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.


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

page: 18
<< 15  16  17   >>

log in


posted on Mar, 13 2013 @ 07:16 AM

Originally posted by Char-Lee

Originally posted by redhorse

Originally posted by Char-Lee

Originally posted by ollncasino

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.

Yes well if you has sick parents maybe you would feel differently. Who is going to stop them if they are selling pictures of you think that is a parents right? The persons who saw the photos clearly found them extreme. YOU did not see them!

And neither did YOU.

And yet... In spite of what a judge ruled, you will assume the worst based on...? A Wal-Mart (see something say something mentality) employees over-reaction. Okaaaayyy....

I'll go with the judge. But hey... We all have our baggage I guess. Besides it's more fun to jump up and down all indignant than actually think something through.

I only pray the judge did the right thing and the girls are ok for real.

Most Mothers don't even know when the father is abusing the children, may be innocent to her and not to him. I would not take that chance with my daughters.

Suggesting that mothers do not sexually abuse their own or others children.

You make so much noise here going against the judge who deemed the pictures being of innocent nature shouting that these pictures were not of innocent nature, pictures that were made with the mother present which according to you are to explicit to post anywhere and brought to walmart for development by the mother. But yet you only point to the father , THE MAN as your potential pedo.

Lets asume that you are correct about the pictures for a minute. Reading your responses and who you point to (the father) then if it were up to you those children would still be in the hands of the mother who , reading the case, still has as much potential as the father. If you are right then in all likelyhood they were both into it.

But hey lets lock up the man and pretend the mom is ok just because she is a woman. Nevermind the actual risk that those kids are still in the hands of a pedo (the woman). Hell she might even find another man to "share" her kids with and continue to satisfy her kink or fetish or w/e you want to call it.

she taught Sunday school classes, Huckaby was a trusted member of the community. She would look after other kids for parents

The police questioned her father, Daniel Cantu, who had not seen the little girl for nearly a year. Two men were described as "persons of interest," their vehicles towed and searched, ultimately turning up nothing.

Did a Sunday school teacher with no history of violence, who was a mother herself, really rape and kill this little girl in the church and pack her in a rolling suitcase before driving in her own car, a purple KIA, to dump the body in that pond?

Yep she did

Huckaby was indicted on five counts on August 17 including: kidnapping, murder, lewd or lascivious acts with a child, and rape with a foreign object. The latter two charges qualify as "special circumstances" in the state of California. If convicted, she could face the death penalty.

A mother of a 4 year old girl who was a teacher killed and raped a 8 year old girl with a freakin rolling pin no less.

Most Mothers don't even know when the father is abusing the children, may be innocent to her and not to him. I would not take that chance with my daughters.

Go ahead , dismiss females and take your chances with some woman with a good rep.

posted on Mar, 13 2013 @ 07:45 AM
It must have been terrible for the parents and the kids involved in this fiasco, i can see both sides to this situation and yes, the childrens safety is paramount, that goes without saying, but some people are too just too overzealous and quick to jump to the wrong conclusions.

I can appreciate sometimes innocent family snaps can or may be interpreted as being a little off or odd by some people, especially by those that aren't parents themselves or don't understand everyday normal and innocent family situations, but really...abuse can't be that difficult to differentiate from innocent family snaps can it?

Without being morbidly obvious, an adult would or should be able to tell from a photo if there is sexual abuse evident in a photo surely?

If kids are taken away as a kneejerk reaction because of 'family bathtime' type snaps, then my parents (good, loving, non-abusive parents) and just about all of my peers' parents would have been carted off to jail decades ago.

This should never have gone as far as it did.

posted on Mar, 13 2013 @ 09:38 AM

Originally posted by corsair00
reply to post by SubSea

FINALLY!! Thank you - somebody needed to say it. Let's say it again.

Puritanical attitudes toward the human body are what breeds perverts in the first place.

Let that sink in, Christians...

Haven't read the whole thread yet, so don't know if this was replied to.

I AM a Christian, and when we did summer-camps back in the early 1990s there were kids OPENLY changing together (boys and girls) on the beach. They didn't swim nude, but there was nudity when they got changed and dried afterwards.

It's pedo-paranoia these days, not (totally) religion that caused the employee to flag those photos. Ever seen some church art? Talk about nudity...

posted on Mar, 13 2013 @ 10:01 AM
Suing for only 75,000?!!!! WTF people!!!! Walmart screwed up big time with this one. I'd sue them for 75 million. Make walmart pay for the kids clleges after they removed them in a traumatic experience from their own parents for a month. I'll say it again. F walmart.

posted on Mar, 13 2013 @ 08:14 PM

Originally posted by Creep Thumper
Stunning that only a couple of people here will walk in the victim's shoes, see the situation from another perspective.

These children were "victims," certainly.
Victims of a third-party invasion of privacy.
Victims of management unable to use common sense.
Victims of over-zealous "investigators" afraid to exercise discretion, and eager to exploit their "authority."
Victims of a criminal justice system manipulated by political correctness, and devoid of empathy and a reference to real people and normal behavior.
Victims of a "child protection" sector that is more concerned about job safety than actual threats and harm.
Victims of ignorant bystanders and commenters who are blind to nature, afraid of nudity and see sexuality as inherently perverse and criminal.

Some people (many of whom claim to speak from experience and/or authority) find it easy to overlook that no obkective proof of harm to the children existed or was found by anyone. They overllok the fact that f family was split apart. They overlook that innocent children were forcibly removed from their homes, subjected to sexual invasion, and placed into the custody of strangers.

They overlook that the final judgment found all of the "child safety" "experts" were wrong and acted unlawfully.

You're part of the problem.

No, perverts brandishing the badge of authority are the problem. Self-righteousness is most dangerously embodied in "authorties" who see criminals and perverts where none exist.

To clarify, victims being child victims in thousands of cases.

"Thousands of cases" are 100% irrelevant to any single case; they are supposed to be judged on their own merits; not on "gut instinct," years of "experience" or presupposition and prejudice.

No children were harmed in the taking of these photographs.

edit on 13-3-2013 by jdub297 because: (no reason given)

top topics
<< 15  16  17   >>

log in