59 replies to this topic

[Altzer]

I found this hilarious xD does that make me a bad person?
I mean the guy's repulsive, but man that was clever.

Edited by Altzer, 13 July 2011 - 09:37 AM.

[Maloo]

I found this hilarious xD does that make me a bad person?
I mean the guy's repulsive, but man that was clever.

It kind of does, but he is clever indeed..
Just not in a good way.

[SamTheMan]

Wow, he owned the court system on this one. But I feel like a sex offender wouldn't be smart enough to figure out the whole act as my own attorney = watching my own child porn. That was probably just a plus he found out later.

[Shampoo]

why is him being allowed to watch cp the repulsive part in this? would you be offended if it were a professional lawyer in a suit and tie watching these videos? how does the act of watching cp further harm the children?

[Altzer]

why is him being allowed to watch cp the repulsive part in this? would you be offended if it were a professional lawyer in a suit and tie watching these videos? how does the act of watching cp further harm the children?

Of course, I'd find it disgusting whoever did it! Making and financially supporting cp harms children, but you're right - just watching it from jail doesn't harm them. It's just fucking disturbing.

[Jake]

Wow, he owned the court system on this one. But I feel like a sex offender wouldn't be smart enough to figure out the whole act as my own attorney = watching my own child porn. That was probably just a plus he found out later.

I don't see how intelligence can be determined on someones morality. Dare I show you examples?

why is him being allowed to watch cp the repulsive part in this? would you be offended if it were a professional lawyer in a suit and tie watching these videos? how does the act of watching cp further harm the children?

Actually a huge difference. The lawyer would (hopefully) not be using this evidence for his own personal stress relief which everyone assumes this guy is indeed using it for. I don't agree with it harming the children further but then again I was never molested as a child so I don't agree with you being stubborn saying this would not emotionally hurt them. I'm assuming they will be saved from hearing this information, obviously they would be subjective to its use.

[MeWantCookies]

Wow, he owned the court system on this one. But I feel like a sex offender wouldn't be smart enough to figure out the whole act as my own attorney = watching my own child porn. That was probably just a plus he found out later.

Lots of inmates represent themselves because they can devote 10 hours a day to their own case, while a public defender may spend 30 minutes a week on it. They also sometimes defend themselves when they insist on lying on the stand (an attorney can't represent you if they know you're going to lie).

For this guy, it was probably just a side effect.

[Chalk]

Then why isn't he being charaged?

Charged? He's in jail.

[soulshin3]

If he decided to become his own attorney because of said loophole, then he's a genius.

Regardless though, I don't understand how just because the CP is evidence suddenly makes it legal to watch.

I don't see this guy even being alive for his trial if he's watching CP in the same building where the people who arrested him work.

[Sweeney]

The attitudes toward "justice" in this thread scare me witless.

[Frizzle]

I truly belive that saturation is the best possible route. I've watched enough porn now so that anything that doesn't involve tentacles or crying bitches makes me flaccid. It's a sad day in society when you don't get bat an eyelid at a women getting triple penetrated.

The attitudes toward "justice" in this thread scare me witless.

I would love to hear your views on our justice system Josephine. (Seriously)

[artificial]

The article is deliberately vague with how he's viewing the videos. It seems like he's accused of quite a serious crime - obviously the decision to represent yourself wouldn't have been considered lightly. If he was viewing the videos for his own sexual gratification, then there's obviously a reason to be skirmish. However, if he actually is reviewing the tapes for legal purposes than I don't see a problem with it. I'm no lawyer, but I'm assuming consensual child molestation is a less serious crime than child rape. There could be many legal reasons as to why he's reviewing it all.

[Trichomes]

consensual child molestation

Wait, what?

[artificial]

Wait, what?

14 year old girl consenting to sex with an older male (is that still child molestation?)
14 year old girl being raped by an older male.

[Kat]

I'm no lawyer, but I'm assuming consensual child molestation is a less serious crime than child rape. There could be many legal reasons as to why he's reviewing it all.

..Nope. Child sex abuse is more like.. an umbrella term. I believe that the law is such that children cannot consent to having sex with an adult or something along those lines.
But no, consent would not stand up in court

[Tetiel]

I would find the sheer denial of his rights to build his own defense much worse than him being able to watch videos of what he has done. It's disturbing that so many of you think otherwise. Do I hate it? You're damn right I do. I'm disgusted, but to deny it would set dangerous precedence. As much as I would love to, the law just can't pick and choose who gets rights and who doesn't. It's a terrifying thought.

Any person charged with a criminal defense acting as their lawyer should be allowed to go over any evidence held against them. All citizens should have the right to defend themselves to the best of their ability. I have full confidence that he will get what's coming to him (by law or otherwise) and I take some comfort in that.

[Scot]

I found this hilarious xD does that make me a bad person?
I mean the guy's repulsive, but man that was clever.

You have the right idea. He probably believes this is an open and shut case against him so why wait a few months idly by before he gets convicted? Might as well fap as much as possible and give the System the finger.

[Trichomes]

14 year old girl consenting to sex with an older male (is that still child molestation?)
14 year old girl being raped by an older male.

I have a feeling he's not going to have an easy time convincing a jury that the molestation of these young boys was consensual.

Regardless, this would be considered statutory rape in the Unites States. The age of consent is between 16 and 18.

[Tetiel]

14 year old girl consenting to sex with an older male (is that still child molestation?)
14 year old girl being raped by an older male.

This really doesn't relate to this case from what I've been able to see at all. It's almost a completely different subject

He did lure these boys to him with money and other material things, but 12 year old boys most certainly do not have the right to consent. Gilbert was basically charged with hosting a child prostitute in his home for months, causing bodily harm through cuts and bruises, and actually videotaping the incidents, AND bringing said minor across borders with the purpose of having sex with him. It's really not the same thing at all.

Of course, everyone should keep in mind that these are alleged victims and crimes.

[leurz]

Is he allowed to bring lotion and his ipod with some twangy music in the room with him? Is he completely alone and unsupervised or just separated from other inmates?
It's really hard to tell from the article whether he's spending all day in there fapping or if we're making a big deal over him just working on his own trial. >.>

[Tanuki]

I would find the sheer denial of his rights to build his own defense much worse than him being able to watch videos of what he has done. It's disturbing that so many of you think otherwise. Do I hate it? You're damn right I do. I'm disgusted, but to deny it would set dangerous precedence. As much as I would love to, the law just can't pick and choose who gets rights and who doesn't. It's a terrifying thought.

Any person charged with a criminal defense acting as their lawyer should be allowed to go over any evidence held against them. All citizens should have the right to defend themselves to the best of their ability. I have full confidence that he will get what's coming to him (by law or otherwise) and I take some comfort in that.

This is exactly what I wanted to say but couldn't quite come up with the words for it. Bravo.

Also, child abuse is child abuse. No child that young could have any idea of the repercussions or realities of sex. Even if they "consented", it's not true consent as they couldn't have truly considered the choice, and there's a high chance of manipulation from the adult as well.

[Shampoo]

This is exactly what I wanted to say but couldn't quite come up with the words for it. Bravo.

Also, child abuse is child abuse. No child that young could have any idea of the repercussions or realities of sex. Even if they "consented", it's not true consent as they couldn't have truly considered the choice, and there's a high chance of manipulation from the adult as well.

I couldn't find anything in the article that stated the age of the boys, but the fact that American law considers anyone under 18 a child is somewhat ridiculous. Sexual maturity is reached in the early teens, so there really isn't any reason to have age of consent higher than that. One could argue that emotional maturity doesn't come until much later, but this is a product of society treating physically mature individuals as children. In our eagerness to protect children we are preventing them from being able to grow up.

[MeWantCookies]

I couldn't find anything in the article that stated the age of the boys, but the fact that American law considers anyone under 18 a child is somewhat ridiculous. Sexual maturity is reached in the early teens, so there really isn't any reason to have age of consent higher than that. One could argue that emotional maturity doesn't come until much later, but this is a product of society treating physically mature individuals as children. In our eagerness to protect children we are preventing them from being able to grow up.

Different states in the US have different ages of consent. The age of consent also varies depending on the the age of both participants, not just the youngest one. In other words, several states make any sexual contact with a child under the age of 14 or 16 automatically non-consensual. In some states, a 16 - 18 year old can consent to sex as long as the other participant is between 16 and 21. The whole idea is to protect minors (anyone under 18) from being manipulated by a significantly more mature adult while at the same time not punishing teenagers for doing what they do.

The fact that sexual maturity is reached so early is an argument pedophiles often make, but it's flawed. The age of sexual maturity has not yet adapted to the type of society we live in today. 300 years ago when people seldom lived past the age of 35, it made sense for the whole maturity timeline to be moved up. People had to get married and begin procreating at 13-15 so that they had ample time to raise those offspring to 13-15 before they died. Today, in the States at least, getting married at 15 is the exception because there is no hurry to procreate. A couple could have children well into their 30s and still be able to raise them before reaching old age. There is no rush to reach emotional maturity, there's no rush to begin procreation, and the current societal system is not designed to encourage procreation of those under 14.

[leurz]

I couldn't find anything in the article that stated the age of the boys, but the fact that American law considers anyone under 18 a child is somewhat ridiculous. Sexual maturity is reached in the early teens, so there really isn't any reason to have age of consent higher than that. One could argue that emotional maturity doesn't come until much later, but this is a product of society treating physically mature individuals as children. In our eagerness to protect children we are preventing them from being able to grow up.

Well, I agree with you, but I don't think this is a case of simple forbidden love. If you're making hours and hours of video of sex w/ a minor.......you're probably a skeezeball.

[sircomflix]

The attitudes toward "justice" in this thread scare me witless.

It reminds me of when people went apeshit when Casey Anthony was acquitted of murder.