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

It makes me laugh when Americans talk about their fear of Sharia law or strict interpretations of The Bible when applied to law as they claim these are documents that are "hundreds of years out of date" and then put their entire legal system on the basis of a single document (the Constitution) that is also "hundreds of years out of date", despite several updates over the years.

To have a legal system based on a single document over 200 years old is assinine, even in civilized society.

What the man's punishment in this case should be is that he NEVER will be allowed near his child again. It is also likely that if any woman has any other children with him, the family courts will not be inclined towards giving him any access.

So he'd better enjoy his photo. He's not likely to ever get another, not now, not when she's got children of her own, not of his grandchildren. I hope that photo really does it for him.

He won his photo - and lost all his humanity. Good trade.

Click here for more information.

Sex is a tough issue to deal with, particularly by the judicial authorities. Their's is such a blunt instrument.

It seems clear to me that the man in the story linked to by the OP, was on a journey designed to take him to the inner reaches of his daughter's panties. It's a good thing that she told her mother what was going on and that the mother acted on it. The drugs and the request to pose nude, plus the girl's age add up to serious potential trouble. The law, I believe was right to step into that situation.

The porno head photo transplants, in and of themselves, seem less serious to me, although I know there are people who believe that sort of thing is just the thin edge of the wedge. I don't believe that is always the case, but considering the other circumstances, it might well be, in this particular case.

I'm very leery of the creation of a "thought crime" category in the criminal code. To me that would be the thin edge of a different sort of wedge, that of undue interference by the state into the private lives of citizens.

reply to post by Bee2010


This was the most disgusting post in this whole thread. The vile hatred and anger of some people in this thread who want to try to prove how morally superior they are is really ironic.

First off, no one here "supported" the fathers actions or pedophilia, show me one post that does. The point was simply made that if he broke no laws by putting his daughters face photo on top of an ADULT female body then he should not be sent to prison FOR THAT PARTICULAR ISSUE (I don't know what other things he did or whether they were a crime, but the OP implied the photo was what deserved a jail sentence and titled his thread around it, thus that is whats up for debate). Thats all people are argueing, not that they "agree" or "support" his actions or pedophilia or are pedophiles themselves like you so stupidly allege. Its good that people stepped in and intervened in the situation though and obviously, he should probably be served a restraining order preventing him from being near his daughter, but throwing him in jail for 10 years for essentially a thought crime is the type of tyranny that I hear the same people on these forums crying out against. If anything, the man needs therapy and help, not to be sent to prison where he'll no doubt become a real criminal due to the harsh life there.

No matter how stupid or perverted their action was, if its not a crime they shouldn't be sent to prison. Whether or not the photoshop should be a crime is a completely different debate, but the fact is that it was not a crime when he did it. If cases like this occur where he does get sent to jail then it sets a terrible precedent where by any judge can throw people in prison based on their own personal opinions/moral/religious views rather than the law and pretty soon youd might find yourself in jail due to a "morally superior" judge for something like idk... slandering a bunch of people you dont know on the internet?

reply to post by darkest4


Thats your opinion, I have mine.

Im not shocked by the sentiments from some of the posters here... just as I wasnt shocked they claimed theyd "tap that" concerning the pic and video of the underdeveloped of age girl who in all outward appearance was a child of maybe 12 in a thread weeks ago. What attracts some men to women who are by all outward appearances children.. who knows. What makes some pretend they cant control themselves and cant manage to not screw someone unless they are sure of the age of the person.. or mental status.. or health.. etc? WHo knows.. other than excuses for their own desires or complete disregard for other human beings ....and the inability to even feel accountable for their own actions by even themselves.. if not the law. You CAN control yourselves.. we are not savages.. well, some of us arent. What makes some think just because its not "illegal" its free game or acceptable actions with a child... who knows. But they should be known for who and what they are.

Obviously the pasting his daughters face on naked bodies of adults wasnt a "crime" that could be punished. It wasnt technically illegal to do such a ridiculous and sick thing.. but its sick nonetheless. To then add the drugs and trying to get her to pose nude just adds to the body of evidence stacking up against this "father" concerning his true intent. It may not be illlegal, but it should not be condoned nor explained away. This was an obvious child who he knew the age of... so those arguments are pretty weak. He also knew this was his daughter.. regardless of his nonexistent relationship with her previously.. yet another weak argument. A "thought crime" was never mentioned other than those who dont want to be judged by their own thoughts. There was never any argument about punishing or judging him for what he thought.. it was due to what he DID.

What do we do with untrustworthy and dangerous individuals like this? We prosecute them for what they did that actually broke a law, as is being done.. and we shun them. We prevent the opportunity for this person to visit this kind of violation on any other children.. his own or others. Regardless of what some here try to justify, pasting the face of his own child on the body of a naked adult is a violation. It damages a child to know her own father sexualized her for his own gratification. I do not want to kill this man.. I do not want him to be legally prosecuted for anything that did not break a standing law. What I do want is for this man to never have the opportunity to do this.. or worse.. again.

I am not shocked, but sickened by the posters here who have made the people who object to this behavior seem to be the people who are unreasonable. Accusing things like "thought crimes" which was never mentioned until an apologist mentioned it. ANY person here.. the OP, illusions, etc.. who has ethics and some moral compass knows without doubt that this behavior is abhorrent and frightening.. and should not be condoned or explained away. Due to some of the sad llitlte comments, let me add this.. I am not a xtian. I am not an atheist. But I DO know right from wrong... as do each one of you ..including those who want to cloud the issue or twist it. This is incorrect behavior and I dont care if you believe in some musty old book or in nothing at all. Ethics and morality arent the domain of the religious alone.. and not all of us need a guidebook/bible/koran/whatever to tell us when a certain thing should not be done.


I can see many a poster owning their words here.. as you should.

How is it a thought crime?
He began acting on the fantasy that WAS in his head, did he not?
The 'thought' itself wasn't enough so he began to make EXTERNAL sexually stimulating pictures of his own daughter. Tell me, is it likely he would have stopped there had he not been caught?

reply to post by MiloNickels


Since you don't argue the fact that pedophiles are sociopaths I rest my case.

reply to post by darkest4

How is it a thought crime?
He began acting on the fantasy that WAS in his head, did he not?
The 'thought' itself wasn't enough so he began to make EXTERNAL sexually stimulating pictures of his own daughter. Not to mention having his daughter pose for him etc.
Tell me, is it likely he would have stopped there had he not been caught?

Originally posted by Bee2010
How is it a thought crime?
He began acting on the fantasy that WAS in his head, did he not?
The 'thought' itself wasn't enough so he began to make EXTERNAL sexually stimulating pictures of his own daughter. Tell me, is it likely he would have stopped there had he not been caught?

edit on 10-6-2011 by Bee2010 because: (no reason given)

Its a thought crime because the photoshop is not a crime according to law... thus he can't be given a prison sentence for that particular issue. Whether or not he would have stopped before committing a real pedophile crime is not something a judge is allowed to send someone to prison for according to our bill of rights... Theres people in this thread saying pedophiles should die, theyd teach them a lesson, etc, should they be thrown in prison for attempted murder because their words suggest they might act violiently towards any pedophile they see in the future?

Seems like he broke other laws giving her drugs or something based on what other people are saying (I didn't read about that because thats not what the OP was putting up for arguement in his thread title/post) and deserves whatever proper jail sentence he gets for any laws he did break.

This makes me sick to my gut and mad as hell but..

I SUPPORT THE COURT DECISION

I know a lot of you are going to get mad, but calm down, here me out and logically think about this.



Here is why:

- It is better than him carrying out any fantasies on/with her.

- Where do we draw the line? Daughters, relations, neighbors, neighbors kids? face on porn, cartoons, biki models?
If the court rules against him they must define where the line is and the fact is he has not hurt anyone, he has used his own property to fulfil his own sick fantasy. Tell me what you would do if you were the court and watch how quickly that law is stretched or imposed to

- If you deny him his freedom to do this it is just another step closer to a dictatorship society where we have no rights - unfortunately the price of freedom is some people that shouldnt be free are... The law protects the innocent and the guilty - if it didnt it wouldnt be doing its job.


I don't believe that the real issue is what this man has done, it is that he has these thoughts to start with.

Thoughts are not a crime, and neither is photoshopping someone's head on to someone elses body - and rightly so.

Originally posted by Exuberant1

Originally posted by boondock-saint

In the Bible...

Yeah, let's bring the Bible into this.

Let's quote ancient books and pretend to not be off-topic whilst doing it.

Dude...it's not like he's quoting scripture...It's just a fact....that in Jewish culture you are considered a man or woman at 13.
And not just for the jews...Many other cultures marry their children off at 13 or older.

Here's some food for thought....mother nature, or god, or whatever you personally want to call it has set the human body to be ready for sex at 13/14ish...So why is it not okay for a 13 and 18 yr old to have sex?

And no one can deny that most women are attracted to older males. And vice versa...

Shouldn't this well-known fact illuminate the ridiculousness of the 18+ law? (not sure what the legal term is)

But as for a Dad doing that to his daughter...that is morally and psychologically messed up. The man doesn't need prison, he needs a good psychologist.

reply to post by darkest4


Once again - how is it a thought crime when he actually acted on it? Or is 'thought crime' your buzz phrase for the day?

Originally posted by Bee2010
reply to post by darkest4

 

Once again - how is it a thought crime when he actually acted on it? Or is 'thought crime' your buzz phrase for the day?

Do you not READ?
The action of the photoshop was not an ACTUAL CRIME, it was currently perfectly legal though gross, thus if you put him in prison for it it becomes a "thought crime" in that you are putting him in jail for what he fantasizes about and might do in the future that might actually break a law. Same as if you threw everyone in jail in this thread who suggested pedophiles should all be killed/beat up or that theyd "show them a lesson if they met them", etc for attempted murder or assault.

Originally posted by Bee2010
reply to post by boondock-saint

 

Mods should be alerted to the fact you're probably a 40 year old guy who has sexual fantasies about underage children. You protest too much. Admit it, go on, it's what most of us are thinking about you anyway.

except for the fact that he's gotten more stars than anyone on this thread...so obviously more people agree with him...at least on the underage law...

Men that support the father in this scenario are in my opinion most likely to engage in the fantasy and/or the act in reality. It's called moral relativism,

i'm not sure what he said about relativism so i can't comment on that...except that I don't think that what the father did is okay...

The degree that you protest that this scenario is ok is in direct proportion to how much you yourself do, or want to carry out he same sort of fantasy and/or act.

that's a hefty accusation...maybe I should look through some of your posts and see what you've been protesting...I'm not defending boondock...but you are out of line with your accusations...

Is there a way we can block posts from particular members? I'm not partial to the CobraCommander guy or that Maslo for the exact same morally relative tripe they spew out every chance they get. As far as I'm concerned, this site seems run over by men who want to have sex with children.

..really???

The simple punishment is to name and shame him in his local community as a sick pervert
who puts his kids faces onto porn pictures !

there is no greater punishment than having your friends family and peers know your deep dark secrets !

Originally posted by gentledissident
The thought crime of pedophilia elicits the thought crime of murder. This violent reaction is a good reason to have a separate prison for pedophiles.

I think we'd do better if we realized we are primates.
en.wikipedia.org...

Im guilty of having thoughts of the second reference.

Am I alone?

Good thing the thought police cant charge me either

Seriosuly the rehabilitation success rate for pedos is extremely low almost non existent. Prison does not rehabilitate them either. However it does keep them from violating children. Plus the sentence for these types of people is short.. a slap on the wrist. These pedos emotionally and mentally destroy innocent children and haunt them for life. But when it comes to owning some drugs it is a huge issue? The punishment is severe. As if people who choose putting chemicals in their body is so much worse then what pedophiles do.

Im willing to bet the sympathizers are not parents and has never had to deal with these animals. And people like myself who have kids are outraged with these parasites that prey on kids. A poll would prove interesting. Pedophiles have no place in society what so ever. We are not talking about gays here and rights. I do not care if pedophilia is a mental disorder because everything these days is a mental disorder even being a conspiracy theorist according to some.

You can call it hate speech but Pedophiles should be put down it seems to b the only answer - my two cents

Originally posted by sapien82
The simple punishment is to name and shame him in his local community as a sick pervert
who puts his kids faces onto porn pictures !

there is no greater punishment than having your friends family and peers know your deep dark secrets !

Yes he will be demonised by his community I imagine and rightfully so. He should not be allowed near ANY children what so ever. Or see his child. Reminds me of this scene when the child molester Ronnie gets in to a pool.

reply to post by Partygirl

So, maybe not for child porn...but definitely for incest! He should face charges of not being fit to be the parent of a teenage daughter. How damaging this must be to the kid.