex offenders register on the basis of bath time snaps. They then had to spend $75,000 getting their daughters back and clearing their name.

Walmart is to blame but so is the Child Protection agency that seized the girls on the basis of bath time snaps. Deeply worrying.

edit on 9-3-2013 by ollncasino because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 12:38 PM
link   
reply to post by ollncasino
 
I guess Walmart would consider me a hardened criminal as I have cute bathtub pics of both of my kids when they were little as well as of my grandkid. Heck, you better add my mother to the criminal list too as she has bathtub pics of me and my sister. It's a good thing my granny has passed on, or Walmart would have to add her to the list as well.....


+14 more 
posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 12:38 PM
link   
What would have been the outcome for the parents who don't have $75,000 handy to pay legal fees?

Totally disgusting, and those walmart employees should be fired. They've clearly shown they lack the understanding required to distinguish between child porn and family photography.



posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 12:43 PM
link   
reply to post by ollncasino
 

I have heard from a friend of mine that there are some sites which expose children and they make tons of money by selling the pictures and movies to their clients!...You cant blame people to be a little suspicious of nude kiddy pictures.


+11 more 
posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 12:43 PM
link   
reply to post by ollncasino
 





It was a month before the girls were returned to their parents, after a Maricopa County Superior Court judge ruled the photographs were in fact harmless and a medical exam revealed no signs of sexual abuse.


Unbelievable! The state intruded and molested the children to be sure they were not molested.



posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 12:46 PM
link   
Just when you think you finally seen it all in another thread, then you get this. What flipping planet does someone come from that doesn't know about these types of family photos? We can assume the wal-mart worker was of suspect IQ, that goes without saying, but law enforcement actual carrying out medical exams for abuse? And then putting them on the registry?

All involved should be sued to hell in back, then sued again for ruining our country with this endless insanity.


+6 more 
posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 12:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by shapur
reply to post by ollncasino
 

I have heard from a friend of mine that there are some sites which expose children and they make tons of money by selling the pictures and movies to their clients!...You cant blame people to be a little suspicious of nude kiddy pictures.


You need to shut your mouth.
This incident went far beyond a "little" suspicion.

Maybe if these state authorities had done a little investigating before traumatizing these kids i could understand your argument, but as it stands...forget it, you obviously dont understand what your defending...



posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 12:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by ollncasino
An Arizona couple are suing Walmart after they developed their vacation snaps & wrongly decided that some were of a pedophilic nature and reported them to the police. The couple lost custody of their 3 daughters for a month and their names went on a central sex offenders.


A Walmart employee, unhappy over the content of several bath time pictures, contacted bosses with concerns that they may have been images of child pornography.

Instead of receiving a batch of happy memories of a fun family outing, the couple were reported to the police and their children were placed into the care of the Arizona Child Protective Services Agency.

It was a month before the girls were returned to their parents, after a Maricopa County Superior Court judge ruled the photographs were in fact harmless and a medical exam revealed no signs of sexual abuse.

Daily Mail


The story is also reported here ABC News

The photos were simple childhood nudity taken on holiday. In particular a number were bath time photos and three were of the girls lying on a towel naked with their arms around each other. The Walmart employees decided that these were pornographic in some sense.

The couple are suing Walmart for damages and to recover $75,000 in legal fees they incurred defending themselves.



Apparently you can't take pictures of your own children in the bath anymore without running the danger of Child Protection Services seizing your kids and putting your name on a sex offenders register.

edit on 9-3-2013 by ollncasino because: (no reason given)



You know there are a lot of strange people in the world, but I really doubt the photos we are shown are the ones that worried Wal-Mart employees. Surely the photo person asked the supervisor and more then one person was concerned for the children.

I have bath time photo pf my girl at 3 and her little brother, but I know that now days so many people are greedy enough to sell pictures of their little ones for money. it is almost epidemic and sadly they sometimes become more and more involved in the porn until they lose all perspective of hurting their kids.

I would rather people start protecting and nipping in the bud the abuse going on in one out of 10 home in some counties.

Yes it is bad that the kids were taken away and checked for physical abuse and I would hope for questioning about how often these photos were taken...no I do not for a moment believe that bath pictures in towels with sisters and Dad were the cause.
edit on 9-3-2013 by Char-Lee because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 12:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by RadicalRebel

Originally posted by shapur
reply to post by ollncasino
 

I have heard from a friend of mine that there are some sites which expose children and they make tons of money by selling the pictures and movies to their clients!...You cant blame people to be a little suspicious of nude kiddy pictures.


You need to shut your mouth.
This incident went far beyond a "little" suspicion.

Maybe if these state authorities had done a little investigating before traumatizing these kids i could understand your argument, but as it stands...forget it, you obviously dont understand what your defending...


You need to realize many people here don't have your opinions and can speak as they please and you have NO right to tell people to "shut their mouth"!



posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 12:57 PM
link   
Only $75k?

Were I one of the parents, Walmart would be looking at MUCH much more in damages.

Stuff like this should start at $1 Million.

Wally world can then settle out of court for half that, the lawyers get their 30% of that, and then the tax man, and then, hmm, what's left over?

The whole thing is utterly appalling.

Walmart should also buy this couple the most expensive Professional grade DIGITAL camera and a photo quality color laser printer with a lifetime supply of photo paper and color toner so they never ever have to go to a photo processing place ever again.

Sheesh.



posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 12:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by ollncasino

Originally posted by marbles87

They put them on a sex offender list and all the people want is 75 large. If I was them I would be taking Walmart for everything.


What is wrong and deeply worrying is that parent are presumed guilty until proven innocent.

Their 3 daughter were seized and they were put on a sex offenders register on the basis of bath time snaps. They then had to spend $75,000 getting their daughters back and clearing their name.

Walmart is to blame but so is the Child Protection agency that seized the girls on the basis of bath time snaps. Deeply worrying.

edit on 9-3-2013 by ollncasino because: (no reason given)


You don't assume anything... you protect the kids. Have you seen the evidence.

The worker was "shocked" do you really think ANYONE is easily shocked now days?
edit on 9-3-2013 by Char-Lee because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 01:01 PM
link   
People shouldn't be taking naked pictures of their children in the first place.


+37 more 
posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 01:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Char-Lee

You don't assume anything... you protect the kids. Have you seen the evidence.


They didn't protect the kids. They traumatized the kids and subjected them to a genital examination.

The kids didn't need protecting from the parents - they needed protected from the Child Protection agency.



posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 01:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wifibrains
reply to post by ollncasino
 





It was a month before the girls were returned to their parents, after a Maricopa County Superior Court judge ruled the photographs were in fact harmless and a medical exam revealed no signs of sexual abuse.


Unbelievable! The state intruded and molested the children to be sure they were not molested.


You know there is a major wave of crime involving kids and they don't have to be molested for it to be happening.

In this day I would think parents would be smart enough not to take nude photos with their little ones since there is such a disgusting appetite for those pictures by the depraved who are very willing to pay just to view them.

Personally I would feel the horror of people thinking I did something like sell pictures of my kids but i would be glad someone gives a darn about the kids too. An employee would not set off an alarm if the pictures were as sweet and as the article shows. imo



posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 01:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Char-Lee

You don't assume anything... you protect the kids. Have you seen the evidence.


No, and neither have you. You don't blindly "protect the kids" based on your point of view. What about the point of view of the children? You do realize that these children were ripped from their family correct? How in gods name is traumatizing these children by removing them from their parents home in any way "protecting the kids" when there was nothing wrong done in the first place?

People that immediately assume the worst and defend their position to death make me sick. What happened to properly investigating a situation before acting? I guess many are right that here in Amerika you are now guilty until proven innocent. Hope that the next family is as well off as this one or they might just permanently lose their children because of some schmucks assumptions.



posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 01:10 PM
link   


You don't assume anything... you protect the kids.


In order to protect the kids, lets now ban all devices able to capture / record an image.



posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 01:12 PM
link   
I like how the other guy is automatically a "schmuck". If WM had done nothing and the parents turned out to be pervs the public would still be screaming for their heads.



new topics
 
64
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join