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

page: 3
64
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 01:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Creep Thumper
People shouldn't be taking naked photos of their kids. It's weird.

What is the purpose? A picture with their clothes on isn't good enough?


It's kinda like the classic on the pony pics many parents get taken.......nothing cuter then a naked babies little butt ! Some of my favorite pics of my daughter are bathtime pics......




posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 01:31 PM
link   


A Maricopa County Superior Court judge ruled that the photographs were not, in fact, pornographic, and a medical exam revealed no signs of sexual abuse. The girls were returned to their parents.


what do you want ?

you want the parents jailed, thats it ?

i dont understand you point of view, honestly.



posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 01:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Char-Lee

The sad thing to me, is a caring person and their boss who gained nothing but tried to protect kids will never try again.


Is much of the problem not that nowadays a climate of fear and distrust has been promoted by child protection agencies, feminists and the media to look upon any man as a likely pedophile?



posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 01:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Evil_Santa
 



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.

what i find most ludicrous is that the simple matter of determining whether family photos were pedophilia or not cost $75,000 for legal representation.

as for the legal fees, i'm sure a lawyer quickly took the case (seeing it as a slam dunk for easy cash) and asked for a small percent up front, knowing they would be reimbursed for the full cost when they sued.

i would definitely go for several million, they almost lost their three children for crying out loud! not to mention the young kids being sent away for a month, who knows what they were asked/told/"reeducated" about during that time.

it would be wise to not only go after walmart, but the agencies that made the call to take the children away. they are the bigger issue here. the fact that the parents chose to develop the pictures at walmart publicly strongly suggests that they aren't pedophiles. i've met several child services employees, and i've found them to have very twisted world views. "let's damage the children for their own good" about sums it up. *rage*



posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 01:33 PM
link   
edit on 3/9/2013 by Creep Thumper because: Oops. Thinking out loud.



posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 01:35 PM
link   
This story is from 2009

Can't see why you bring it up even...clearly the tiny bit of "trauma' involved was more then paid for by the poor workers store.


Are bathtime photos child pornography? 7:00 am September 21, 2009, by Theresa Walsh Giarrusso A couple in Arizona had their three children taken away from them for taking partially nude bathtime photos of their kids. The couple was never charged with any crime and did get their children back. They are now suing the state and the Walmart that turned their photos over to the police.



“Neither parent was charged with sexual abuse and they regained custody of their children, but the Demarees say the incident inflicted lasting harm.”



posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 01:36 PM
link   
take a picture of your kids at bathtime : you're a paedo
watch your kids on the beach : you're a paedo
Give little soldiers to your kids : you're an uncaring parent and should be labeled a terrorist

ok, i think i found the problem.

Kids are the problem.



posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 01:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by AnonyWarp



A Maricopa County Superior Court judge ruled that the photographs were not, in fact, pornographic, and a medical exam revealed no signs of sexual abuse. The girls were returned to their parents.


what do you want ?

you want the parents jailed, thats it ?

i dont understand you point of view, honestly.



They went through the proper process, the children were protected, the parents were found not to be abusing...that should be what everyone wants.



posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 01:38 PM
link   

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!


well you certainly feel superior don't you. My sister had a genius IQ and works for Walmart. You know how many millions you just insulted. I once worked there when I was young and was glad of the job. Insult away!


+1 more 
posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 01:38 PM
link   


Originally posted by Char-Lee

The sad thing to me, is a caring person and their boss who gained nothing but tried to protect kids will never try again.

right. because a pedophile is going to develop illegal nude photos at walmart instead of just using a digital camera and printer.



posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 01:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Char-Lee

Originally posted by AnonyWarp



A Maricopa County Superior Court judge ruled that the photographs were not, in fact, pornographic, and a medical exam revealed no signs of sexual abuse. The girls were returned to their parents.


what do you want ?

you want the parents jailed, thats it ?

i dont understand you point of view, honestly.



They went through the proper process, the children were protected, the parents were found not to be abusing...that should be what everyone wants.


No! It should never cost a family $75,000 just to prove their innocence! That is not how it is supposed to work!



posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 01:39 PM
link   
Don't take naked pictures of your kids and you won't have a problem.



posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 01:40 PM
link   
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.



posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 01:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Char-Lee
This story is from 2009

Can't see why you bring it up even...clearly the tiny bit of "trauma' involved was more then paid for by the poor workers store.


If you had read the story (dated March 9th 2013 in the 2 newspapers) you would have seen that the kids were seized in 2008 but the court case for damages is now reaching its final stages.

The Demarees appealed to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, and on March 6 the court held a hearing before three judges. It’s unknown when the appeals court will rule on the case against the city and Walmart.

ABC News



posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 01:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Char-Lee
 


People seem to forget that we all have to start somewhere and that there a lot of intelligent people working these kinds of jobs to support their families.

But they're "schmucks" to most people.



posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 01:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Creep Thumper

Don't take naked pictures of your kids and you won't have a problem.


Not seeing pedophilia where it doesn't exist and not treating parents as guilty until proven innocent would solve this problem too.


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



posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 01:48 PM
link   


Don't take naked pictures of your kids and you won't have a problem.


Dont use any device able to take pictures and you won't have a problem

Dont use any device able to cause harm and you won't have a problem

Dont..

But instead, report anything to the police, just to make sure, you can never know.

Preenptive justice, guilty until proven innocent, right ?
edit on 9-3-2013 by AnonyWarp because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 01:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by ollncasino

Originally posted by Char-Lee

The sad thing to me, is a caring person and their boss who gained nothing but tried to protect kids will never try again.


Is much of the problem not that nowadays a climate of fear and distrust has been promoted by child protection agencies, feminists and the media to look upon any man as a likely pedophile?

About one in 10 kids!


Myth: Child sexual abuse is a rare experience. Fact: Child sexual abuse is not rare. Retrospective research indicates that as many as 1 out of 4 girls and 1 out of 6 boys will experience some form of sexual abuse before the age of 18. 1 However, because child sexual abuse is by its very nature secretive, many of these cases are never reported. Myth: A child is most likely to be sexually abused by a stranger. Fact: Children are most often sexually abused by someone they know and trust. Approximately three quarters of reported cases of child sexual abuse are committed by family members or other individuals who are considered part of the victim’s “circle of trust.”2



Non-touching behaviors can include voyeurism (trying to look at a child’s naked body), exhibitionism, or exposing the child to pornography. A


www.nctsn.org...









posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 01:50 PM
link   
Why are people taking naked pictures of their children?



posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 01:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Char-Lee
 


the parents are proven innocents, it wasnt voyeurism, and the kids werent abused physicaly.

You are speculating.

To prevent potential voyeurism, we should all wear blindfold.
edit on 9-3-2013 by AnonyWarp because: (no reason given)






top topics



 
64
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join