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

Originally posted by SpaDe_

Originally posted by Char-Lee
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

Really? You do realize this world is full of functional retards right? Just look at the daily headlines for christ sake! Do you not recall a recent headline when a school went on lockdown because of the fresh prince of bel air's theme song? Yeah keep up the faith in people like that!

Have you ever even been in a Wal-mart? I don't trust half the employees there to know how to properly stock a shelf let alone make a judgement call such as this!

I agree, I think the problem is WM employees (and other morons) who live in a fantasy world and think they are on an episode of CSI: Miami so they try to turn everything into a crime in order to feel important.

The lack of privacy in the world today really bothers me and if it doesnt bother you you are probably part of the problem or one of the functioning retards mentioned above.

I dont want to live in a "nanny state" where everything we do is monitored and scrutinized by people who have no right to be meddling.

Why should anybody give up their right to privacy in the name of public safety.

reply to post by violet

Originally posted by violet
There are Pervs out there that get off on photos like these if they're posted online,

so WHAT?

There are perverts out there that get off on ANYTHING. you name it. Does that mean that we should NOT take photos of everything that excites a perv?????

Gimme a break, this is pathetic.

If a perv gets off on a picture of my "hand" maybe I should stop posting pictures of my "hand"? what about my "leg"? "my toes"? an "orange"?

What a world we live in.

I just wanted to point out, since many people on the front page are having difficulties with the amount being sued for, that the amount is NOT "Only $75k?". It is X+75k, X being the damage value that will be picked, and 75k being the legal fee.

The couple are suing Walmart for damages and to recover $75,000

"And"... not "to".

Basic reading comprehension

Originally posted by Chipkin9
Don't know if anyone's said this yet, but if I lived in America (And outraged by this as most of you are) I would boycott Walmart altogether.

That would teach them.

The damage done by the boycott would greatly outweigh the cost of the £75k fine imposed (If that even happens).

Unfortunately, not enough people will here about this, and not enough people will care. They'll just carry on being sheep and won't mind that corporations can snoop on their business and and make false accusations against them, that could potentially land them in prison.

Very outraged by this story

Done and done. I've been boycotting Walmart for a long time now. I dont care if it's the cheapest place to buy many consumer goods. Chances are that the stuff is cheap because it is made in China and probably junk anyway or it's hazardous to your health.

Also, I would much rather support local businesses anyway because it's better for the economy.

Originally posted by Mystery_Lady

Originally posted by AnonyWarp
reply to post by Char-Lee

 

They went through the proper process, the children were protected

its a bit different.

The parents lost custody for a month and registered as sex offender BEFORE being judged INNOCENTS.

Unfortunately with child services, that is the proper procedure. Also, if any abuse happens in your family and you don't report it right away, your children will be taken away from you for child neglect. Child neglect basically equals child abuse. Your name will be put on a child abuse register that can be tapped into by employers, and you will not be able to get any job dealing with children. This is not the sex offenders list mind you.

Even if you do report the incident, they still can take away the kids because you failed to protect the kids. If you were their, then the incident should not have happened. If you were not there, then you should have known not to trust and leave the person, whether husband, wife, other retaliative, or babysitter, with the child.

I know there is no law that says mothers have to report their husbands for suspected child abuse like doctors, counselors, and others do. According to a handbook that I happened to obtain from the department of human services, child abuse is defined by any recent act or failure to act. With the failure to act, in many cases means failure to report even though it doesn't out right say so, you will be listed as perpetrator along with the person who allegedly abused the child.

Many mothers who haven't reported their spouse, boyfriend, and etc for what ever reason are taken totally by surprise when CYS comes in, lists them as a perpetrator, and removes their children. Sometimes there was a reason to report, and many other times there was no reason except someone hated them or have strict weird ideas of what is actually child abuse.

I don't blame parents now a days when they don't let their kids out to play like they use to. You never know if a CYS worker lives near you, or who would think it is child neglect/abuse if you even let your 13 year old walk alone down the street to their bus stop or to a friends house.

Children are more likely to be molested in the custody of child protection services then by their own parents.

www.parentalrights.org...

newsok.com...

www.angelfire.com...

Originally posted by Creep Thumper
You want to remember your children naked?

What? That is the most ridiculous thing to say...they are born naked and yes, it's the most precious memory most parents have of their children, newborn baby in their arms...

Just a couple of peripheral points. It does look like a clear over-reaction, and it's obvious what the dominant sentiment is on this forum about what happened. But....

I have a friend who works as a social worker for DSHS (Department of Social and Health Services) as a caseworker who deals with this stuff. It's a thankless job because you are damned if you do and damned if you don't. If you DO remove children from an apparently perilous situation everyone hates you, threatens to sue you, and, once in awhile, threatens bodily harm. If you DO NOT remove children from an apparently perilous situation everyone hates you, threatens to sue you, and, once in awhile, threatens bodily harm. You are between a rock and a hard place. One day I asked my friend how her day went. She said,

"Oh, just another day of fathers screwing their daughters and me being blamed for it."

In other words, it's a thankless job and I doubt many here could stomach it for very long.

Secondly, here we have parents who went to WalMart (1) to develop pictures (2) of their naked kids (3). How many degrees of cluelessness do you need before someone questions your sanity? I would think in this day and age of perversion pictures of naked kids, no matter how "innocent," are simply a No-No. It's not just WalMart and not just DSHS, but the entire community. Look at the reaction to any newspaper article that reports someone is accused of any sort of child molestation, even if it's an 18 year old with a 17 year old. EVERYONE wants to kill the guy. It's so bad that in my community the local rag, er, newspaper, has resorted to disabling comments on those stories. Whomever it is is guilty until proven innocent, and even if innocent, their reputation is left in tatters to the point that they may as well move away. It's the community that has put the pressure on DSHS to "do something" to the point that the "authorities" over-react. Their bosses are tired of $30 million suits against the agency that they keep losing.

And in terms of over-reacting, just look on this thread. NO ONE here has actually seen the pics, but you are more than willing to pass judgement without having a clue as to what the actual circumstances were. Of course WalMart sets your teeth on edge to begin with, so you're already negative. What if it had been the still independent Mom & Pop corner drugstore? What if the caseworker was my friend above, who had just dealt with a week's worth of demented fathers and had been told to "err on the side of caution" or lose her job? The point is that you don't know hardly anything about this case.

Part of being a good parent is being aware of this sort of stuff. If you are at all savvy you do not put your family at risk, and that's what these parents did. I'm not saying it's their "fault," but a whole lot of people here would never have done something like that in the first place. If you must have pics of your sweet naked innocents, there is such a thing as digital photography. That's what real perverts use. Has no one told these people that film is dead?

Sad and disgusting that this happened.

What's worse are the people in this thread defending it.

I would sue WM, the PD, and CPS for hundreds of millions were I in this situation.

This is what you get when society, via government and media manipulation of public emotion (something they are both masters of), is overly-cautious, and overly-reactive about ANY GIVEN TOPIC. We don't have anyone to blame but ourselves. This is exactly how the country as a whole has been allowed (key) to evolve into IMO since September 11th 2001. I'm not sure why the authorities were called by regular employees (?) and I also don't understand some (not all) of the unbridled rage at these individuals instead of the policies of the store - it seems to be, as said, unbridled rage - justified or not.

You know what I find the most entertaining about my skim through this thread. You have the people who say Walmart did wrong and others who say they didn't.

What should be discussed IMO is why in this day and age with child pornography being a huge problem are parents taking these innocent pictures to Walmart to be developed in the first place. I'm sure Walmart doesn't do extensive background checks on people they hire.

What if the person who was tasked with developing these pictures was in fact a pedophile and made copies for their own sick twisted fantasies? I think if anything, the parents can be thankful that the person showed some concern for the content of the pictures. The alternative is a scary thought.

Originally posted by schuyler
Just a couple of peripheral points. It does look like a clear over-reaction, and it's obvious what the dominant sentiment is on this forum about what happened. But....

I have a friend who works as a social worker for DSHS (Department of Social and Health Services) as a caseworker who deals with this stuff. It's a thankless job because you are damned if you do and damned if you don't. If you DO remove children from an apparently perilous situation everyone hates you, threatens to sue you, and, once in awhile, threatens bodily harm. If you DO NOT remove children from an apparently perilous situation everyone hates you, threatens to sue you, and, once in awhile, threatens bodily harm. You are between a rock and a hard place. One day I asked my friend how her day went. She said,

"Oh, just another day of fathers screwing their daughters and me being blamed for it."

In other words, it's a thankless job and I doubt many here could stomach it for very long.

Secondly, here we have parents who went to WalMart (1) to develop pictures (2) of their naked kids (3). How many degrees of cluelessness do you need before someone questions your sanity? I would think in this day and age of perversion pictures of naked kids, no matter how "innocent," are simply a No-No. It's not just WalMart and not just DSHS, but the entire community. Look at the reaction to any newspaper article that reports someone is accused of any sort of child molestation, even if it's an 18 year old with a 17 year old. EVERYONE wants to kill the guy. It's so bad that in my community the local rag, er, newspaper, has resorted to disabling comments on those stories. Whomever it is is guilty until proven innocent, and even if innocent, their reputation is left in tatters to the point that they may as well move away. It's the community that has put the pressure on DSHS to "do something" to the point that the "authorities" over-react. Their bosses are tired of $30 million suits against the agency that they keep losing.

And in terms of over-reacting, just look on this thread. NO ONE here has actually seen the pics, but you are more than willing to pass judgement without having a clue as to what the actual circumstances were. Of course WalMart sets your teeth on edge to begin with, so you're already negative. What if it had been the still independent Mom & Pop corner drugstore? What if the caseworker was my friend above, who had just dealt with a week's worth of demented fathers and had been told to "err on the side of caution" or lose her job? The point is that you don't know hardly anything about this case.

Part of being a good parent is being aware of this sort of stuff. If you are at all savvy you do not put your family at risk, and that's what these parents did. I'm not saying it's their "fault," but a whole lot of people here would never have done something like that in the first place. If you must have pics of your sweet naked innocents, there is such a thing as digital photography. That's what real perverts use. Has no one told these people that film is dead?

The easy answer is to just take pictures of your kids from the waist up during bath-time or whatever in order to save yourself a bunch of hassle. The problem lies within nosey people, who have no business getting involved in other people's lives, trying to be heroes.

I think the parents should sue the WM employee for violating their privacy and maybe people would think twice before meddling in the affairs of others. It's not your job to police society. There is a career field for that already it's called THE POLICE.

Maybe if the govt and the media would stop trying to get involved in people's lives on a constant basis the rest of the population would follow suit.

reply to post by violet
There are perverts that get their jollies from anything and everything these days. I have one perverted neighbor who literally "gets his jollies" from spying on me while I mow the yard. To keep all the perverts at bay should all people- especially children- go about covered in bed sheets "halloween ghost" style? No, because some pervert somewhere would get their jollies from that as well. People should not have to take perverts into consideration when deciding to record their children's activities and sharing them with friends and family.

My mother had a pic of my brother peeing on a tree. Then a few months ago I read an article about a police officer giving a fine to a parent of a child that was outside peeing and not even in the city it was in a rural area. My son was potty trained because we let him pee on a tree outside. Not sure why that helped him, but it did. I've taken lots of innocent bath pics of my kids, and this is so scary to me, because my children are my world. Bath time is even a milestone because when they finally get old enough to bathe without you holding their heads up, it's a big deal. It's just sad to me how intrusive the world has become with parenting. It's almost scary how afraid I am to overstep anything. I don't spank my kids, but shouldn't I be allowed to? We homeschool and for a time, I was scared of the government interfering with that. I will fight to the death for my children though, and I refuse to live in fear. Luckily, Oklahoma is one of the states that have fewer laws regarding homeschooling. We still do state mandatory testing, which I think is a bizarre concept, but my kindergartener tested well above first grade level, and is already making her way into the gifted and talented program. Though, my son, who was diagnosed with adhd by his previous public school teacher, had a hard start in the public school experience, tested average. Well you know what, average is freaking awesome for him! He was roughly two school years behind when we started homeschooling him. It's so unbelievably frustrating that someone can look at some pictures and violate a whole family for whatever reason. There is a HUGE difference in child pornography and innocent bath photos. You can tell the difference, so it would seem like they were just being nosy and who knows maybe the mom or dad rushed the order too fast and they were being malicious with them.

reply to post by doubtit


Child pornography is only a problem when it's time to pass restrictive internet legislation. The person at Walmart was not a pedophile nor did they make copies for their fantasies. No matter how many different situations people conjure up, the facts of this case remain the same. Common sense and a GED would have told the police and CPS to do a little investigating before jumping to conclusions.

All over this thread I see "Only 75K?"

Maybe some people think honor and integrity are more important than Dollars.
Damn few left.

reply to post by IBelieveInAliens

wow! do you often speak to complete strangers in such an authoritarian manner? that sort of prevalent behavior is exactly why i have chosen to be non-confrontational time and again. besides, this was 8 years ago (a fact you could have discovered had you asked some intelligent questions rather than commanding me to take action).

Originally posted by innocenttdreams
reply to post by violet

 

Originally posted by violet
There are Pervs out there that get off on photos like these if they're posted online,

so WHAT?

There are perverts out there that get off on ANYTHING. you name it. Does that mean that we should NOT take photos of everything that excites a perv?????

Gimme a break, this is pathetic.

If a perv gets off on a picture of my "hand" maybe I should stop posting pictures of my "hand"? what about my "leg"? "my toes"? an "orange"?

What a world we live in.

I didn't say parents shouldn't be posting ANY photos of their children online. If you read my entire post I said I haven't seen these pictures in question and that I'm going with the idea that the Walmart employee and the authorities saw something more than that. Or this wouldn't have happened. Somebody who's job is printing off family photos all day long and didn't report any of them, did so with these.

I highly doubt an orange or your hand will stimulate a potential pervert. Don't use sillyness like this to justify your uncivil response to my post

Originally posted by littled16
reply to post by violet

 

There are perverts that get their jollies from anything and everything these days. I have one perverted neighbor who literally "gets his jollies" from spying on me while I mow the yard. To keep all the perverts at bay should all people- especially children- go about covered in bed sheets "halloween ghost" style? No, because some pervert somewhere would get their jollies from that as well. People should not have to take perverts into consideration when deciding to record their children's activities and sharing them with friends and family.

Yes I agree but these days the sharing is not just with friends and family.
Current technology has to be taken into consideration.

I trust you find it ok to take perverts into consideration when sending children off to school on their own? You run through the list of don'ts.
Maybe its just me and a few others that feel we should assess safety precautions with every situation regarding our children? I hope you think of it on Halloween as well, when you say to your child not to let a stranger invite them in.

Again I'm only saying this because these pictures caused a sensation. The parents were investigated for child pedophelia.. Of course the children should not have been taken in the manner they were.

You are all assuming these photos were as innocent as the parents claim them to be. One article said "3 of the photos can't be shown". Why is that?

reply to post by Char-Lee


You know, when was the last time you saw the photos? Let alone when was the last time that you engaged in logical thoughts?

Would someone who was engaging in criminal activities have photos other then naked children on their camera reel? Would someone who was engaging in criminal activities, and has spent the time to already mask their tracks online/seek out underground havens for pedophiles, really use walmart to have film developed. Would they even use non-digital photography? Why would a criminal use their real information when having the film developed?

To be blunt, if someone was engaging in activity that they knew was illegal, then they would have taken steps to prevent being caught doing the illegal activity. Even walmart could have looked at their camera data to see who dropped the film off.

But hey, keep up the "protect the children at any cost" mentality that's swamped our nation. It's to the point that if i saw a child lost at the mall, crying for their mother, I wouldn't help them, because people like these walmart employees are so quick to jump the gun on suspected predatory that even an act of trying to be the good citizen would be misinterpreted by like 30% of the population.

reply to post by marbles87


They are suing for $75, 000 in legal fees PLUS damages. That means they will likely get a lot more if a judge or jury decides they are entitled to an award. You can bet that will be a whole lot of money if punitive damages are awarded. (Which I believe are appropriate in this case.)